Committee of Supply

Proceedings in Section C

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL

On Vote 39: ministry operations, $800,352,000.

The Chair: Good morning, Members.

I would like to acknowledge that we are here in Victoria on the traditional territories of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking peoples, the Songhees and the Esquimalt Nations. I want to thank them for having us here.

Of course, members are invited to reflect on the territories they are on at this stage. Thanks, Members.

Minister, did you have an opening statement you would like to make?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank everyone here today. I’m looking forward to the questions and to being able to provide as fulsome answers as possible. This is an interesting and unique time, I think, for all of us. No less so for my ministry, which has a lot of activity going on during this COVID pandemic.

With that, let’s just get straight down to business.

M. Morris: Good morning, Minister. It’s nice to see you here in our Zoom world these days. I know you’ve got a world of very knowledgable people whispering all kinds of good things in your ear as we go through this process here.

You’re probably aware that we’ve broken it up into stages. It’ll be policing, probably for the morning and a little bit into the afternoon. Then we’ll go into the community safety unit. There’ll be a few questions on that. The coroner’s office. I’ve got some questions surrounding the coroner’s work over the last year. Emergency management B.C. Then we’ll go on to corrections and consumer protection to kind of wind up the day here.

There are not too many issues on there, but as you know, policing is quite contentious in many issues, or in many areas, around the province here.

I’ll begin with just a few questions, I guess, to establish some groundwork here for us. The first one I’m going to ask is in relation to: what is the provincial cap for provincial RCMP members in the province as of right now?

[9:35 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: The authorized cap, strength, is 2,602. It’s been that since 2012.

M. Morris: So 2,602. How many of those vacancies are actually filled today, and how many are vacant?

Hon. M. Farnworth: As of June this year, the established strength…. I want to just make that there is a difference between the authorized strength, which is what they are authorized to, which is the 2,602, and their established, which is 2,325 members. There are 200 hard vacancies, and there are 250 soft vacancies at the current time.

M. Morris: So the authorized strength is 2,602. The established strength is 2,325, of which there are 200 hard vacancies built into that. Could you explain what the difference is between the authorized strength and the established strength? Are those numbers varied just because of the budget restrictions that the ministry has in place for provincial policing, or are there other reasons for that?

[9:40 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: The difference between the two…. They are authorized to have up to 2,602 members, but the way that they have structured their org chart and the decisions that they have made are that they are at 2,325. That’s the difference. The decision is made at the RCMP level.

M. Morris: So it’s the commanding officer for the RCMP who makes that particular decision. Have they put in any requests this year, or in the last three years, for additional provincial policing resources that would increase the strength from the 2,325 that we currently have right now?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question.

Yeah, they have had additional requests. As you know, we have a multi-year plan. This year they’ve asked for additional resources, and we have provided 54 additional front-line resources. Last year it was 60 additional resources.

M. Morris: So the 60 last year and the 54 front-line resources this year comprise the 2,325 total that you gave me earlier on?

Hon. M. Farnworth: For 2019, on the request of 60, we gave a total of 30 cadets plus an additional ten members, for a total of 40 front-line members.

[9:45 a.m.]

M. Morris: So 30 cadets and ten members on the front line. That’s general duty policing on the front line. Could you tell me where those positions went to? We have some issues in the northwest part of the province, of course, with LNG Canada building and some of the pressures on the Terrace detachment and whatnot. I know Vanderhoof has had some pressures in the past.

Can you just give me an idea where those numbers were dispersed to for 2019?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Of the cadets, the bulk went into the north. What we’ll do is I’m happy to get a breakdown for the member for the communities that they went into.

Of the response teams, I can tell you that four went to Kamloops, four went to Prince George, and we’re currently working with the RCMP to get four into Terrace.

M. Morris: You said response teams. Could you explain what the response teams are, please?

The Chair: Just a gentle note to the member. Of course, it would be “could the minister.” It’s so amiable; I haven’t stepped in. But just in case others get confused, of course.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Those response teams are put into the communities to be able to provide additional support to help backfill either hard or soft vacancies.

M. Morris: Chair, I appreciate your words.

To the minister, my understanding…. Has Terrace received any positions, then? Is the response team located in Terrace to provide services to Terrace, Rupert, Aiyansh — all the neighbouring detachments in that area? Are they in place today?

Hon. M. Farnworth: They’re not there yet. The COVID issue has created some challenges. Once the RCMP staffing program is in place, they will be located there, and they will be serving the area that you outlined.

M. Morris: Is there any timeline, I guess, projected for those resources to help out? I know Terrace has been under significant pressure on the provincial side. I know their caseload has gone up significantly there. So they are wondering.

These positions have been in Prince George and Kamloops. I don’t know where all these positions would be. But are they all in position as of today, except for Terrace?

[9:50 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: That’s correct, Member. They’re all in place, with the exception of Terrace. It’s our intention and the RCMP’s intention to get them into Terrace as quickly as they can, as the COVID situation is managed.

M. Morris: Minister, so the overall established strength is 2,325 across the province right now for all categories of provincial policing. We’ve added 40 in 2019 and 60 resources last year. The 40 that you were just talking about — are they for 2019-2020? And was there an additional 60 added in 2018? How does that work?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The 60 is what was asked for. The 40 is what we provided. This year they have asked for 54. We are still working with them on that request, and we have to get the funding for the additional resources for this year. So that 60 request was for last year. They are in this year. Then this year’s request is what is currently being worked on with the RCMP.

M. Morris: They’ve asked for 60. They got 40 approved. And they asked for 54 last year.

I guess what I’m saying is…. The authorized strength is 2,602, and the RCMP are asking for 54, 60 resources. They’re asking for more. You’re trying to find some more money to pay for these extra resources. Perhaps you can explain. I know many of my colleagues are unsure how this works as well. We have the authorized strength at 2,602 officers in provincial policing in British Columbia. Our established strength right now is 2,325.

What is preventing the RCMP and yourself from au­thorizing right up to the cap of 2,602?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. It’s actually a combination of factors that is the result between the authorized strength and the established strength. It’s requests for a specific number of resources. So as the member said, last year it was 60. We gave 40. We were able to fund 40.

[9:55 a.m.]

There is the Treasury Board process in terms of getting additional financial resources to pay. It is also having confidence in terms of, even if you did fund to a particular number, getting those resources from either the depot or other detachments across the country to come to British Columbia, as well as the operational decisions made by the RCMP themselves in terms of the resources that they have. Do they want to invest in front-line policing, for example, to bring that number up to an authorized strength, or are there other priorities that they have within their policing mandate that they are focused on?

It’s not just one. It’s actually a combination of things, decisions, that make up that difference between the established strength and the authorized strength.

M. Morris: I appreciate the explanation. I know it’s quite a complicated world in trying to make that determination, at the end of the day.

How many provincial policing vacancies are there throughout British Columbia on the core policing side, on the front general duty side, throughout the entire province here, as of now?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thanks to the member for the ques­tion.

We said there were 200 hard vacancies. We’ll get you the actual number in terms of the front line. I can tell you that the bulk of the vacancies are, in fact, at E division, at the headquarters, and that there’s been a real effort to ensure that out in the detachments, they remain staffed as much as possible.

We’ll get you that information, but as I said, the bulk of the vacancies are at E division headquarters.

M. Morris: Thank you for that, Minister.

There are 200 hard vacancies throughout the division. These are these numbers mostly in E division headquarters, Green Timbers, and some scattered throughout the province here.

In the last multi-year plan submitted by the commanding officer for E division, were there increases to detachments, like Vanderhoof, Terrace or many of these other detachments that have a pretty significant criminal code caseload per member? Could you give me a list of those detachments in that multi-year plan where the RCMP have requested additional resources, please?

[10:00 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I can tell the member that he’s correct. Vanderhoof received additional resources. The bulk of the communities that did require and did receive additional resources were in the North, the north Island and in the Kootenay Boundary area.

I’m happy to get a list of individual detachments. But it would be quite extensive. I think there are about, potentially up to, 54 different communities. We’re happy to get that specific info, but I can tell you that’s where the bulk of the resources went.

M. Morris: Good to hear. I think core policing has suffered quite a bit for a long time, not just in the last three years but for a long period of time. It’s good to see some resources going in there.

Have any of the provincial specialty units been reduced in strength for budgetary reasons or any other reasons? I’m talking about CFSEU, for example, the provincially funded emergency response team, or any other of these specialized teams that provide provincial services?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. As the member knows, we’ve had an issue…. I appreciate his comments on core policing. I think both of us recognize the importance of core policing. I know it was a priority for him, and it’s been a priority for myself as well.

[10:05 a.m.]

He’ll also know that there has been an ongoing issue, for quite some time, with Green Timbers and the issue of rent that was being paid. Well, that issue has been resolved, and the result of that was that CFSEU was no longer having to pay rent.

We had, last year, earmarked some funding for naloxone for CFSEU. What we were able to do with the resolution of the Green Timbers situation was to take that money that had been used for paying rent…. CSFEU was able to keep that, so the money that we had targeted for the naloxone for CFSEU we then repurposed for front-line core policing, and CFSEU was kept whole. There have been no other special units that have had any funding reduced.

M. Morris: How much rent was CFSEU paying? How did that translate into…? They put it right back into operations again, or were you able to provide any more additional resources for them?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thank you, Member. Yes, it was $4.2 million, and it went straight back into operations.

M. Morris: That’s good to see, always looking for opportunities to put more money into operations and whatnot.

Their activities have been significantly reduced through­out the province. Of course, that’s an operational decision by the RCMP themselves — restricting travel.

Have there been any kind of budget restrictions placed on the RCMP provincially, in the province, with respect to travel, operational training or anything like that from the ministry perspective? Was there any clawback of any part of the RCMP budget overall?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. No, there has been no reduction or freezing from the province, in terms of resources.

We have been working with them, though, in terms of getting a better sense in terms of accountability and clarity and how they can improve their spending when it comes to such things as travel and overtime, for example.

M. Morris: Perhaps the minister can just clarify. The RCMP have had trouble in travel and whatnot, as far as budgetary issues go. How are you helping them with that, and how are you providing clarity with respect to your role in the ministry to the RCMP and their travel and training?

[10:10 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member. As he knows, it’s not uncommon, in the RCMP, to face budget pressures.

One of the things, in terms of us being able to make our best case for additional funding and resources at Treasury Board, is to be able to provide Treasury Board with the detail that they require. One of the ways in which we’re able to do that, and one of the things that we have been trying to do, is to work with the RCMP to identify those areas — in particular, travel seems to be the common one, on a yearly basis — on where their pressures are, why those pressures are there and get a better understanding.

In doing so, that assists them in terms of: “Okay. Are there opportunities for us to make improvements on better spending there?” It also helps us in terms of when we’re going to Treasury Board to make our case.

M. Morris: I appreciate that. There are all kinds of pressures within every agency that Treasury Board is unaware of.

One of the ways the province is configured is that a lot of the specialized services are headquartered out of Green Timbers or headquartered out of the urban area of British Columbia. Travel is a necessity for these specialized units to conduct their work, do their investigations, gather intelligence throughout the province. There needs to be a presence, particularly when we look at the pipeline construction that we have and a lot of the pressures that the pipeline construction brings to bear on policing resources in providing that level of service.

Have there been restrictions…? I know it’s an operational decision, but I think it’s something that Treasury Board and the minister need to be mindful of. It was one of my frustrations, I guess, when I was still on the force a long time ago, in trying to get resources out of the urban centre. There were cost implications for me, as a district officer, to pay all the associated costs for these units. As a result of that, a lot of times we couldn’t bring them up because of the costs.

Has this been taken into consideration by your ministry staff, and the folks, in your instructions, I suppose, to the RCMP?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question.

Absolutely, we take that into account. Certainly, we know that when an operation is doing, it does involve costs and bringing in resources. So the key for us is just to make sure we have a good understanding of what those costs are. As I said, that certainly helps us present our case when we are at Treasury Board, for example.

M. Morris: Good to hear. I have heard that a few issues have arisen in the northern part of the province with respect to CFSEU, for an example, where their travel has been curtailed to the point where they’re having trouble gathering the intelligence on the gang activity throughout northern B.C.

[10:15 a.m.]

It’s quite prevalent up here, and of course, these kinds of folks that are involved in those activities look upon the construction camps that we have scattered throughout the north here as another source of illicit revenue for them, opportunities to commit crimes and whatnot.

I’m hoping that their travel restrictions haven’t been to the point where it’s affecting their intelligence-gathering component, which is so important in criminal investigations and in maintaining peaceful order throughout the province here, with respect to pipeline development as well. I’m sure that the minister is mindful of that as he goes into his deliberations with Treasury Board.

I may get back to some of the specialized unit stuff as we proceed through our conversation here this morning.

One of the areas I’m interested in, though, is how many police vacancy…. How are the police, right across British Columbia — municipal, RCMP, provincial, independents…? It doesn’t matter. Were they affected by COVID to any significant degree? How many police officers ended up contracting COVID since it has descended upon the world, and how has that affected operations?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question.

I can tell him that at the beginning of the pandemic here in B.C., in March, there were about 700 to 800 members who were self-isolating for that period of about two weeks. That dropped steadily. Actually, there has also been…. Everyone at that time also started staying home, and there was a lot less activity around. The number of calls dropped. So the impact, while things were tight, was not significant in terms of impacting the ability of the police forces across this province to be able to their job.

In fact, what I can tell you is — and we will confirm for you — at the last count we’ve had that during this entire pandemic, it’s very few who have actually contracted COVID. We think the number is about seven individuals, but we will confirm that for you.

M. Morris: Those numbers are very good to hear. You know, the front-line responders have contact with the public on a fairly regular basis, and to have seven out of the number of police officers that we have in the province…. I think it goes a long way towards what they’re doing to prevent it from happening in the first place. So it’s good to hear.

Has the province received any extra funding from the federal government with respect to COVID and public safety?

[10:20 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: The answer to that question is no, but I just want to check on one thing.

Thank you, Member, for the question. In terms of regards to policing, the answer is no.

M. Morris: Thank you for that.

It’s my understanding that the RCMP and probably the other police agencies in the province are tracking any extra costs related to COVID. Is the minister predicting that, at some point in the future, they may be presenting the province with an invoice for any extra costs that they may have incurred as a result of COVID?

COVID is not over yet, by a long shot, so I imagine all the departments in the province are still keeping track of all this. Do you predict any level of increase that might be attributable to issues around social distancing, the house parties that we’re seeing, the increased attention to out-of-province licence plates in the province, enforcing any of the Quarantine Act measures that the federal government has placed upon us? Do you see any extra costs?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. It is a good question because COVID has impacted us in a number of often complex ways, but we are not anticipating any additional costs related to COVID in terms of policing.

Now, having said that, there are and have been, obviously, a number of measures that have been put in place — for example, at the border, or the follow-up. A lot of that does not involve policing resources. Some of those things we will be able to cover in EMBC. But I can also tell you that in terms of additional costs related to some aspects of COVID that have involved the province, while we’re not expecting an invoice from policing, we will be presenting an invoice to the federal government.

[10:25 a.m.]

M. Morris: Good to hear. Speaking of the federal government — and maybe I should have touched on this when we were talking about CFSEU — I do recall a couple of promises made by the federal government over the last few years about providing money for guns and gangs nationally right across the province here.

Have we seen any money come into the province from the federal government for guns and gangs, and did that go to CFSEU? Or how was that money distributed, and how much was it?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. It was $30.5 million to be spread over five years, and the money is going to a number of different initiatives related to guns and gangs. For example, one of the key ones is the firearms forensic lab here in the province as well as prevention programs — just two examples.

M. Morris: Interesting. So the federal government, the responsibility to build the new lab at Green Timbers…. I assume it’s under construction, or it might even be done. I haven’t looked down there.

What particular…? Was it a federal government consideration that part of the $30.5 million be spent on the firearms lab itself, or was there some specific thing that the province wanted to have done with that money that would help the guns and gangs strategy in British Columbia?

[10:30 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question.

The firearms forensic lab is up and running. It was very much identified within our strategy as a gap that was missing here in the province and as a priority for us. It was able to assist us in investigations and getting the work done here in B.C., as opposed to having to rely on it out of province. It was very much a priority for our strategy here in B.C.

M. Morris: Just some clarification on that, then, Minister, please. So the RCMP built a new federal lab in British Columbia to replace the one that was on Heather Street prior, and they did not include a firearms lab in the new crime lab that they built. Is that correct?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, the feds did build a lab, but it had a limited capacity. There were only a couple of labs left in the country. What became clear, which we identified, through our strategy was that there is a significant gap, particularly as it applies to our needs here in British Columbia. In terms of our strategy, this was identified as a priority.

It is our lab, and we are able to get the work that we need done, that meets our needs and on our timelines, as opposed to relying on a federal lab that is serving a significant area of the country.

M. Morris: I think that’s a good strategy. I guess, living up here in the central Interior of B.C., I don’t often get into Green Timbers, especially in the last three years.

Is the federal RCMP lab constructed now on the Green Timbers site, and they’re providing a service, but they just didn’t have the capacity to deal with the files that we have here in British Columbia?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes.

M. Morris: Carrying on, then, with this $30.5 million. Some of it was given to the firearms lab on an annual basis. It’s roughly — what? — five-point-some-million dollars a year over the next five years. What was the prevention program that the minister referred to that the other part of this money went to?

[10:35 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: A couple of the programs, for example, would be the expansion of the Bar Watch program that’s taking place and the ERASE program. Those would be two examples of prevention programs.

M. Morris: So none of this extra money, then, went to CFSEU itself. Has CFSEU had any increase in their operational funding over the last three years?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. What I can tell the member when it comes to CFSEU funding….

One of the things that was happening was that, in previous years, the RCMP was using some CFSEU funding for other priorities. What we have done is now ring-fenced CFSEU funding so that they are no longer able to do that. Money that is earmarked for CFSEU can only be used by CFSEU. It cannot be diverted to other initiatives within the RCMP.

M. Morris: Interesting to hear that. Can you give me an example of some of the other priorities that they were diverting CFSEU funding to?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. We are working with the RCMP on just that question, and as we get more information, I will be happy to share it with the member. But I want to make it clear that we have invested heavily in CFSEU over the last number of years. In fact, about $18 million over the last three years — additional funding.

[10:40 a.m.]

We want to make sure that funding that is for CFSEU is for CFSEU. That’s why it has been ring-fenced. Within that, funding, for example, for JIGIT stays with JIGIT. We want to make sure that they are resourced in the way that they’re supposed to be.

Anyway, as I said, as I get additional information, I’m more than happy to share that with the member.

M. Morris: To the minister: you ring-fenced the funding for CFSEU to ensure that it is used only for CFSEU-related work. Of course, there’s a broad expanse of work associated with CFSEU. That ranges through…. The main thrust of gangs in the Lower Mainland and throughout British Columbia is drug-related, drug trafficking. Then, of course, that leads to all other nefarious acts, including homicides and whatnot. So it’s quite expanding.

How much money was ring-fenced for CFSEU? Was any money clawed back from CFSEU funding as a result of this ring fence? They’re working with a set amount of money. Were they using money from other areas? You referenced the fact that they were misappropriating money that was earmarked for CFSEU into other areas. So was any money clawed back?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question. I just want to make one thing clear. I did not say that CFSEU misappropriated money. I want to make that really clear.

For this year — as the member knows, the funding rate is 70 percent — we provided $58.15 million for CFSEU.

M. Morris: I appreciate the clarification on that. That was the wrong term to use, for sure.

So $58.15 million was the 70 percent share of the dollars for CFSEU. Is that down somewhat? If my memory serves me correctly, I do believe we were providing in excess of $70 million annually for CFSEU three years ago.

[10:45 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: The difference between last year and this year, for example, is…. Last year was $61.69 million. Last year, in the budget, there were start-up costs for the witness protection program and the gang-exiting program. Obviously, as that gets set up, then those costs are normalized. That’s why you see that reduction this year. Those were one-time costs last year.

M. Morris: Has the budget for CFSEU been reduced from three years ago until today, to the $58.15 million? Considering your start-up costs for the witness protection program and whatnot, has it been reduced overall over the last three years?

Hon. M. Farnworth: What I can tell the member is that there have not been cuts to CFSEU at all. What we will do is we will get the member a breakdown on funding for CFSEU going back over the last five years so that he is able to see that.

M. Morris: I appreciate that very much. Thank you, Minister.

Minister, in your mandate letter, it states that you’ll “provide more support to police efforts to disrupt the supply chain and advocate for increased penalties for drug dealers who knowingly distribute death-dealing drugs.”

Can the minister review with us the steps that he has taken in relation to that part of his mandate letter?

[10:50 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I also just want to correct it. We have got that number for ’17-18. The number that he was referring to, that roughly $70 million, was at 100 percent. The provincial contribution at that time, at 70 percent, was $54.9 million. This year the 100 percent contribution is $81.6 million. It has grown significantly over the last three years.

In terms of what’s on my mandate letter, there have obviously been a number of key initiatives that we have undertaken in terms of dealing with this issue of gun violence and drug violence in this province. We provided additional support to the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit of B.C. to target high-level drug traffickers, made that a priority. We brought in the witness protection program.

We’ve embarked on the guns and gangs strategy, identifying gaps, for example, like the firearms lab. We’ve brought in improvements, in terms of legislation — around pill presses and making illegal compartments in vehicles, for example — and improved the ability to seize criminal assets. A whole range of initiatives that police have been asking for has been very much, in whole, because of the priority we’ve attached to this issue. That’s a key part of my mandate letter.

M. Morris: You mentioned additional support to CFSEU for high-level drug trafficking investigations. Could you elaborate a little bit more? How many more resources did you put into that particular part of CFSEU?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question. A $3½ million provincial share is cost-shared with the federal government, for a total of $5 million for the provincial tactical enforcement priorities. We lead the country in that. That is a significant investment, and it’s a significant initiative that’s been undertaken in this province.

M. Morris: I agree. I think B.C. has led the way when it comes to tactical enforcement and operations with CFSEU and other operations that we have here.

I guess I look at the increased number of opioid deaths that we’ve seen, the fentanyl deaths that we’ve seen in British Columbia, on an increasing basis for several months and years now. I’m just wondering what else…. Is the minister satisfied that everything that can be done from a drug interdiction level, from an enforcement level, is being done that can be done?

[10:55 a.m.]

Or has the minister considered putting additional resources into that aspect of things to try and eliminate the supply of fentanyl that’s been so devastating in our province here and across the country?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thanks to the member for the question. This is a very challenging and complex issue, as I know the member is aware of. Since we took office, we have undertaken a number of initiatives in this area, not just on the enforcement side but on the broad preventative side as well, and it is a multifaceted approach that’s required.

One of the challenges that we’ve seen since COVID, of course, has been a change in the drug supply, which has become more toxic. Police are identifying that a lot of the fentanyl that’s getting into the drug supply or the drug network, they now believe, is being produced here a lot more than it has been for quite some time. Obviously, that’s concerning to the police, and it’s concerning to us.

We’re always looking at different strategies that can be applied, and enforcement is one component of that. Obviously, the health and preventative side is an additional component. We’ve been working with the federal government as well in terms of the strategies that they have put in place, and we will continue to do that.

M. Morris: It is disconcerting. The precursors are quite easy to get, I guess, internationally — and to bring them all into British Columbia.

Have you put resources into liaison with the Canada Border Services Agency or any other federal agency to try and curb these products when they come across the line, when they enter into Canada? Or have you put any more resources into detecting these illegal labs that we have scattered…?

[11:00 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I can tell the member — I thank him for the question — that, yeah, we know that there’s significant collaboration and cooperation between CFSEU and Canada Border Services Agency.

It is something I’ve raised with the previous minister, Minister Goodale, on behalf of British Columbia, as an individual province, but also with our colleagues from provincial and territorial governments across the country, and the same with Minister Blair. Additional resources that will allow for the interdiction at the border and, in particular, for example, at our ports are a priority for us.

I know that that collaboration is going to continue, both at the enforcement level — obviously, operational decisions are made by those police and border agencies — and, certainly, at the political level. We will continue to push for improvements and additional resources that can assist at our entry points into the country and into the province.

M. Morris: Again, we’re in the position…. There’s always more that can be done, most certainly, on that. We do have a very tragic circumstance in the province here with the number of opiate-related deaths that we see piling up every month here in British Columbia.

I know there are no restrictions, as well, under the provincial police service agreement, with anything respecting the administration and enforcement of laws in British Columbia. The federal government aside…. I’ve been critical of them for many years in not stepping up to the plate and fully funding positions and funding some of the things that they should be. But we’re faced here now with the number of deaths, and they seem to be growing. They haven’t subsided any.

Has the minister or will the minister consider putting more resources into the interdiction of fentanyl and carfentanil, which seem to be more prevalent these days in British Columbia, and trying to track down these illegal labs? If what he says…. It’s troubling that the fentanyl is being manufactured here in the province more and more all the time.

Has the RCMP requested…? Have they worked together with the minister’s staff to develop a strategy to try and increase their presence or to become more effective in the interdiction of these dangerous, fatal drugs?

[11:05 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I’ll make a couple points.

No, we’ve not received additional requests from the RCMP for additional resources in that regard. What I can tell you is that that collaboration in identifying this as a priority, both at the federal level, federal policing, and with our provincial police resources, is obviously a priority. They make their operational decisions, and I think that they very much…. It’s in line with the mandate letter to be going after these mid-level and high-level traffickers who are engaged in this kind of activity.

It’s also important to note — as I said before, and I think the member also realizes — that it’s not just on the enforcement side, but it is also on the preventative side, as well, and on the health side of dealing with this particular crisis that we’ve been facing in relation to opioids. One of the challenges that we’ve seen, and one of the reasons why this spike that we have seen in fatalities — which is a tragedy wherever it happens in this province — is, in fact, the number of people who are using these substances alone and that social distancing has also contributed to that.

We are going to continue to work on a multifaceted and multi-pronged approach that encompasses all of those things, whether it is on the mental health side, whether it is on the enforcement side, whether it involves cooperation with the federal government on the border issue. This is an ongoing issue that we certainly are committed to, but we all know that it isn’t going to be solved overnight.

M. Morris: Obviously, we haven’t been able to solve it overnight, because it’s been an ongoing problem for a number of years now. I do agree with you that it’s got fingers that stretch into all facets of society.

I will get back to mental health and some of these other compounding factors here momentarily. But you talked about the strategy and working with the federal government. All grand strategies eventually deteriorate into work. I think a guy by the name of Drucker said that once, and I agree.

These strategies have been in play now for two or three years. Between the feds and the province, we’ve got another $5 million that has been put into a CFSEU high-level drug team.

What have the results of that been since we put that money into it? What kinds of prosecutions have we seen? What kind of drug interdiction have we seen? Have we been able to take anything off the streets as a result of that $5 million investment? Was that just a one-time, one-year investment, or was that $5 million a year a multi-year investment?

[11:10 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. A couple of points I’d make. First off, that funding is not one time; it’s ongoing funding.

Then second, there have been some significant interdictions by CFSEU. Some in the media, and some that don’t make the media. I’m happy to get, for the member, some examples of that. They have had some considerable success.

On top of that, I’d also say, in terms of the overall efforts being taken by police right across this province, not just CFSEU, where you’re also seeing…. We have seen on the civil forfeiture side, for example, a real increase in the referrals by police agencies to the civil forfeiture agency in being able to seize criminal assets that have also played a significant part in being able to interdict and to seize assets that have been achieved by criminal means.

M. Morris: I’m pleased to hear that there have been some results here. But significant, tangible enough results that justify that $5 million ongoing investment? You’d hope, I guess, at the end of the day — and I know all police officers think the same way, as I’m sure that you and your staff do — that everything that we do has an impact on reducing the fentanyl deaths or any of the other tragedies that occur from drug trafficking and gang activity.

Have we seen a significant increase in the amount of fentanyl and carfentanil and some of these other deadly drugs seized off the streets since this $5 million investment?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thanks for the question. What I can tell you is that over the last two years, we’ve taken over 705 kilograms of illicit drugs through enforcement efforts and more than 46 million lethal doses of illegal drugs.

M. Morris: And still we have all of these fatalities out there. It’s frustrating for anybody that’s in law enforcement and public safety trying to contain these things.

Do you think it’s…? Should this be a high priority for government in trying to deter and mitigate the number of opioid deaths we have by just increasing resources to whatever level is necessary? You know, we still have room under the authorized cap for another couple of hundred officers, perhaps. Do you see an opportunity here to just pour resources into it to try and increase the success of interdiction?

[11:15 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question.

I think the approach that we have taken — which is that it has to be a comprehensive strategy, of which enforcement is part — along with treatment, prevention and harm reduction…. All of those things are key components of the strategy this province has taken.

It involves cooperation with all the other jurisdictions, provinces across the country. The strategy that British Columbia is taking is very much similar to that of other provinces and with the federal government. It’s the approach that’s supported by, for example, the Canadian Chiefs of Police and our own chiefs of police here in the province. We intend to continue doing just that.

This is a priority, I think, for all of government, all ministries in government. How do we get this tragedy of the deaths that we have seen of this opioid crisis…? How do we get that down?

I think we were having some considerable success prior to COVID. But as the Premier, who has written to the Prime Minister on this issue…. We will continue to work on all different facets that make up this complex problem, continue to deal with it in a way that reduces the number of deaths and, at the same time, also gets people the health and the treatments that they need.

M. Morris: I appreciate the minister’s remarks.

I look back to the authorized strength of 2,602 members, and we currently have an established strength of 2,325 members. We have this crisis involved with the illegal trafficking of drugs in the province that is leading to so many deaths across this province on a monthly basis. But we also hear…. Over the last three years, we’ve heard the Attorney General speak many times about money laundering, which is associated to organized crimes, and say that it was a blight on society.

I’m wondering why government hasn’t taken the opportunity, under public safety…. It’s falling under your ministry, there. If these are significant priorities for government — to curb the number of deaths related to opioids, fentanyl and carfentanil in the province and to curb the money laundering, if it’s to the extent that the Attorney General claims it is in the province here, that it’s a priority for the province to look at — there’s still room under the authorized cap to put police resources into the enforcement side to try and reduce the consequences of organized crime, drug trafficking and the fentanyl issues that we have in the province here.

Is this a high enough priority for the minister and government to consider this? You do have room under the authorized cap. It’s just a matter of putting the resources in. It doesn’t happen overnight, as the minister knows.

If they were to make a decision today that we are going to put in an extra 200 or 300 police resources into…. If money laundering is a priority — and, of course, the fentanyl issue is — in the province here, they have that opportunity.

It will take the RCMP a while to gear up for that, to get the necessary resources in. But is this the priority that…? Is it at the level that it needs to be to address this, from the minister’s perspective?

[11:20 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question and his comments. I know he cares a lot about this issue, and he and I have engaged on this topic in previous estimates.

I guess the point I want to make is…. With the issues that we’ve been talking about, if there were a silver bullet to dealing with them, I think any government would have used that. The reality is that these are complex issues that require a multifaceted approach. It’s not, I think, a question of just saying: “Oh, we have an authorized strength, and let’s just go to that authorized strength.” Rather, it’s identifying: “What are the key issues and the key components that need to be dealt with?”

I know the member has raised money laundering, for example. Well, changes made by this government in regard to casinos have had important impacts, in terms of dealing with that issue of money laundering and, at the same time, getting the federal government to recognize that money laundering is a cross-boundary, cross-jurisdictional issue, where they have the ability to put in additional resources that the province does not have the ability to do.

That’s where we’ve put our focus on doing. The work that we have been doing at the provincial level and getting the feds to recognize it as an issue has started to pay…. We’ve started to see that it is working.

Likewise with we’ve been talking about here — the opioid crisis and the issue around illegal drugs and substances. Again, we have made changes. We have put additional resources into CFSEU. We have brought in additional legislation that gives police enforcement additional tools to be able to target those who need to be targeted. We have made changes, legislatively, around civil forfeiture. All of those things combined, I think, show that this continues to be a priority for government.

On the health care side, on the mental health side, we’re ensuring addiction treatment facilities so that people are able to get the treatment that they need. All of those things contribute to the solutions that we’re trying to find to deal with this problem.

The chiefs of police have recognized this. They have just written to the Prime Minister on the issue of decriminalization for small amounts of possession.

This is a complex, multifaceted issue that requires a multifaceted, cooperative approach across a wide spectrum of ministries and agencies, and we are committed to doing just that. This is a priority for us, and we will continue the work that we are doing.

M. Morris: I thank the minister for that answer. I know it’s very complex, and there are far-reaching consequences for many families in British Columbia. Probably every family in British Columbia has been affected by some segment of organized crime and drug trafficking and the health issues related to that.

[11:25 a.m.]

There is still an opportunity for the province to increase the level of enforcement and interdiction there, and I’m not going to go back into that any more — the same as it is for Health and Social Services and B.C. Housing. We see all of the issues surrounding these hotels that the government has purchased to put the homeless people in. The level of crime going up at astronomical rates in just about every one of these areas has put an impact on policing.

It calls for that integrated approach. I don’t mean in a piecemeal fashion. It calls for an integrated approach with Social Services working with Health, working with Public Safety, working with B.C. Housing, to come up with a shared vision, I guess, at the end of the day, on how all those resources are going to be used. Right now I think we’re hampered a little bit by these various silos that we have.

One of the most significant impacts that I’ve seen operationally in the province…. It started a number of years ago. Gee, I think it might have started when we were in government, but it has been carried on. It’s the Car 60 program, the mental health worker teamed up with a police officer in the communities, attending the types of files that involve mental health issues. They’ve always been around, but they’re becoming more paramount. They’re becoming more accented because of the various dangerous drugs — crystal meth, fentanyl, carfentanil and whatnot.

Has the minister put any thought into increasing the number of Car 60s, the mental health cars, that we have in the various police departments around the province? I know Prince George has one. We could probably use a few up here. Kamloops, Kelowna, Vancouver. Surrey has got an excellent program there. But perhaps they’re underfunded.

Maybe there’s something more that the minister can do with respect to those kinds of programs in the province here. Does he have any comment on that?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. Yeah, those are all good programs that he has mentioned in a number of communities. In part, communities do make those decisions in terms of what they’re able to provide. But we do recognize the importance of mental health services when it comes to policing.

That’s why one of the things that has taken place has been the introduction of the three pilot projects in Vancouver, Vernon and Abbotsford. Mental health components are part of those projects. They are currently, I think, at the evaluation phase, and if not now, then very shortly. I look forward to seeing the results of those pilot projects.

I’d also note, because I know the member is on the committee, the committee we’ve struck to look into the Police Act. One of the issues that they, I know, in their terms of reference, will be looking at is that issue of mental health. So the experience of programs that are successful in other communities.

You know, I would…. Let’s put it this way. I don’t intend to speak for the committee, but I certainly would not be surprised to see recommendations coming out of the committee on that issue of mental health and the challenges that police face in that regard — and potential changes that could come out of that.

I take the member’s point that that issue of mental health and policing is a critical issue. I think we all are aware of the importance that it is assuming these days.

[11:30 a.m.]

M. Morris: Any kind of support that the minister can provide our detachments right across British Columbia — even our provincial police detachments, which don’t have access to a lot of these specialized resources that we can see in the larger centres with respect to mental illness — I think would really help. Particularly in our downtown cores, where we’ve seen such an influx of people coming in to live in the new housing facilities that his government has provided and the proliferation of crime associated to a lot of those areas. I think mental health has a lot to play in that.

One of the things that I’ve seen from my own experience — from family members, unfortunately — over the years is the fact that mental illness is camouflaged significantly by addictions, whether it be marijuana or some of the other terrible drugs that we have out there, including alcohol. It took years and years to finally bring these family members and get them out of an addicted state to properly diagnose their mental health.

This is a real problem for police, because the police are the meat that’s caught in the sandwich here in trying to resolve these issues and provide a public safety service. But they are hamstrung by the fact that there are not enough addictions treatment centres. There’s not enough treatment for folks suffering from some kind of mental illness, because it hasn’t been properly diagnosed as a result of the addictions that the individuals might be suffering.

Any time the minister can put an oar in the water to help out and resolve some of these things in the communities, the increased workload that the police have in Nanaimo, in Vancouver, in Maple Ridge and some of these other areas where we see these housing complexes that seem to be a magnet for these kinds of activities, that would be appreciated. I’m hoping there might be an answer somewhere down the road with respect to that.

I’m going to leave that for now. I know I have a bunch of colleagues that want to come on. They’ll be asking questions after we take a break for lunch. I just want to talk a little bit, before we break, about First Nations policing and find out from the minister whether the federal government is fully funding the commitments that they have already made with respect to First Nations policing in the province here.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question. I know this is an issue that has been of concern to him, and it is an issue that has been of concern to me. I know that when he was in this chair, we were funded for 90.5 of that 108.5. What I can tell you is that not only are we now fully funded for the 108.5, but we have an additional nine, to bring that up to 117.5. And they are fully funded by the federal government.

M. Morris: Finally. But it’s still a pretty insignificant number when you look at the fact that we have 203 First Nations bands across this province of ours.

[11:35 a.m.]

Can you tell me what the specific duties are for these members under that federal program?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I just wanted, also, to make sure….

I know the member knows this, but there may be others who aren’t quite aware of the nuance when it comes to the First Nations policing program. It’s a cost-shared program, 52-48. The feds pay 52 percent; the province pays 48 percent. The province has always paid its share, and the issue has been around the federal share. So I just want to make it clear that the feds are now fully funding their share, and the province has always paid its share of the program.

There are a couple of points I want to make around this. First, we’ve been engaged with the feds in terms of revitalizing that First Nations policing program, because we view it as critically important to policing in British Columbia. The member is quite correct when he says there are 203 First Nations in this province. I would like to see the program expanded and that it serves the needs of First Nations communities across B.C.

This is an issue that I have raised with the federal minister, both at FPT meetings and also privately in one-on-one conversations I’ve had with Minister Blair. He has indicated to me that this is a goal of his as well, that this is a priority for him, that he wants to get this revitalization of the program. It’s something the previous minister was working on, and the feds have indicated that they are definitely engaged on this.

We continue to work with the RCMP to ensure that First Nations police officers continue to work with the communities to where they are posted. I think that that is of critical importance. I think that goes hand in hand with changes to the First Nations policing program at the federal level. It’s something that we are engaged in and we’ll continue to push for.

M. Morris: I appreciate the answer from the minister. When I refer to the minister’s mandate letter, again, where it says “reducing the numbers of Aboriginal people involved in the justice systems, developing initiatives that reduce and prevent crime and increasing the use of restorative justice programs” within our First Nations communities and within our urban First Nations populations…. It’s quite a mouthful there.

[11:40 a.m.]

I look forward to the minister’s response on what he has done to meet the commitments under his mandate letter.

Considering your previous answer and considering the high number of First Nations populating our urban centres throughout the province, has the minister put his mind to what can be done to provide a more comprehensive service to our urban First Nations populations? I see many in town here in Prince George that are from outlying villages and communities throughout the north. I also know that there’s a number of them in the Downtown Eastside and in Vancouver itself that require a significant amount of support in what they do. Could the minister comment on that?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thanks for that question, Member. I think it is an important question. While we have been focusing in the previous questions around First Nations policing — and a lot of that is intended for the 203 nations around the province and communities in rural B.C. or in communities outside of the urban areas — that issue of the urban First Nations population is, obviously, a crucial one as well.

One of the key areas in terms of my mandate letter — and the work that we have been doing over the last number of years has also been in concert with the Attorney General’s ministry — is around the development of that First Nations justice strategy, which was a partnership between this ministry, the Attorney General’s ministry and the First Nations. We had the agreement signed in Nanaimo that actually establishes that strategy in place. I think that’s been a significant step forward and is a cornerstone of our efforts in that area.

The work that we are doing on restorative justice, for example, is still ongoing within my ministry. Again, that is also a key component in terms of the work that’s been undertaken, recognizing that 20 years ago, 15 years ago, within our corrections facilities, about 10 percent of the population in our correctional facilities was Indigenous, was Aboriginal. That’s now up to 30 percent. Clearly, we need to address that. The work that we’ve undertaken is designed to do just that.

M. Morris: You know, it is troubling when we do see the numbers creeping up like that. Thirty percent of inmates are First Nations. We have Gladue, the decision that came down from the Supreme Court, so that pre-sentencing reports can be submitted so the courts can take that into consideration.

[11:45 a.m.]

Perhaps the minister has put his mind to what kind of a strategy we can put in front of the process, instead of having: the 911 phone rings, the police respond to a call, and they investigate. As a result of the investigation, people go through the court system. They end up in our correctional systems, and 30 percent of them happen to be First Nations. Has the minister put his mind to how we can put that filter right at the beginning of the process so that it prevents that 911 call coming in, in the first place?

Restorative justice is great. I believe in it 100 percent. I’ve lived on reserve. I’ve seen those kinds of things happen very effectively and in many of the other communities that I’ve policed over the years. But there needs to be something put in place right at the front of the process that prevents that 911 call coming in and engaging the criminal process that ultimately puts these folks in our correctional centres.

Has the minister put his mind around that, as to what kind of a process we can put in place?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member. This is what the First Nations justice strategy is all about. It’s recognizing that this is a comprehensive approach that’s required. In some cases, you’ve got….

The work on that is ongoing, and it’s going to continue to be ongoing. Whether it’s at the situational table level, whether it is in identifying what critical service gaps are in communities, whether it is the kinds of services, whether it is counselling services or addiction services, whether it is being able to identify the nature of problems in a particular community or, depending on the size of the community, even with particular individuals — how do we address those?

It’s something that’s not just in this ministry. It involves Health. It involves Mental Health. It involves Social Services. I think it has to recognize that in the urban area, a lot of those services are there. But in many communities in the province, they’re not there, or they take time to get to those services. The strategy has to be able to recognize and respond to that.

[11:50 a.m.]

As I said, it’s making sure of those and, as you’ve also identified, that we don’t have things concentrated into silos. There has to be that level of cooperation and integration that needs to take place.

I’d also add that this is one of those areas that I fully expect the committee that’s looking at the Police Act to be coming back with recommendations on. So I appreciate the question from the member.

M. Morris: I appreciate the minister’s answer on this.

Restorative justice. Maybe the minister can confirm his vision of restorative justice. Does it include all the things that need to be put in place — just what you were mentioning there — to prevent that 911 call coming in, in the first place?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I am noting the hour.

I thank the member for that question. We talk about, for those situational tables, communities being able to identify high-risk individuals and get the services that are required before so that a 911 call does not take place, but also in terms of restorative justice itself.

I mean, what I have expressed before is that I’d like to see a strategy that works right across this province — a restorative justice program that works right across this province — so you don’t have what we have right now, which is a patchwork approach, where some communities are really engaged and have really activated restorative justice and done a lot of work, and then others where it can be kind of hit-and-miss.

What I’d like to see is a coordinated restorative justice program across this province that meets the needs of those individual communities and those individual regions and that recognizes that while there are differences within the province, while there are differences in terms of demographics, while there are differences in terms of socioeconomic issues, the fundamental ability to really use restorative justice — and not just use it but an acceptance and a recognition of the benefits of it — is there right across B.C. in communities, whether they are urban, rural, suburban, Indigenous, non-Indigenous. I do think it has a critical role to play.

With that, I move that the committee rise and report progress on the estimates of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and ask leave to sit again.

The Chair: Thank you, Minister. I think we’ve already been granted that leave. I appreciate the ask, anyway.

Motion approved.

The Chair: Thank you, Members. Enjoy your lunch, and we will see you back at around 1:30. This committee is now adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 11:54 a.m.