A week or so after the real watchdog — the representative for children and youth — was shunned, and former deputy minister Bob Plecas was hired to review a horror story from the Ministry of Children and Families, a problem developed.
He was billed as an “independent reviewer,” and he likens himself to a “management consultant.”
But a key figure in the case that prompted his appointment — the mother who lost custody of her kids because the ministry considered her unbalanced — had issues with her harrowing personal file being handed to someone whose only standing was that he was hand-picked by the premier. To get around that, the ministry designated him a “director,” to give him full access.
By the stroke of a pen, the independent outsider technically became an insider. As his report released Monday shows, it was entirely appropriate. For better or worse, Plecas is the consummate insider. You wouldn’t expect anything less from someone with a lifelong career in government, a self-described “all-round fixer,” including a stint as the first deputy minister of the problem-plagued ministry. He thinks like one, acts like one and writes like one.
That has benefits and drawbacks. The benefits include some personal experience with the ministry, which he shared in the report, with a “back in the day” attitude. He knows all the stresses the front-line workers face, and he still has the deputy minister’s instincts to defend his (former) staff against all challenges.
He also has a lifetime’s experience in how politics and government work. So he knows how a one-time funding bump would lower the profile of some problems, without making them go away. He knows the information flow in the ministry, and that the brass aren’t getting on top of problems soon enough.
He knows how child-welfare cases turn into question-period fodder, and morph into political point-scoring exercises.
And he knows the enormous clout that Ted Hughes — who wrote the book on how government should do child care — has in B.C. So he couched some of his recommendations with references to the same ideas Hughes used several years ago.
But there are drawbacks to hiring an insider. Although Plecas expressed respect for representative Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond and gave her due credit, he wants that office stripped of its oversight function as soon as his various other fixes are implemented. That’s the instinctive reaction just about any past or present deputy would have to a sharp-tongued, fire-breathing watchdog who regularly rains hellfire down on the ministry.
Plecas said the ministry is well on its way to a quality-assurance program and if the staffing in that office is increased, in two years the ministry could “take over the functions that currently reside with the representative.”
Turpel-Lafond’s efforts have been significant, but only partly successful, he said. “Persistent tension permeates everything,” and the sheer volume and constant nature of her hundreds of recommendations is overwhelming.
“Despite everyone’s best intentions, the constant recommendations have become part of the bigger management problem.”
So he recommends bringing oversight, a function that has brought about dozens of stinging, in-depth critiques of ministry shortcomings over the years, into the ministry itself. It’s something Hughes contemplated, although only after some conditions were met.
Plecas said: “External oversight should end when the ministry is capable of carrying out these functions, and the representative’s role should become one focused on advocacy.”
Plecas also has the time-honoured government belief that better PR is the answer.
So part of the move away from an independent watchdog would be a “strong, effective public information program,” with a ministry spokesperson who can gain the trust of the public.
Turpel-Lafond’s response to being labelled part of the problem was fairly restrained.
“This narrative that I’m the villain because I make too many recommendations is borderline comical.”
She also said his report is based on her office’s work. The idea of a budget hike?
“I’ve rung that bell every single year.”
B.C. Liberals seem ready to accept the Plecas report. Why wouldn’t they? It’s an avuncular summation of what Turpel-Lafond has been yelling about for years.
And it’s got the added bonus in their minds of suggesting they get rid of representatives like Turpel-Lafond.
