Gary Coons

VICTORIA – The BC Liberals’ decision to cut the Infant Development Program will hurt families who have children with disabilities, especially those living in First Nations communities and in remote areas said New Democrat Gary Coons today.

“Parents with high risk and vulnerable children from across BC credit this program for securing them the services that allow their children to thrive, and providing them with expert advice and a wealth of support. This program’s positive impact is even more pronounced in Northern BC communities where fewer services and opportunities to connect with other families are available,” explained Coons, MLA for North Coast.

Today in the legislature, Coons questioned Children and Families Minister Mary Polak about the decision to make cuts to the IDP program.

Families who rely on the program were not consulted, and learnt about the decision last week.

Parents and experts from across the province are refuting the Minister’s attempts to characterize this as an administrative cut. “Families describe it as a lifeline, and are publicly sharing how it directly benefits children and youth with special needs.”

The provincial IDP program provides direct services to families, ranging from providing expert advice on what therapies will most benefit their children based on the research, to finding physicians, child care services and educators who are qualified to work with special needs children.

“Parents and their children have benefited from the expertise and support this program provides. The BC Liberals’ decision to cut a program that has a proven track record, and misrepresent what it does, is troubling and unfair to families who need the extra support and services.”

In Prince Rupert, child development consultants are warning that eliminating the program will have a devastating impact. A key component of the IDP has been the transition to the complex and dynamic Aboriginal/ Supported Child Development program,  which is vital in our community. “They have stated in writing that they feel that families will be negatively impacted by this decision, and that they are especially concerned that the North region will be impacted the most”

Coons is urging the BC Liberals to revisit this decision.

Hansard…FUNDING FOR SPECIAL NEEDS PROGRAMS

M. Karagianis: Families with special needs children rely on the infant development program. For example, Dorothy Gazzola, parent of Faith who has Down syndrome, said that the program is a godsend and that it has played an integral part in how well her daughter Faith is developing as a special needs child.

My question is to the Minister of Children and Families. Why is she cutting a program that has a proven track record of helping special needs children?

Hon. M. Polak: Well, as it turns out, the member is incorrect. There will be no cuts to the infant development program and no cuts to the supported child development program. In fact, both budgets remain at an all-time high of $18 million for infant development and $57 million for supported child development.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: The minister is wrong, absolutely wrong.

Right here I have a notice from the B.C. Association for Community Living: “Elimination of Provincial Infant and Child Development Offices a Shocking Blow to Child Development in British Columbia.”

This goes on to say from Janice Barr, chair of the supported child development provincial steering committee and executive director of the association for Community Living: “The government is not making an administrative cut. They are severing a key link for support…a direct impact on the lives of children and youth with special needs.”

Again, why is the minister cutting a vital program and eliminating a program that helps children with special needs?

Hon. M. Polak: Again, there will be absolutely no change to the services that are received through the infant development program and the supported child development program.

While the two provincial adviser positions have been valuable over the course of development of both of these programs around the province, these are not positions that provide direct services to families and children. The fact remains that these are administrative positions that we can fulfil the duties of within the ministry, and that allows us to direct increased funding to front-line direct services to kids.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

G. Coons: If the minister had done her homework and talked to the stakeholders, the front-line workers and the families, she would have found out how valuable this program is.

The minister is on record saying that there isn’t a need for these advisers. The loss of the infant development program will be even harder on first nations families and families living in the north.

Melinda Heidsma, Prince George Association for Community Living, which delivers the IDP services in the north, says: “The provincial IDP office is a lifeline not only for families but also for the IDP consultants all over the province.”

Compared to the parents living in urban areas, those parents in rural and northern B.C. have access to even fewer supports and services for their special needs children. Why is the minister reducing the level of help that special needs families from first nations families and from the north receive?

Hon. M. Polak: Let me say to the members opposite once again that there will be no loss of service. There will be no interruption of service for families receiving the infant development program or supported child development program. In fact, what is most disturbing to me…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Polak: …is the way in which the opposition members have preyed upon the fears of those who receive these services by telling them that a program is ending when it is not changing one iota.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: Experts in the field rebuke this minister’s spin and rhetoric. The B.C. Association for Community Living says that it’s not an administrative cut, that the IDP and its staff have a direct impact on the lives of children and youth with special needs.

Now, not only is the B.C. Association for Community Living describing this cut as devastating, five front-line consultants from the Prince Rupert area who work extensively with infant and child development, especially with first nations children, say that this cut will seriously impact families, especially in the north. They point to how families in the north rely even more on the services that the IDP program provides and how it is essential for these families.

Will the minister revisit her decision and restore funding to this vital program?

Hon. M. Polak: The provincial advisers play an intermediary role between the ministry and service providers. They do not provide direct service to children. The infant development program retains its full budget of $18 million. The supported child development program retains its budget of $57 million.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Polak: I find it difficult to believe that the opposition would defend the idea of maintaining two administrative positions costing us $600,000 a year that could go into direct front-line services for kids.

J. Kwan: I have a letter here, actually, from the provincial adviser, infant development program of B.C. Here’s what Dana had to say.

“It is very important that MCFD and the government understand that the provincial IDP office and aboriginal supported child development provincial offices are not bureaucracies, nor are they administrative structures. They have very little, if any, administrative functions.”

They go on to say:

“The provincial IDP office provides direct services to families who call for information, to professionals who need to know where to refer a newly diagnosed baby or to access up-to-date evidence based on early childhood intervention information.”

My question to the minister is this. Does this sound like administration to you, when you’re a parent on the other side needing help for your newborn child and support of services?

Hon. M. Polak: Well, let me make it clear to the opposition member. The coordinator positions that provide referrals and the types of services to which she just referred — those are continuing. We are talking about the provincial adviser positions. They perform an intermediary role between the ministry and the service providers.

I just can’t understand why the opposition would want to maintain government positions at the expense of services to kids. What is it you don’t like about providing front-line services to kids?