Recently, I blogged about the Santa's naughty list of B.C. Liberals, which was well received by Santa and the public alike. Indeed, it has been said you can tell a lot about a government by the way they treat societies most vulnerable, especially children.
Sadly, our government has failed our province's at-risk children on many occasions and that's why when our good friend RossK emailed with a story that came his way from a very solid source, I knew the Grinch must be lurking around the halls of government ministries somewhere:
He blogged about the children under the care of B.C.'s Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFC):
Specifically, those kids in the province's care who don't even have foster homes yet. Imagine being one of those kids at this time of the year.
Once you've imagined all those kids (and there are a lot of them), wouldn't you want to do a little something for them if you were a front-line MCFD worker right about now?
Like, say, buy them a small present for Christmas — even if it was nothing more than a Taylor Swift album?
And, as you might expect, buying such small gifts (total cost under $50) has been a longstanding practice at the MCFD. Until, we have been told, this year."
Gasp, say it isn't so! The Grinch making an appearance in the Ministry of Children and Families? Well, the government categorically denied the allegations on Twitter:
@BCGovNews
Aha! Well that would be reassuring — if it wasn't for the existence of an email that was left via the contact page on my website shortly after posting a link to RossK's blog.
I have removed the name of the sender of the email — a ministry employee — but the recipient's name was removed prior to my receipt of this email, to protect the identity of those involved.
"From: XXXXXX,XXXXX X MCF:EX [mailto:XXXXX.XX.X@gov.bc.ca]Sent: December-03-12 3:03 PM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Subject: Christmas Gifts for XXXXXX
Please be advised that due to cutbacks, MCFD will not be supplying Christmas gifts for children in care.
As parents and extended family, you are still expected to provide a gift for your child if you wish to do so.
Thank you.
XXXXXXX XXXXXXX Child Protection Social Worker
Ministry of Children and Family Development "
So now we have a conundrum.
We have two sources making the same allegations, an email transcript backing up those allegations and a government denying and refuting all of it.
After posting this, a reader of mine who lives in Children and Families' Minister Stephanie Cadieux's riding phoned her office because he was so appalled. Her office in turn phoned Victoria and reported back to him that the ministry was allowing the purchase of gifts — making it sound like a sudden policy change.
I sent a copy of the email to ministry staff asking for a comment, and this was the official response of the Ministry of Children and Family Development:
"Any claim that the ministry will not be supplying Christmas gifts for children in care is absolutely inaccurate and it is very concerning that this erroneous message was sent to a client. In fact, social workers are encouraged to ensure every child and youth in care receives gifts during the holiday season.Funding to cover gifts for children and youth in care is built-in to monthly payments the ministry sends to foster parents. For children and youth living independently or on Youth Agreements, ministry staff are authorized and encouraged to ensure those young people are remembered over the holidays and gifts are provided."
Isn't that great? It's all just big miscommunication! I think it is just fabulous to find out that not one kid in care in this province will go without a gift this year, however small, because of cutbacks — in particular because this is a Families First government after all.
And if you have also been in receipt of one of those emails, please send it along to me so we can make sure there are no more misunderstandings or "erroneous" information out there.
Because you know, I think a lot of people would find it hard to stomach a government that just promised a tough budget was coming, only to find out it was at the cost of a little bit of Christmas for kids who need it most.
Follow Laila Yuile on Twitter: www.twitter.com/lailayuile
The Liberals are going to make sure their corporate pals are well taking care of is number one priority before increasing pension and severance package before may 2013 election.How many times can premier Clark say the word "may" without losing all credibility? The Liberals don't want the dirty laundry aired and the defendants don't want to be convicted including the premier clark of fraud in the BC rail sale fraud scandal.
http://bit.ly/U9CJJk
I still have questions, much the same as those of Mr. King.
.
As to the second paragraph, the ministry's stand is even more dishonest because the chosen words - "...are authorized and encouraged to ensure those young people are remembered over the holidays and gifts are provided." is even more vague and lacking in precision.
Authorizing and ensuring anything is meaningless without the necessary funding.
Are social workers 'authorized' to spend their own salary buying these gifts?
Will out of pocket payments be reimbursed?
How does one determine the appropriate amount of cash to be spent on 'any' gift? ...how much is authorized for all the gifts given to the clients of each social worker?
I'd appreciate hearing if someone at the ministry has the courage to actually pull back the curtain on this issue - I'm looking forward to some more answers.
Thanks so much for this Laila,
James King,
Victoria
Christy had the opportunity, to clean up Campbell's corruption and thefts. Christy chose to work for Harper too, as Campbell did before her. The HST forced onto the BC family's, seniors and low income people, by Campbell and Harper?....People who thought, they would never use the food banks, now find they have to.
Christy and the other BC Liberals were right there when, Campbell began his Grand Larceny BC. Not one of them lifted a finger to prevent that thief of a Campbell, thieving and selling everything out of BC, he got his hands on.
Depriving children in government care of x-mas gifts? Is a new low for the Campbell/Clark BC Liberals. Very, very Campbell like.
In fact, there was no follow up at all in an attempt to correct what they claim is erroneous information by a social worker.
Doesn't that strike you as odd? Unless of course, the information in the email is correct and there is no need for the ministry to follow up on what they claim, is a mistake.
Either way, their concern ended with their response.
Clearly the BC Government does not put Kids first so the rest of us should.
"We appreciate the kind offer however, as the Director of Child Welfare pointed out in his email to staff the vast majority of children in care are placed with foster care families and part of the maintenance payment they receive from the ministry is to cover presents. For those children and youth who are living under arrangements other than foster care the social workers are able to purchase a gift up to a maximum yearly amount of $100 per child or youth. And in fact are encouraged to do so. Again, there has been no provincial direction to change this practice.
Our privacy legislation prevents us from making public the names of children involved with the ministry. As you know, there are numerous community service agencies that would accept a donation of a gift for a child who may be in need of one during the holiday."
So, as per the ministry, if you wish to send a gift, please send this to your local community service agency who may be able to help you on this.
I wish I had more to tell you, but unfortunately, this is the best I could get.
I think you may be correct.
My source made it clear that longstanding practice was to reimburse front line workers for purchasing such presents.
That, it would appear, is not what the Ministry is referring to in its response.
.
RossK, I belive your source also indicated or mentioned children who were not in foster homes yet, which is another matter altogether - my sources email doesnt differentiate anything, simply stating simply 'children in care'.
Either way, something stinks. I couldn't imagine what a parent who couldnt afford to give a gift, or wasnt in a position to do so, would feel like getting this email.
There is much more digging to do on this one.