Carole Taylor's Journal

On this edition of Journal: another hitch in the plan for a smooth path to reconciliation in British Columbia.First, we had the BC government’s introduction of the Land Act, which unsettled many of its assertions of co-management with First Nations of all the Crown land in the province. The Act was withdrawn, but not before some name-calling.But then in a splashy press conference, Premier Eby announced the granting of aboriginal title to Haida Gwaii. When people of all stripes and professions raised questions about what that would mean for private property owners, the Premier announced again and again it would not affect private property.And then, boom – there was the court decision granting aboriginal title over land in Richmond to the Cowichan, with the Judge suggesting – despite what had been asserted by Premier Eby – there were issues around private property rights.Finally, last month in another twist on this reconciliation journey, a different judge in a separate case found that BC’s mineral claims regime, fundamental to our hoped for resurgence in mining, is inconsistent with the province’s own declared law, DRIPA – the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act – because mining claims were made before receiving free, prior, and informed consent from First Nations.With all of this cumulative confusion and uncertainty, is it any wonder that support for reconciliation has fallen in recent polls?Joining me to make sense of all this is Thomas Isaac. As one of our country’s leading experts on aboriginal title and the law, he has concerns about what he is seeing in BC.

On this edition of Journal, we try to make sense of the mish-mash of housing initiatives coming at us from all directions – federal, provincial, and municipal governments.Two things seem obvious. First, no one is coordinating these various programs, since some of them overlap and some even contradict each other. At one point last spring, research showed there were at least 60 initiatives aimed at developers and builders, supposedly to increase the supply of housing, therefore leading to affordability. But have they?Second, the whole issue of housing is fractured into parts. There is home ownership, market rental, below market rental, social housing, seniors housing, assisted living, and on and on. Each category gets debated on its own with little attention to how it fits with all the other needs. Policies are then developed sector by sector.Beau Jarvis sees this as a problem. Beau is the President and CEO of Wesgroup Properties, one of Canada’s largest housing providers. For many years, his company has been a major player in purpose-built rental housing. Many people in government and in the community feel that this is the only answer to affordability, but is it?Have we completely given up on the idea of ownership – in any form – because it seems so expensive and so impossible?But at the moment, rental is the flavour of the month, garnering much of the attention and policies to support it. Despite Wesgroup’s strong presence in that market, Beau feels it is a mistake if we aren’t talking about housing as a whole with all its permutations and combinations since piecemeal policy does not guarantee a liveable, affordable city.

On this edition of Journal, we examine what is happening to the City of Vancouver – and what can be done, if anything, to turn this situation around.When I was a councillor in the late eighties, I remember one example of how neighbourhood planning was done in those days: on the street, not in backrooms.A brand new False Creek residential development, to be built on industrial land, while controversial, was to be a centrepiece of new urban planning principles. Immediately, questions arose. How can you have density without amenities like parks? Or the idea that you can’t start building without thoughtful plans for infrastructure and traffic management. Most importantly, you have to talk to residents (or future residents) about their needs.Larry Beasley, an urban planner for the city, was not content to just send paper reports to Council – he took a group of us councillors down to False Creek so we could actually see the design initiatives that were important to liveability, rather than just plunking down apartments.As a sidebar, part of the lesson was about quality, dramatically emphasized when he was mid-sentence explaining why a certain kind of rock – rip-rap – had to be used along the shoreline to prevent rats from infesting the residential area. Just at that moment, a rat appeared and scampered up to us. Alright, alright. Pay for the right rip-rap! But the point actually is, Larry Beasley was always hands-on: walking the streets, talking to residents, asking questions, listening and responding, ensuring we built a city for its citizens. It is a big reason why Vancouver has so many unique neighbourhoods. And for many years, those streets became mini communities – safe to walk, shop, and talk to your neighbours.Larry is not happy with what he is seeing today: that the province has decided it can design our cities from Victoria.

On this edition of Journal: What has happened to the centre-right coalition that ran British Columbia for so many years, under various names (SoCreds, BC Liberals, etc.)?The latest iteration was cobbled together just before the last provincial election when John Rustad, who had been kicked off the BC Liberals before they became BC United, joined up with the dormant Conservative party – and then Kevin Falcon, the BC United leader, pulled his party out of the race.And we’re seeing the same kind of division on the right at the municipal level in Vancouver.  Ahh, BC politics.And unbelievably, this party with virtually no money, no organization, and a lot of newbie candidates almost won the election. Such was the unhappiness with the NDP government and Premier Eby.Now, one might have thought that such a surprisingly good result would have given this new group hope and enthusiasm for the future. But no. Instead of all pulling together in the same direction with one eye on the future, the backstabbing and innuendo began.Whispers and more whispers: John Rustad, the man who brought them so close to victory would be gone by Monday, or next week, or next month.One year later, five MLAs have left or been kicked out of caucus and a majority of the Conservative Party executive have called for Rustad’s resignation, as have the presidents of five Metro Vancouver ridings. And yet, John Rustad is becoming more and more prominent on social media, talking about issues such as Cowichan, affordability and EV mandates.To help us understand the machinations of politics in this province is my guest this week, Dr. Stewart Prest, a lecturer in political science at the University of BC.

On this edition of Journal: healthcare.How can we ever have a meaningful discussion on how to improve healthcare delivery in Canada when we aren’t even allowed to ask the question? Medicare is perfect – until it isn’t.Tangentially, this reminds me of the President Biden situation, when all his spokespeople were insisting that he was in perfect health until the public saw with their own eyes during the debate – that, in fact, something was very wrong.So what are we seeing with our own eyes about healthcare delivery?All seven OB-GYNY doctors – the entire unit – resigned their positions in the Kamloops hospital, citing unsafe working conditions and staff shortages.People in Kelowna were told in the spring that the entire pediatric team at Kelowna General Hospital was being closed down due to poor working conditions.Last year, British Columbia started sending some of our cancer patients to Bellingham, in the US, because we couldn’t guarantee timely treatment.And of course, our headlines are filled with ER closures around the province: Merritt, Mission, Delta, and on and on. I can’t imagine the family that showed up in the middle of the night with a sick child, only to find the ER closed, thinking our healthcare system is just fine.And I haven’t even mentioned waitlists and the shortage of family physicians.One man who has been warning of this impending crisis since 1995 is Dr. Brian Day. He has devoted years – 13 of them – in court fighting provincial and federal governments, trying to be heard.Brian has recently written a book: “My Fight for Canadian Healthcare.”

On this edition of Journal: the complexities and needs of our aging population.I’m a baby boomer and to this day, I am astounded that institutions never saw us coming. With at least five years’ warning before this population boom hit the school system, it seemed to be a surprise when we all arrived – not enough desks, not enough classes, not enough schools.But that bureaucratic “miss” is nothing compared to what we face today, as these same baby boomers age. Who knew?Who knew boomers would need more and more complex healthcare as they got older?Who knew that it would become harder and harder for some seniors to pay rising rents on a fixed income, leading to an increase in homelessness for those over 55?Who knew that, along with longer lifespans, there would be a commensurate demand for those not able to take care of themselves – a demand for long-term care beds and assisted living services?Well, here we are – and now we know.According to British Columbia’s Seniors Advocate, we need at least 5,000 new long term care beds, as the waitlist for seniors needing these beds has grown by 200% in the last ten years.And this shortage becomes a chokepoint for our entire healthcare system. Hospital beds are often occupied by someone ready to be released from acute care, but can’t until a long-term care bed is available. Then the E.R. gets backed up because a patient that should be admitted to a hospital bed has to stay in the hall of the emergency department because there isn’t an open bed upstairs.Sounding the alarm on this issue, as well as ageism, is Dan Levitt, our province’s Seniors Advocate.