Skip to main content
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

A report from former deputy minister Bob Plecas called for more funding, additional staff and better training within B.C.’s child-protection system.

Deddeda Stemler/The Globe and Mail

A review of British Columbia's child welfare system released this week fails to hold to account social workers who put children in harm's way, says the lawyer for a woman whose case triggered the review.

And the suggestion that social workers do their jobs with the constant fear of public criticism over any errors in judgment is "pure fiction" in light of what happened to the woman, known only as J.P., and her children in their dealings with child-protection workers, her lawyer said.

"The report seems to be a folksy narrative on how a ministry designed by [Bob] Plecas has gone wrong – because they veered from his initial path," lawyer Jack Hittrich said, referring to former deputy minister Bob Plecas, who wrote the report released on Monday. "The standards and practices set up are good. In the J.P. case, social workers deliberately did not follow them, with disastrous results."

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Plecas's report called for more funding, additional staff and better training within the child-protection system, while also suggesting the ministry and its workers were too often the target of criticism from the media, Opposition politicians and the province's independent children's watchdog. The review was launched after details emerged about J.P.'s case. The woman's husband was allowed unsupervised visits with the couple's four children after social workers refused to believe or investigate her allegations that he was sexually abusing them, allegations the judge found were true.

The furor swirling around the Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) has also included extensive media coverage of the deaths of several children in care over the past few years and several reports by the children's representative, Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, that have cited gaps in ministry services for vulnerable children.

Plecas Review Report Part One

The details of the J.P. case came to light in July in a Supreme Court of B.C. ruling that found social workers on the case "engaged in a wholesale disregard of their statutory mandate and the requisite standard of care expected of them to protect the children from harm" and that the director of child welfare provided "false and misleading information" to the court to support J.P.'s children being taken from her and placed with their father.

The children are now in J.P's care. After the court ruling in July, the government announced it would conduct an independent review of the J.P. case, and named Mr. Plecas to conduct it.

In August, the province appealed the judgment, and Mr. Plecas's mandate was changed so he could provide an interim report on child welfare services while the case was still before the court.

That report, released on Monday, has only added to the controversy over the ministry. In his review, Mr. Plecas said the MCFD "by and large does an admirable job" in helping vulnerable kids and that B.C.'s rate of out-of-home care for children – 10.1 per 1,000 – is lower than 12.4 per 1,000 in comparable provinces.

Mr. Plecas also cited external factors that affect the ministry, saying that sometimes, particularly when it comes to the death of a child in care, an avalanche of criticism and calls for change can lead to "even greater instability and loss of confidence in the work of the ministry."

Story continues below advertisement

He also noted the hourly rates for child protection workers in B.C. were below the national average and that funding for the ministry has failed to keep up with inflation, resulting in cuts or hiring freezes.

Mr. Plecas also suggested the office of the Representative for Children and Youth – created in 2006 – be phased out, saying the volume of recommendations it makes has become "overwhelming" and that the ministry could move toward internal oversight.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond said independent oversight of the child welfare system remains a necessity and that without it, stories of vulnerable children would never be told.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies