Government policy stipulates that hotels may be used only in extreme circumstances, and then for just a few days. Despite that, Gervais had been staying at the hotel for months.
This is only the most recent in a long history of allegations that ministry staff have bungled their responsibilities, sometimes with fatal consequences.
It鈥檚 important to remember that child-welfare duties are shared by a number of agencies, among them detox centres, hospital ERs, law-enforcement personnel and the courts. While the ministry is an expedient target, it is not always solely to blame. In this case, Gervais was being looked after by the Fraser Valley Aboriginal Children and Family Services Society.
Nevertheless, the ultimate responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of the minister, Stephanie Cadieux. And regrettably, Cadieux has tried to weasel out.
First, she said she could not comment on the events surrounding Cadieux鈥檚 death, for 鈥減rivacy鈥� reasons. This is difficult to accept. The young man is dead, and privacy regulations are not intended to shield staff or ministers from appropriate criticism.
Then she said the ministry鈥檚 legislation prohibits her from 鈥済etting involved in the day-to-day decision-making related to child-protection matters.鈥� She called this keeping 鈥渢he political branch of government鈥� out of operational decisions.
This is staggering. No one is suggesting that Cadieux spend her days on the front lines.
But as a minister of the Crown, she is responsible for everything her ministry does within its charter. By attempting to evade this longstanding principle, she makes a mockery of ministerial accountability.
And in any case, this was not a 鈥渄ay-to-day鈥� matter. A young man had died in circumstances that clearly suggested a management failure, or worse.
It was the minister鈥檚 duty to establish a reliable reporting system to satisfy herself how the children in her care were being treated. This need not have intruded upon intimate personal details. What it should have done is ensure the youth she was responsible for were receiving appropriate care.
However, that is not the end of this story. Half or more of all children in care are aboriginal.
The ministry is delegating responsibility for these kids to service agencies run by First Nations. The Fraser Valley Aboriginal Children and Family Services Society is one such group.
The motive behind this policy is laudable. Aboriginal children lose elements of their identity if they are removed from their communities and placed in a different cultural setting. Some 148 of the approximately 200 First Nations in sa国际传媒 either have or are planning child-service agencies.
But this is an enormously complex responsibility. The children鈥檚 ministry has a budget of $1.4 billion, and struggles to protect the kids in its care. Is it realistic to expect that small, arm鈥檚-length agencies, many with limited resources, can carry this burden?
Here is what Alex Gervais鈥檚 death has taught us. The ministry lacks a reliable reporting system to keep tabs on the children in its custody. Policies intended to safeguard kids (such as limited use of hotels) can be ignored without the minister being informed.
Cadieux has no detailed knowledge of how individual youth in her care are being treated, and thinks it would be 鈥減olitical鈥� to find out.
And the ministry has embarked on a massive delegation of responsibilities to small agencies whose sheer numbers will, in all probability, preclude meaningful oversight. What could possibly go wrong?
