West Vancouver - Capilano Report |Spring – Summer 2011

Childhood Poverty in West Vancouver – and Richmond

Six months have passed since I issued my report on childhood poverty in West Vancouver – and Richmond.  (Available on my website – http://www.ralphsultanmla.ca/ralph-works/special-studies/)  Avid readers of that 99-page compendium of regression equations, charts, and “on the other hand” economist’s pronouncements, will recall that it was reported, from usually reliable sources, that West Vancouver has one of the highest childhood poverty rates in British Columbia, that British Columbia itself has the highest childhood poverty rate in Canada, and that Canada has almost the highest childhood poverty rate of any industrialized nation.

From which I concluded that the constituency I am privileged to serve as MLA, was among the “worst of the worst of the worst,” globally.  Along the way, I discovered that my MLA colleagues representing Richmond, had it even worse!

Several months after release of my best-seller, I stood up in our Legislature on point of privilege and rudely interrupted the Member from Mount Pleasant  who was in the middle of another ritual denunciation of the poverty sins of this government, reserving a future opportunity for rebuttal.  Assistant Clerk of the House later chastised me for relying on federal instead of provincial precedent in attempting such a parliamentary manoeuvre, and suggested an apology might be in order.  My draft apology, composed for her on the spot in the Members’ Corridor, outside the legislature hall, went something like: “I wish to apologize to the Member for Mount Pleasant for rudely interrupting her remarks on a point of privilege, but something had snapped in my brain upon hearing for the approximate 100^th time in this Legislature (by my actual Hansard search) that ‘British Columbia has the highest poverty rate in the country’.”  Assistant Clerk informed me this would simply not do, and I admitted my guise of simply raising another point of privilege to reinforce an earlier point of privilege.

So this newsletter is my last refuge of explanation.

My 99-page statistical analysis was performed on family data drawn from 54 B.C. communities.  It confirmed the obvious:  some families have lower incomes than others.  However, my analysis also confirmed that the allegedly impeccable source of the poverty data, Statistics Canada, did not measure poverty; that in fact it had repeatedly gone out of its way to emphasize that it did not measure poverty.  Clearly, the Federal Government has proven to be an unreliable ally of NDP critics.

But, but .. on the other hand .. this is not to say that we do not have a low-income problem. Data tell us that prevalence of lower family incomes in any community is strongly driven, I conclude, by many factors, but particularly by the presence of immigrants and the presence of single mothers.

Most significantly, the data also told me that (on an after-tax basis), the proportion of a community consisting of off-reserve aboriginals is not correlated with the incidence of lower family incomes.  Therefore, when it comes to reported incomes, off-Reserve aboriginal families appear to be just like any other families. I find this encouraging.

My delving into the data also revealed that the provincial government expends roughly 10 per cent of its budget, roughly $4 billion, on programs aiming to assist lower-income families with children.  Meanwhile, Federal government programs  redirect approximately 10 per cent of our GDP to persons of lower income across the board.  From which I conclude that income redistribution is actively alive in our country. This is, I believe, significant in terms of Opposition Leader Adrian Dix’s stated intention to make income redistribution a major plank of his party in any forthcoming political campaign (Vancouver Sun, June 22, 2011).

Since the report was issued, I have enjoyed meetings with individuals, school boards, and various social activist groups including First Call, the coalition-based originators of the annual “worst childhood poverty in Canada” proclamation.  I received a respectful hearing – and learned that reaction to my report is much in the eye of the beholder.  People read into it what they want to read into it.

For example, a principal researcher at First Call, while dismissing my lament about the mislabeling inherent in the “highest poverty” press releases, was pleased that someone like myself was finally paying attention to a genuine problem, which I did not deny.

Others of a less left-leaning persuasion, raised issues of what is happening with our immigration policy.

Finally, many others challenged me to put some meat on the bones of my suggestion that as a society we must create a more focused day-care system to assist single mothers.  While I have conceded that the vast cost of such a social enterprise would make any Finance Minister blanch, whether that be Hon. Kevin Falcon in Victoria or Hon. Jim Flaherty in Ottawa, the need of single mothers for affordable day care remains a strong personal revelation and I feel an obligation to do something about it.

So while I think it will be appropriate for me to stand up in the House once again and challenge the Opposition Party’s inevitable 101^st proclamation that West Vancouver – and Richmond – contribute immensely to a childhood poverty problem which is the shame of the western world, I do also acknowledge that governments at all levels have important work to do.

Ralph’s Civil Liability Twin Pak

On June 2, 2011, I introduced two private bills dealing with civil liability; my “civil liability twin pak.”

Bill M213, The Family Compensation Act Amendment Act, 2011, allows a court to award damages for grief and loss of guidance, care and companionship to spouses of deceased persons as well as parents and children.  Curiously, as B.C. law now stands, if you suffer from the wrongful death of your spouse or child, courts may grant you damages for the financial loss you have incurred. However, compensation for the pain and suffering of wrongful death? Nothing.

A constituent lost her husband through an apparent prescription error. Compensation for the tragedy?  Sorry. Nothing. Her pension income was unaffected.  Financially, life went on as before.  But did my constituent’s life go on as before after loss of her lifelong companion?  Certainly not.

This amendment is a carbon copy of the statute currently on the books in Alberta granting the potential for the court to grant awards, within limits, for those who have suffered the tragedy of wrongful death.

The bill passed first reading and was placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House – which will be some time in the fall.

This bill is consistent with the “Families First” agenda of Premier Christy Clark, and her office has encouraged it – as a private bill bypassing the usual convoluted process of legislative development.  I am optimistic that after debate, my bill will be passed.  I am indebted to West Vancouver  attorney Andy Sandilands for assisting me in its drafting. .

Bill M212, The Limitation Act Amendment Act, 2011, is the other half of my “civil liability twin pak,” introduced the same day.  This bill sets an ultimate limitation period of ten years with respect to the civil liability of engineers, geoscientist, architects, accountants, and dentists.

Today the civil liability of highly trained persons working in these professions extends 30 years beyond discovery of the alleged fault. What are some of the consequences?

• Dentists around town must find storage space for all of your old X-rays and plaster casts for 30 years, since recently a dentist hereabouts was sued for a worn crown 17 years old.

• Engineers routinely skip having liability insurance at all, for fear it will merely attract litigation, and besides, it’s too expensive. The engineering equivalent of unsafe sex, I would say.

• Accountants fear the loss of their homes and even their RRSPs, as appears to be happening in a current very high-profile case back East.

• Architects find litigants’ reach extends beyond the grave, as experienced by my own assistant as she fought both lawsuits and her own cancer in years of effort to settle her architect husband’s estate.

Professionals should be held accountable for malpractice and incompetence – and they are. That is why they are governed day-to-day by their respective professional colleges.  So why, on top of that, does the law create essentially a lifetime of liability without expiry, on top of that rigorous self-policing?

It is hard to figure, particularly since government, in its wisdom, stipulates only six years of opportunity to find fault with what transpires in its own hospital system, and the doctors who staff it.   I marvel at the grotesque contrast between six years of liability exposure for the government’s own, versus 30 years for everybody else.

I am optimistic that, encouraged by professionals in each constituency, a majority of MLA’s will vote for this bill when re-introduced in the fall.

Editorial:  Ralph’s Fireside Chat to America

Harvard University keeps in close touch with its graduates (they are a major source of grants and funding.)  Nobody does it quite as well as the Harvard Business School, where I spent many years of my life.

Each quarter, the HBS Alumni Bulletin arrives in the mail box of 75,000 HBS alumni – taxi drivers and bank presidents alike – around the world.  They constitute a unique mosaic of owners and managers, entrepreneurs and capitalists alike.

From time to time, we are invited to tell this audience what we are up to – common fare being grandchildren, trips abroad, and escalating careers.  But  occasionally my 1960 Class Secretary invites us to offer our opinions on what is going on in America – most recently from the vantage point of the Oval Office.

What politician could resist such a bully pulpit – Davos, UN, and the Economic Club of New York rolled into one!  Here is what I wrote, and here is what was duly reported last month by the HBS Bulletin to the 75,000.

If I was in the Oval Office (and speaking as a politician who is used to facing disenchanted voters), I would broadcast a fireside chat that runs something like this:

My fellow Americans, I want to share with you this evening some hard truths about our great nation.  You may not like to hear what I have to say, and no doubt what I say will be attacked by many, and I will lose votes I might count on in the election, should I choose to run again.  But these are truths that must be told.

First, America has been living beyond its means, and governments at all levels have made promises the country cannot keep. There is simply not enough money to go around.

Second, we are all going to have to work harder, put more into the system, and be rewarded, in turn, by receiving less back from the system.  Put another way, we are going to have to work harder and receive less.  This is  hard truth that all Americans, regardless of their economic status, rich and poor alike, must recognize.

Third, we are overextended and are going to have to pull back from some of our commitments abroad.  We cannot be the policeman of the world, and it is not clear that the world wants us to be.  In any event, we can no longer aspire to that role, which implies some shrinkage in our enormous military capability and the cost of maintaining it.

Finally, we politicians have to level with the people as to the cost and capability of governments to deliver the pension benefits, health benefits, retirement perks, and guarantees (public and private) that many enjoy today.  Contracts will be breached.

The idea that we can trim the fat from government to restore fiscal order is not supported by the reality of our situation, and to cut, for example, what we spend on educating our future generations will guarantee mediocrity and uncompetitiveness for our great nation in the future.  This is not where fiscal balance can be restored.

In truth, we are facing a challenge as great as those this nation faced at Valley Forge, during the Great Depression, and after Pearl Harbour.  We can rise to the challenge.  But first we must recognize the truth of our situation and where the pathway to restoring the solvency of the nation may be found.

I am confident that, as in the past, Americans will do the job.

Good night!

Ralph Emphasizes Legislative Support for North Shore Shipbuilding Contract

On May 30, 2011, Ralph introduced a private member’s bill into the Legislature, expressing support for Seaspan of North Vancouver’s quest to acquire a significant portion (one-half will do!) of the forthcoming $35 billion Federal military shipbuilding program.

The following was offered to the House for consideration:   Be it resolved that this House support the efforts of our federally-qualified marine contractor in acquiring contracts for building large vessels for the Canadian Navy and Coast Guard, recognizing that capitalizing on the $33 billion National Ship Procurement Strategy will expand British Columbia’s economy and shipbuilding expertise.

Ralph went on to say:  “Canada needs this $35 billion program for defence of the realm. Our navy frigates do not last forever and must eventually be replaced. Patrol of our third coastline, the Arctic, is becoming a necessity much faster than any of us had predicted. Relying upon the Americans or anybody else to defend our coastlines and our interests abroad is simply unacceptable. A strong Canadian defence is the price of Canada’s freedom.

“Secondly, we’re in competition here with eastern shipyards. From the perspective of eastern Canada, it’s all too easy to dismiss western Canada as remote, unsophisticated and not terribly important. Well, we beg to differ.

“The centre of gravity of the world is shifting towards Asia. The centre of gravity within Canada is shifting as well. The west is the big new kid on the block in terms of population, trade, economy and political influence.

“Vancouver’s the busiest port in Canada by far, and our marine industries match any standard of excellence. Unlike some I could mention, our British Columbia shipyards are efficient, productive and solvent. They routinely deliver on time and on budget.

“Thirdly, thousands and thousands of high-paying jobs are at stake here in Vancouver, in Victoria, in Nanaimo and in the hinterland. We’re prone in this House to get excited if a billion-dollar project comes along. Members, this one is 35 times bigger than that.

“I ask this House to unreservedly show its support for our British Columbia shipbuilding industry as they pursue these vitally important, job-intensive, family-strengthening contracts in Ottawa.”

Premier Christy Clark seized the opportunity presented by this private bill to make her first statement in the British Columbia Legislature as Premier.  Only two hours after being sworn in, she was in the House, during private members’ time by consent, and declared the Government’s ringing endorsement for British Columbia’s pursuit of this important, jobs-creating, contract.

Members on both sides of the House spoke with enthusiasm in support of the resolution.  The resolution passed unanimously.

Seaspan’s bid will be in the hands of the procurement officials in Ottawa on July 7^th, and B.C. optimism is running strong.  Our commitment to tax assistance, training programs, and other demonstrations of tangible support, will help B.C.’s bid immeasurably.

North Van’s 6^th Squadron, Royal Canadian Engineers, celebrate 100^th birthday

I recently attended a celebration of the 6^th Field Engineer Squadron, Canadian Army, based in North Vancouver.

Army engineers are called “sappers.”  They built the Rideau Canal, thwarting American plans to seize Canada.  They built the Cariboo Trail, extending our province’s sovereignty into territory over-run by American gold seekers.  They built their barracks in Sapperton, in New Westminster.

The 6^th Squadron was organized by J.P. Fell 100 years ago.  Its lads marched into war in 1914.  Of 3,670 engineers sent by the 6^th Squadron to France, 210 rest there, in their graves.

During World War II, engineers from this unit stormed ashore and died on Juno Beach.   They served in Egypt, Israel, Germany, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Croatia, Bosnia, Afghanistan – and even against the Soviets in Siberia.

At the birthday ceremony, I watched about 100 of these army engineers march past, rifles ready, preceded by North Vancouver’s famous J. P. Fell Pipe Band.  They were followed by army, air force, and navy cadets, and vintage Bren Gun Carriers and Artillery Tractors.

Army engineers build bridges, clear away obstructions, and defuse dangers – man-made or natural.  Sounds like what is needed in the aftermath of earthquakes and tsunamis.

Should their services be needed, the 6^th Field Squadron stands ready, but our closest Canadian Army Base of regulars is far away in Edmonton.  The  Canadian Army does not have a permanent presence in B.C.  How on earth did this happen?  It seems a previous Premier of our province did not much care for things military, and acquiesced when the  folks in Ottawa shut down their remaining base in Chilliwack.

Should emergencies arise, let us hope that our new Government in Ottawa will better understand British Columbia’s vulnerabilities and our special need for permanent field engineering units, both in war – and in peace.

We salute the 6^th Engineering Squadron on their 100^th birthday.