As I sat down to write this article, with a dozen tabs open to fentanyl-related stories and studies, a new headline made its way to the front page and it hit me like a tonne of bricks. “Overdose deaths involving fentanyl fill Vancouver morgues to capacity.” One life lost is heartbreaking; the scale of this emergency can hardly be articulated in a way that respects and represents the grief felt around B.C.

The situation in Vancouver is particularly dire, but fentanyl-related overdoses are happening all over the province and our riding is no exception. The reach and magnitude of this crisis has been tragic. The fact that it has only continued to escalate since the B.C. Ministry of Health declared it a public health emergency on April 14 is horrific in its own right.

Also in the news at the time of writing is an article in the Vancouver Sun that reads “the B.C. government is almost doubling its advertising spending [to $15 million] five months before the provincial election, but the minister responsible says it’s to raise awareness of the fentanyl overdose crisis…”

People are dying. We need to help them, not make ads about them.

In 2009 when H1N1 hit B.C., the province put $80 million towards fighting the flu that killed 57 people. Illicit drug overdoses have killed 622 people in the first 10 months of this year, surpassing car crash fatalities to become the leading non-natural cause of death in B.C.

By their own, arguably generous, estimate the provincial government has spent $15 million to prevent and respond to overdoses. Yet even their plan to create 500 new addiction treatment spaces by 2017, a promise made by the premier in the 2013 election, remains unmet. So far only 220 new spaces have become available. And during the same period, the number of substance-abuse treatment beds for young people has dropped 25 per cent to just 89.

The government’s resources thus far have largely been focused on collecting data and distributing naloxone kits, a medication that can reverse the effects of an opioid overdose. They are important initiatives, to be sure, but they are reactionary. They kick in when someone is already in the throes of an overdose. If we want to get ahead of this crisis, we need to step in with a comprehensive plan to support people before they are that close to dying.

Reports released by researchers with the University of Victoria’s Centre for Addictions Research of B.C. (CARBC) provide evidence of the inadequacy of government responses to this emergency, but they also detail a path forward.

For Victoria specifically, they write that by delaying the implementation of supervised consumption services – despite the indications of a growing overdose epidemic and widespread reports of washrooms in social service agencies being used as unofficial and unsupervised injection sites – the province is ignoring the evidence.

As Dr. Bruce Wallace and Dr. Bernie Pauly, researchers at CARBC and faculty members at UVic, wrote in the Globe and Mail, “What is needed is a more comprehensive approach.

“This should include supervised consumption as well as increased access to treatment and opiate-substitution therapy. There is a wealth of evidence that supports the effectiveness of supervised consumption services in preventing overdoses, preventing the transmission of blood-borne disease and increasing access to referrals to treatment and opiate substation therapy.”

Last week Island Health finished the public consultation phase of their application to open a supervised consumption site in Victoria. I hope you will join me in imploring the provincial government to do everything in its jurisdictional power to support this process along, as well as follow CARBC’s recommendations to increase the number addiction-treatment facilities.

For Immediate Release
December 9th, 2016
Weaver’s Statement on Premier Clark’s obstructionist approach to Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change

VICTORIA B.C. – “Following reports that the Arctic sea ice extent has hit a new record November low, Premier Christy Clark actively obstructed National efforts to address climate change,” says Andrew Weaver, Leader of the B.C. Green Party. “The challenges are too big, the consequences are too profound, and the opportunities are too significant for British Columbia to continue to be a barrier in the formulation of a national climate plan. Premier Clark is risking Canada’s national climate plan so she can turn it into a populist election issue in BC.”

Joining her two Conservative counterparts in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Premier Clark blindsided the federal government today with her attempts to derail the development of a national climate plan. While begrudgingly agreeing to sign on late in the day, Premier Clark once more missed an opportunity to demonstrate leadership on this file.

“We need a diversified, sustainable 21st century economy–one that will serve today’s generation without burdening generations to come. And being a leader in that transition is where the economic opportunities lie. As it currently stands British Columbia is still recklessly chasing the LNG pipedream while literally paying corporations to take natural gas out of the ground. This approach does not serve today’s British Columbians well, and it is sabotaging opportunities for the next generation.”

“Windfalls will be enjoyed by those who move first with vision, not latecomers to a developed market. We should be identifying and seizing B.C.’s competitive advantages – our access to cheap, renewable energy, our educated workforce, our innovative business community, and the quality of life we can offer here.”

“A B.C. Green government would embrace a national climate strategy, increase the carbon levy and bring back in the Cap and Trade enabling legislation that was repealed by the Clark government.”

– 30 –

Media contact

Mat Wright, Press Secretary
+1 250-216-3382 | mat.wright@leg.bc.ca

In what has turned out to be a bizarre set of emails with Rachel Notley’s office today, it now appears that there will not be a public meeting after all. So the net result of Ms. Notley’s trip to BC was a closed door back room event with John Horgan, and a number of radio interviews wherein she talked at British Columbians.  This hardly builds trust especially since Mr. Horgan has changed his opinions on the Kinder Morgan pipeline so many times, I’ve lost count.

Talk about lack of transparency. If Ms. Notley wanted to engage British Columbians she would listen to them, not talk at them. She has not listened and both Ms. Clark and Mr. Horgan have remained silent.

Below I reproduce both letters I received today. Now I have asked countless people about their interpretation of the first letter. It was unanimous that people felt that this was to be interpreted as an invitation for a public meeting. The second letter is pretty clear.

Text of the First Letter

Dear Mr. Weaver:

On behalf of Premier Notley, thank you for your email. I appreciate you reaching out and I have shared your invitation with Premier Notley and her scheduling staff to organize a public meeting between you and her team.

Premier Notley’s scheduling staff will follow up with you shortly.

Regards,

Sonya McAdam
Premier’s Correspondence Unit

Text of the Second Letter

Dear Dr. Weaver,

Thank you for your letter of December 5th, 2016 to Premier Notley. Unfortunately, we are unable to oblige your request.

Sincerely,

Miriam Rycroft
Director of Scheduling, Office of the Premier

Earlier today I received an email from Rachel Notley’s staff (reproduced below). The email accepted my request for a public meeting on the Kinder Morgan pipeline. While details are scant at this stage, and I’m not sure what a meeting with “her team” means, I am very pleased that British Columbians will be given an opportunity to witness a public discussion on the issue of the Kinder Morgan pipeline.

As the only MLA who served as an intervenor on this project,  I will be bringing forward the myriad concerns that I highlighted during the National Energy Board Hearings. In addition, as a climate scientist who has served as a Lead Author on the 2^nd, 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientific assessments, I can relate this infrastructure project to the goals that Canada agreed to when it signed the Paris Accord last year.

Text of the Letter

Dear Mr. Weaver:

On behalf of Premier Notley, thank you for your email. I appreciate you reaching out and I have shared your invitation with Premier Notley and her scheduling staff to organize a public meeting between you and her team.

Premier Notley’s scheduling staff will follow up with you shortly.

Regards,

Sonya McAdam
Premier’s Correspondence Unit

For immediate release
Dec. 6, 2016
Statement on Clark and Horgan’s response to Notley’s visit

VICTORIA B.C. – B.C. Green Party leader Andrew Weaver was angered by the lack of response from Premier Christy Clark and John Horgan as they let the premier of another province go unchallenged in making claims about a project that British Columbians have clearly said they do not want.

“British Columbians have said time and time again that they have felt excluded from discussions on the Kinder Morgan pipeline – that their concerns have been completely ignored. Now when the premier of another province comes to tell British Columbians what’s good for us, neither Premier Clark nor John Horgan did anything to change that.

“Premier Christy Clark was completely absent while a Premier of another province appeared on numerous TV and radio shows and made unsupported claims about the pipeline. The evidence clearly shows us that we are entirely unprepared to deal with an oil spill and yet our Premier had nothing to say.

“John Horgan, on the other hand, held a closed-door meeting with Premier Notley and allowed her to do the talking for him. At a time when British Columbians have made it clear that they want to be included in the conversation, Horgan has made it clear that he doesn’t want to have the actual conversation in public.

“Ultimately, people are wondering if their politicians are really representing their concerns in these discussions. With the complete reversal of the Federal Liberal position regarding this pipeline, significant public trust has been burned. British Columbians are done with backroom meetings and talking points. Only an open, unscripted debate will give British Columbians the opportunity to hear their concerns truly represented and responded to.

“If Horgan and Clark truly care about ensuring that British Columbians’ concerns are addressed, I hope they will support my call for an open, unscripted debate with Premier Notley on the Kinder Morgan pipeline. I am going to keep pushing for it. I hope they will join me.”

– 30 –

Media contact
Mat Wright, Press Secretary, Office of Andrew Weaver, MLA
+1 250-216-3382 | mat.wright@bcgreens.ca

Background – Andrew Weaver

Andrew Weaver received intervenor status in the National Energy Board hearing on the Trans Mountain Expansion Project both as a Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia and as a scientist with a doctorate in applied mathematics and with specialty in physical oceanography and atmospheric and climate science. As an MLA, he represents the constituency of Oak Bay-Gordon Head, which is located along the Trans Mountain Tanker Sailing Route on the southeastern tip of Vancouver Island. He was the only B.C. MLA with intervenor status in the hearing process.

As a scientist, Weaver served as Lansdowne Professor and Canada Research Chair in climate modeling and analysis in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Victoria, where he worked for over 20 years. He was a lead author on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th scientific assessments and has authored and coauthored over 200 peer-reviewed, scientific papers. Weaver is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Throughout the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain NEB hearings, he applied his scientific expertise, particularly in physical oceanography and modelling.