Penticton-Summerland MLA Amelia Boultbee

Image Credit: Keith Lacey, Local Journalism Initiative

Amelia Boultbee says she's slightly embarrassed about being kicked out of a hearing in the provincial legislature last week but makes no apologies for standing up to an NDP Minister who she claims is running a ministry that is failing children across British Columbia.

Boultbee, the newly elected MLA for Penticton–Summerland, is the Conservative critic for B.C.'s Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD).

During a budget hearing held Tuesday, May 13 at the provincial legislature in Victoria, Boultbee was grilling Minister Jodie Wickens about her ministry's proposed $2.4 billion budget. She cited information from a Representative for Children and Youth report stating that 103 children had died in the last fiscal year while receiving services from the ministry.

Of those deaths, 42 were deemed natural, 25 accidental (13 of which were drug overdoses), 20 were undetermined, nine were suicides, and seven were homicides.

Boultbee asked Wickens for the Ministry's 2025 year-to-date statistics and requested anonymized death certificates.

Brenda Bailey, Deputy House Leader, raised a point of order during Boultbee’s questioning.

"I'm wondering if the Member opposite could help me understand the relationship between a request for a coroner's certificate and the funding of the budget at hand," said Bailey, who is also the NDP MLA for Vancouver–South Granville. "I'm just not following how those are linked."

At that point, Trevor Halford, Conservative MLA for Surrey–White Rock, defended Boultbee.

"These questions seem absolutely relevant to the budget," said Halford. "They may be inconvenient for the Minister or the House Leader, but they relate directly to the ministry's responsibilities and the budgetary figures associated with it."

Wickens, MLA for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain, defended her ministry following the exchange.

"If we want to talk about investments in child safety and keeping families together, we are continually doing the work in transformative ways, and we will continue to do that work," she said.

Boultbee disagreed and demanded more information on the causes of child deaths in government care. Wickens responded that such information is the responsibility of the coroner’s office.

"I actually did ask the coroner's office, and he told me to ask this ministry," Boultbee replied. "I'm a member of the opposition, and I have a right to ask these questions and expect answers."

The "budget estimates" meeting, held once a year every spring, allows the opposition to question ministers about the annual budget and related issues over a full eight-hour workday, Boultbee explained.

She raised her concerns about child deaths near the end of a long day of questioning.

"It was well into hour six, and things were getting pretty testy because I was asking very difficult, emotional questions about more than 100 children who died," she said. "I wanted their death certificates."

"At one point, the Minister (Wickens) said I had to get those from the coroner, and I told her I was getting the runaround because the coroner said I had to get them from her."

Boultbee said Bailey’s interruption with a point of order was "very unusual" because Bailey had no standing in the meeting, yet attempted to influence proceedings.

"Her point of order was that my line of questioning had nothing to do with the budget," said Boultbee. "But the way budget estimates works is that you're given really wide latitude to ask almost anything. She was being very partisan and obstructionist."

Boultbee, who had observed dozens of hours of estimates meetings in her first few months in the legislature, said she had "not once" seen anyone rise to question points of order.

"I got kind of snippy because Bailey was addressing me personally instead of the chair," said Boultbee. "The chair asked, 'how do you answer that?' and I said, 'I don’t answer questions from random people standing up in the gallery.' I told the chair this was relevant because I wanted to know if they can keep kids alive, which I thought was pretty relevant to the budget."

Due to rising tension, a five-minute recess was called. When she returned, Boultbee resumed her line of questioning.

"I said, 'you want to talk about the budget? Let’s talk about the budget,'" said Boultbee. "Let’s talk about the fact you’re cutting $4 million from the adoption budget."

Wickens insisted the $4 million budget line reduction would not affect services and thus did not constitute a cut, said Boultbee.

"She wanted to get into this pedantic argument with me, so I asked her how many kids were on the adoption waitlist. She said 500. I responded that, with all due respect, the budget should be increasing so all these kids can get adopted."

Wickens again denied any budget cuts, prompting Boultbee to hold up the actual budget document and point out that last year’s adoption budget was over $40 million, while this year it’s $36 million.

"How are you going to stand there and say that’s not a cut?" Boultbee said. "I’m not talking about services, I’m talking about actual dollars. I said this is institutional gaslighting of the highest order."

Boultbee said her use of the term "institutional gaslighting" led to her ejection from the meeting after she initially refused to withdraw the statement.

She admitted she didn’t know the committee chair had the same authority as the Speaker in the full legislature or that the term “gaslighting” would be considered unparliamentary.

"Just for the record, the word 'gaslighting' has been used several times in the big House without attracting accusations of inappropriate language," she said. "I stuck by my guns and refused to withdraw, so I was ejected."

Boultbee asked an assistant from her office to continue posing questions after her ejection. Another staff member advised her to speak to the Speaker, who informed her she’d have to withdraw her comments to be allowed back and regain standing.

"He told me I didn’t have to say I was sorry," she said. "He said it was a technicality, but if I didn’t withdraw, I wouldn’t be allowed back into that committee room ever again."

About 20 minutes later, Boultbee re-entered and withdrew her comment.

"I simply said, 'I withdraw my comments.' I did the absolute bare minimum to be allowed back. I wasn’t going to pander or apologize unequivocally, which is what people usually do. I just said, 'I withdraw.'"

She said she received a huge round of applause from her caucus for her actions.

"The reason I was so critical of Wickens and her ministry is because I care about children, and in my opinion, this Minister wasn’t being honest," Boultbee said. "She plays little games and isn't transparent. She refused to answer questions for hours, which I think is bad leadership."

"I believe it’s incumbent upon a Minister to answer direct questions honestly, even if the answer is 'we don’t track that' or 'this is our best guess.' She thought I didn’t know what was going on, but I do—I do my research."

"It was question after question, and she kept being evasive. I’m offended by that on behalf of taxpayers and the families of those children who died. A Minister who refuses to answer tough questions is unacceptable."

Boultbee said she’s not proud of being ejected but is proud of standing up and asking important questions on a very difficult topic.

"This hearing was my one chance to question this Minister for a full day, and I honestly think I pummelled her into the ground," she said. "There is no report from her ministry I haven’t read or issue raised that I don’t have an answer for."

When she told Conservative Party Leader John Rustad she’d been ejected, he laughed, she said.

"At first he didn’t believe me, then he just smiled and laughed."

After the hearing, Boultbee said Wickens and a group of about 20 staff members posed for photos showing Wickens making a "V for Victory" hand sign—something Boultbee found highly inappropriate.

"I found it in very poor taste," she said. "They posted these photos on social media. There was nothing to celebrate. I think it’s a very somber topic. If I were the Minister, I would never do that. It’s OK to feel relieved, but to post jubilant photos like you’ve just come back from Disneyland, when you’ve just been talking about dead kids—it kind of makes me ill, to be honest."

— This article was originally published by the Penticton Herald

News from © iNFOnews, 2025