Eby terminates Downtown Eastside consultancy contract that came under fire
British Columbia Premier David Eby has terminated a consultancy contract to improve conditions in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside that came under fire from critics, who called it a political favour that lacked transparency.
Eby's office said in a statement on Tuesday that the debate about Michael Bryant's contract had become a distraction from work to improve the neighbourhood.
It said the contract with the consulting company owned by Bryant — a former CEO of Legal Aid BC and Ontario attorney general — ended on Sunday, and Eby later clarified that it was his decision.
'We have a shared dedication towards improving conditions in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, and thank him for his work to this point,' the statement said.
'However, debate and discussion around this time-limited contract is distracting from the important work underway.'
The statement said the government remained committed to making life better for people who live in the neighbourhood.
In a news briefing in Vancouver, Eby said Bryant would receive no severance and he had been paid up to Sunday, an amount in the neighbourhood of $75,000.
He said he did not know the circumstances behind the end Bryant's role at Legal Aid BC, which the Opposition B.C. Conservatives have said 'ended abruptly' last year.
Eby said his relationship with Bryant began in his Legal Aid BC role, when Eby was attorney general.
The Conservatives have attacked Bryant's contract, saying no reporting benchmarks have been disclosed or met.
The contract instructing Bryant to develop a 'framework' for co-ordinating services in the neighbourhood was worth up to $325,000, including $25,000 in expenses.
Opposition Leader John Rustad said the government had hired Bryant without announcing the contract first, then got rid off him after being caught 'red-handed.'
Rustad said the situation showed the 'arrogance of David Eby, thinking that he could just hire anybody he wants, friends, relatives, and get away with it.'
He said the hiring and firing of Bryant showed a 'pattern of disrespect' to the public from a government acting without transparency.
Rustad said Bryant would not have made any 'difference one way or another' to the problems of the Downtown Eastside.
Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction Shelia Malcolmson has blamed a 'communication problem' between her ministry and the Premier's Office for not having announced Bryant's appointment earlier.
Opposition MLA Trevor Halford said last week of Bryant's contract that there were 'no public deliverables, no transparency, and no justification for why this appointment wasn't disclosed.'
The contract with Bryant's company, the Humilitas Group, is dated February 12. It says the company is to engage with government and non-government sectors to align Downtown Eastside services with provincial policy objectives.
It also says the company is to support development and implementation of 'operational frameworks to address systemic challenges in the DTES.'
The contract says the government wishes for a framework to support improvements for the people, public spaces, infrastructure, health care and housing of the DTES.
But it says 'the parties acknowledge that the contractor does not warrant that these outcomes will be achieved.'
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 20, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Net migration set to plummet to pre-Brexit levels
Net migration is set to plummet to pre-Brexit levels in the next year, the Government's chief immigration adviser has said. Prof Brian Bell, the chairman of the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), claimed that falling job vacancies and an increase on the restrictions for foreign workers and students were likely to push net migration down from its current figure of 430,000 to 200,000 within a year. That would return it to the pre-Brexit net migration average of between 200,000 and 250,000 before Boris Johnson became prime minister and opened up work and student visas. Prof Bell's claim would mean net migration would fall to a quarter of its record peak of 906,000 in the year ending June 2023. However, he warned that it would probably result in staff shortages in hospitality and retail, including chefs, waiters and shopworkers, which will be excluded from the list of highly-skilled or shortage occupations to benefit from overseas recruitment. Sir Keir Starmer's White Paper has proposed that some 180 occupations will no longer be eligible to recruit overseas. Migrants will only be able to obtain a job if the position is graduate-level or above in an attempt to end low-paid migration. 'Foreign workers will be limited to occupations that are crucial for the industrial strategy or for the missions of the Government. Key sectors that will not be eligible therefore are, for example, hospitality,' said Prof Bell. 'So we've seen over the last few years that, for example, chefs, there's quite been quite a lot of visas issued for chefs. That will cease once that sector is removed from eligibility, and it won't be added back in because it's not part of the industrial strategy. 'You would see hospitality suffering. Retail will be unlikely to access it, whereas advanced manufacturing and life sciences will still have access, partly because they're more likely to be graduate jobs anyway and so remain eligible.' Labour's efforts to reduce net migration follows restrictions introduced at the start of last year by the Conservatives to bar foreign workers and students from bringing in their dependants and the introduction of higher salary thresholds for migrants seeking skilled jobs in the UK. Prof Bell said the Tories' measures, combined with a slump in vacancies, would cause net migration to fall further than had been expected by the Office for Budget Responsibility. 'I think it's possible that we'll get down to more like the 200,000 mark,' he said. Official data published on Tuesday showed that the number of available jobs fell by 63,000 between March and May to 736,000 vacancies as companies held back on hiring and replacing workers who left. However, he forecast that as the economy grew net migration would revert to between 250,000 and 300,000. It could fall lower depending on the impact of the White Paper plans to require foreign skilled workers to be graduates, ban the overseas recruitment of foreign care workers and raise English language standards. 'I think we'll revert to about 300,000 although probably a little lower given the White Paper's recent changes which, if enacted, will reduce net migration by perhaps about 80,000 at the average. So somewhere just below 300,000 would seem like a plausible medium-term scenario,' said Prof Bell. His comments came as he launched a report by the MAC which warned that a proposed reduction in family visas aimed at reducing net migration risked breaching human rights law. The MAC said that raising the annual salary threshold required for a Briton to bring their foreign partner or spouse to the UK from its current £29,000 to £38,700 is 'most likely' to conflict with rules ensuring rights to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Family visa income threshold should be lower, review says
The minimum income threshold for family visas should be relaxed, a government-commissioned review has recommended. A report by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has suggested a reduction from the current level of £29,000. It warned against previous proposals to raise the threshold to the same level as for skilled workers - £38,700 a year - saying it could breach the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Conservatives said that the UK should leave the ECHR if it "stops us from setting our own visa rules". Article 8 of the ECHR enshrines the right to family life. The threshold is the minimum income a British citizen or settled resident must earn to bring their partner to join them in the UK. If the partner is already in the UK on a valid visa, their income also counts towards the minimum figure. Most applications are made by people not already living in the UK. The MAC suggested a range of possible new thresholds. It said a level between £23,000 to £25,000 would enable families to support themselves. A threshold of between £24,000 to £28,000 meanwhile would put more emphasis on economic wellbeing - both of the families themselves and for taxpayers. It said it did "not understand the rationale" for setting the family visa threshold at the £38,700 level for skilled workers, as the two visas have "completely different objective[s]". A £38,700 level would be the "most likely to conflict with international law and obligations". It is the government's decision whether to accept any of the MAC's recommendations. Prof Brian Bell, chairman of the MAC, said that balancing family life and economic wellbeing was a "real trade-off". "There is a cost to the UK economy and UK taxpayers of having this route, and we should just be honest about that and say there is a trade-off," he said. "But similarly, on the other side, people who say 'we should set it at very high numbers to make sure that we don't lose any money' ignore the massive impact that has on families and the destruction of some relationships and the harm it causes to children." A higher threshold would also have a "negative impact on the family life of a larger number of people", the MAC said. It noted many families with lower incomes still earn enough to support themselves even if they do not make a net positive fiscal impact on the country. It said an adult would need to earn £27,800 to have a neutral impact on the public finances - and £40,400 for a couple to have no impact in the first year a spouse arrived in the UK. The MAC did not recommend a higher threshold for families with children, saying the impacts on family life for them would be "particularly significant". Net migration halved in 2024 to 431,000, ONS says Home Office rows back on family visa salary level How many people come to work and study in the UK? In 2023 the previous Conservative government announced plans to raise the salary threshold to £38,700, as part of plans to cut the level of migration. But they backed down following criticism that this would keep families apart, settling on a £29,000 threshold with plans to gradually increase it later. Labour did not implement those further rises when the party came into government and asked the MAC to review the threshold. The committee said the threshold of £29,000 was already high compared to other high-income countries it had looked at. The MAC said it "was not possible to predict with any confidence" the impact different thresholds would have on the level of net migration - the difference between those entering and leaving the country. It did suggest lowering the threshold from £29,000 to roughly £24,000 may increase net migration by up to 8,000 people. Net migration in 2024 was an estimated 431,000 people, down almost 50% on the previous year. This followed record high levels in recent years, with the government under political pressure to get numbers down further. The MAC also criticised the Home Office for its data collection, saying insufficient data "greatly hindered" their review. A Home Office spokesperson said the government was considering the review's findings and would respond in due course. Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said migration figures remain too high and that the government "must urgently re-instate the Conservative plan to further increase the salary threshold". "If the ECHR stops us from setting our own visa rules, from deporting foreign criminals or from putting Britain's interests first, then we should leave the ECHR," he said. The ECHR, which was established in 1950, sets out the rights and freedoms people are entitled to in the 46 signatory countries and is a central part of UK human rights law. Last month, the government said it would bring forward legislation to clarify how aspects of the ECHR should apply in immigration cases.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
The winners and losers in Labour's first spending review
When Rachel Reeves publishes the government's spending review on Wednesday, the stories the Treasury will want to tell are the energy, transport and other infrastructure projects that will get a share of the big boost in capital funding – £113bn. They will argue that cash, freed up by the change to the fiscal rules in the budget, could only have happened under Labour and was opposed by the Tories and Reform. But the capital spending cannot stop expected cuts in day-to-day spending, meaning extremely tight settlements for departments, with savings expected from policing budgets, local government, civil service cuts, foreign aid, education and culture. Treasury sources said they would still spend £190bn more over the five-year parliament than the Conservatives' spending plans – meaning more than £300bn will be distributed among departments. Real-terms spending will grow at an average of 1.2% a year over the three years that the spending review period covers, a significant drop from the first two years when it will be 2.5%. Even that figure does not tell the full story because of the disproportionate boost being given to defence and the NHS – and has led the Institute for Fiscal Studies to warn that the spending commitments will require 'chunky tax rises' in the autumn, when coupled with other expected priorities such as restoring the winter fuel allowance to more pensioners and action on child poverty such as ending the two-child benefit limit. Here are some of the key offers from the spending review – and the rows over cuts. The biggest row of the spending review has been between Reeves and the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, over policing, which one source describes as being a 'huge headache'. Cooper has brought out the big guns to make her case, first with a letter from six police chiefs who warned that without more funding the government would not meet its manifesto promises on crime. Sir Mark Rowley, the head of the Metropolitan police, and other senior police officers have also written to the prime minister to warn him that investment was need to prevent some crimes being routinely ignored. It is understood the policing budget will not face real terms cuts but the level of spending is still under discussion. The Home Office is under strain as a major spending department that is key to some of the most ambitious manifesto pledges – including halving knife crime, police recruitment, reducing violence against women and girls as well as dealing with monitoring offenders who will be released earlier due to sentencing changes. The other major spending review row is over deep dissatisfaction from Angela Rayner – the deputy prime minister and housing secretary – with the level of funding for social homes in the spending review, making her one of the last remaining holdouts in negotiations with the Treasury over departmental spending settlements. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been battling for more funding for the affordable homes programme as well as trying to preserve cash for local councils, homelessness and regional growth initiatives. The Treasury had previously put £2bn into affordable housing, described as a 'down payment' on further funding to be announced at the spending review, which Reeves said would mark a generational shift in the building of council homes. However, the next phase of funding has caused a major rift with Rayner – and more so because capital spending on infrastructure such as housing is meant to be a priority. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, is said to have been holding out for a big capital injection to fund flood defences. The autumn budget said the government was facing significant funding pressures on flood defences and farm schemes of almost £600m in 2024-25, and that those schemes would have to be reviewed for their affordability. Sources at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) confirmed a post-Brexit farming fund would be cut in the review. Labour promised a fund of £5bn over two years – from 2024 to 2026 – at the budget, which is being honoured, but in the years after that it will be slashed for all but a few farms. The energy secretary, Ed Miliband, had a long fight to keep cash for a major programme of insulation, which was a key part of the government's net zero strategy. However, there are reports suggesting other schemes could be scaled back to protect the insulation programme. At the October budget, Reeves announced £3.4bn over three years for household energy efficiency schemes, heat decarbonisation and fuel poverty schemes. The government responded to concerns expressed at the time calling the sum the 'bare minimum' and promising a spending uplift at the review. Miliband's department is expected to get significant capital investment in energy infrastructure including nuclear – with the government poised to give the go ahead to the Sizewell C nuclear plant. The chancellor has already announced £15bn in transport spending across the north of England, funds which she said fulfil promises made by the Conservatives to the country but which the party had no way to pay for them in its own plan. Wes Streeting's department is set to be one of the big winners of the spending review and it will lay the groundwork for the NHS 10-year plan, which will be published imminently after the spending review. The department will get one of the biggest boosts to funding as others face real-terms cuts. The funding for the plan prioritises three key areas, moving care from hospitals to communities, increasing the use of technology, and prioritising prevention. No 10 and Streeting hope that the 10-year plan will contain major commitments and a positive story that the government will finally be able to tell properly on improvements to the health service – though any good news could be scuppered by the ballot for strike action by resident doctors. Still, Streeting's department was one of the last to settle formally with the Treasury due to negotiations over drug prices, though departmental sources downplayed any specific row. Any child in England whose parents receive universal credit will be able to claim free school meals from September 2026, the government has said. Parents on the credit will be eligible regardless of their income. The government says the change will make 500,000 more pupils eligible. A Department for Education (DfE) source said it was the best measure outside welfare changes to address child poverty and that the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, had consistently fought to protect school food programmes through each round of spending negotiations. But schools budgets will be squeezed. Teachers will get a 4% pay rise next year, with additional funding of £615m. But schools will still have to fund about a quarter of the rise themselves – a total of £400m from their current budgets. Phillipson has tasked the DfE with finding savings in schools budgets, such as energy bills. Savings will also come as the government is removing public funding for level 7 apprenticeships, which has drawn criticism from skills experts. The justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, was one of the first to reach her settlement to allow her to announce a £4.7bn plan to build three new prisons starting this year, part of a 'record expansion' as the government attempts to get to grips with the prison crisis. The early announcement was essential because it came alongside an announcement that the government would put a limit on how long hundreds of repeat offenders can be recalled to prison amid Whitehall predictions that jails will be full again in November.
