Parsing Adrian Dix's response to Human Rights Commissioner Kasari Govender's letter to Dr. Bonnie Henry

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      It's going to take more than a letter to Dr. Bonnie Henry to get her to reinstate a provincial indoor mask mandate on public schools, colleges and universities, ferries, and transit systems.

      That's clear from Health Minister Adrian Dix's recent comments to Global B.C. News reporter Richard Zussman.

      They came after Zussman asked about a March 16 letter by Human Rights Commissioner Kasari Govender to the provincial health officer.

      In this letter, Govender declared that disliking wearing masks "is not a compelling argument when weighed against the rights of others to life, security of the person, and equal participation in social and economic life".

      "Given the benefits of the mask mandate for thousands of marginalized people and the minimal impact on those being asked to wear one, the balance at this time favours continuing the mask mandate," Govender maintained.

      Keep in mind that when it comes to schools, only 56 percent of B.C. kids from 5 to 11 have taken a single dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Only 37 percent of children in that age range have taken two doses. Children between 0 and 4 cannot be legally vaccinated against COVID-19.

      At the bottom of this article, you can read Dix's statement in full to Zussman. (I decided to transcribe it to save Govender's office the trouble in case she ever orders a public inquiry into this topic under section 47.15 of the Human Rights Code.)

      But in the following section of the article, I am going to go through each of Dix's sentences and convey my view on what they really mean to B.C. families with immunocompromised members.

      Dix: “Well, firstly, the provincial health officer and the provincial health office makes these decisions after, after significant consideration."

      What that means: Dix is not going to tell Global News B.C. if Henry looked at the lifting of a provincewide mask mandate through a Gender-Based Analysis Plus lens, which would consider the impact on marginalized people, including those with disabilities. According to the premier's mandate letter to Dix, "efforts to address systemic discrimination must also inform policy and budget decisions by reviewing all decisions through a Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) lens".

      Dix: "That provincial mask mandate had been in place for a significant period of time in B.C. and those measures that are taken—those provincial health measures—are considered every day against the evidence we see. And so after very careful and due consideration, the provincial health officer gave, made a decision, based on that evidence."

      What that means: Dix's only evidence is hospitalization and intensive-care use data, which are meaningless in the context of Long COVID. That's because the testing regime broke down during the Omicron wave, rendering case numbers meaningless. He will not directly address a large N.I.H.-funded study that showed that districts with mandatory mask mandates demonstrated 72 percent fewer in-school transmissions of COVID-19 in comparison with districts with mask-optional policies when the Delta variant was surging. Nor will he speak about the lifting of mask mandates in the context of Long COVID and its relationship to subsequent serious health problems linked to the virus, like higher diabetes rates in children. Nor does he appear to be overly concerned that the lifting a provincewide mask mandate could result in COVID-19 spreading more rapidly, resulting in more neurological complications, including strokes and neuromuscular disorders.

      Dix: "And I think her decisions and her consistent, thoughtful, balanced approach has been important."

      What that means: The implication from this sentence is that anyone who thinks that Henry is being irresponsible in lifting mask mandates is an extremist rather than someone who agrees with Govender that wearing a mask in school or on transit is a fairly minimal intrusion. Especially in comparison with families with elderly or immunocompromised members being exposed to a higher risk of death, disability, and chronic diseases.

      Dix: "Secondly, the decision was given after considerable, I think, notice."

      What that means: Dix is implying that the onus was on the human rights commissioner to bring her concerns to Henry in advance, rather than Henry necessarily applying a Gender-Based Analysis Plus lens to her decision in advance (which we still don't know). It's worth repeating: the premier's mandate letter to the health minister said that all decisions in his ministry required that analysis, which would have taken into account the impact on people with disabilities. 

      Dix: "In other words, the provincial health officer, you’ll remember this Richard, said these measures would be considered on a particular date, about a month in advance of the decision being made. So lots of notice was being given."

      What this means: From this, it's reasonable to conclude that a month in advance, Henry decided that she was going to make a major announcement on masks to coincide with the second anniversary of the World Health Organization declaring a pandemic. Does this mean that she already decided back then—well in advance of the release of the N.I.H.-funded study on mask mandates in schools—that there was no need to continue with a mandatory mask mandate in schools after Spring Break? If so, shouldn't she be guided by evidence that emerges over time, rather than making decisions based on anniversaries or school calendars?

      Dix: "Thirdly, nowhere in Canada has the, have the needs of the clinically vulnerable been considered with the priority as they have been in B.C. We are the only jurisdiction to do that with respect to booster doses. We did a significant—in terms of vaccination—significant priority was given and in every other area of health care. Especially long-term care by the people living, who are clinically vulnerable, in the community."

      What this means: The subject of Govender's letter was provincewide mask mandates, not long-term care. More than 60 percent of B.C. kids between 5 and 11 have not received two doses and more than 40 percent in that age range are unvaccinated. But Dix did not mention that in this interview, choosing instead to highlight that the province made the clinically vulnerable a priority for immunization. This comment overlooks the elephant in the room: the White House's recent statement that the most common way COVID-19 is transmitted is through the tiny particles (called aerosols) "hanging in indoor air for minutes or hours after an infected person has been there". And the NDP government has steadfastly refused to pay for HEPA filters in schools to clean that air, even though so many kids between 5 and 11 remain unvaccinated.

      Dix: "So the evidence is that we have a provincial health office and a government who has given absolute priority to the needs of the clinically vulnerable. And all the actions that they’ve taken. And that priority continues to be the case."

      What this means: Dix's definition of "absolute priority", therefore, includes supporting the elimination of provincewide mask mandates in school and postsecondary classrooms and on transit and ferries. In these locations, some of the clinically vulnerable have no choice but to sit close to unmasked people who are spreading virus-carrying aerosols by breathing, talking, and coughing. And even if the clinically vulnerable are vaccinated, they can still contract COVID-19 because the current vaccines do not block all transmissions.

      Dix: "People, of course, can disagree with the, the health advice provided by the provincial health officer and her decisions based on the Public Health Act. They can, of course, disagree with those decisions."

      What that means: Even if the provincial health officer's decisions are promoting the spread of COVID-19 and even if that constitutes an infringement on the charter rights of others to life and security of the person—not to mention equal participation in social and economic life—this NDP government is going to stand its ground. In effect, Dix is daring anyone who disagrees with the lifting of the mask mandates to take the government to court. The letter from the human rights commissioner will be ignored.

      Dix: "But I don’t think they can disagree with the fact that they are, they take place in a thoughtful way. In a serious way."

      What that means: Dix is signalling that anyone who disagrees that the provincial health officer is acting in a serious and thoughtful way is just plain wrong. Even if this person is an Oxford University professor of primary care who cited B.C. as a case study in a paper describing the "scandal" around delays in recognizing airborne transmission of COVID-19. Even if this person is a senior fellow with the Federation of American Scientists and a former Harvard epidemiology professor who has described B.C. as the "Florida of Canada" for how it's dealing with COVID-19 issues in schools. Even if this person is a widely respected aerosol researcher who has slammed Henry for her views on how COVID-19 is transmitted, describing this as "one of the most retrograde leadership" examples on the planet. Yes, Mr. Dix, there are people with pretty impressive credentials who do disagree with the fact that decisions take place in a thoughtful way. You, sir, just won't admit it.

      Dix: "It sometimes takes time. I do recall questions at this very microphone why we hadn’t taken decisions on some of these measures when others had. But we’ve taken a balanced approach and we’re going to continue to do so."

      What this means: The B.C. government was slower to lift provincewide mask mandates than right-wing, anti-science governments in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec. So that makes it okay in the eyes of the health minister, notwithstanding Govender's letter to Henry suggesting that this infringes on the constitutional rights of the immunocompromised under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

      Transcript of Adrian Dix's remarks to Global B.C. News

      “Well, firstly, the provincial health officer and the provincial health office makes these decisions after, after significant consideration. That provincial mask mandate had been in place for a significant period of time in B.C. and those measures that are taken—those provincial health measures—are considered every day against the evidence we see.

      "And so after very careful and due consideration, the provincial health officer gave, made a decision, based on that evidence. And I think her decisions and her consistent, thoughtful, balanced approach has been important.

      "Secondly, the decision was given after considerable, I think, notice. In other words, the provincial health officer, you’ll remember this Richard, said these measures would be considered on a particular date, about a month in advance of the decision being made. So lots of notice was being given.

      "Thirdly, nowhere in Canada has the, have the needs of the clinically vulnerable been considered with the priority as they have been in B.C. We are the only jurisdiction to do that with respect to booster doses. We did a significant—in terms of vaccination—significant priority was given and in every other area of health care. Especially long-term care by the people living, who are clinically vulnerable, in the community.

      "So the evidence is that we have a provincial health office and a government who has given absolute priority to the needs of the clinically vulnerable. And all the actions that they’ve taken. And that priority continues to be the case.

      "People, of course, can disagree with the, the health advice provided by the provincial health officer and her decisions based on the Public Health Act. They can, of course, disagree with those decisions.

      "But I don’t think they can disagree with the fact that they are, they take place in a thoughtful way. In a serious way. It sometimes takes time. I do recall questions at this very microphone why we hadn’t taken decisions on some of these measures when others had. But we’ve taken a balanced approach and we’re going to continue to do so."

      Comments