Austerity measures were expected for Budget 2026
Key areas of interest and concern for Rural BC
Lack of rural content and context
BC Budget 2026 does not adequately address the structural realities facing rural and remote communities. Although overall spending continues, the budget still lacks the rural-specific design, targeting, and accountability needed to improve real access.
Our concern is straightforward: broad provincial commitments do not automatically produce equitable rural outcomes. Instead, in many areas, this budget relies on system-wide framing rather than rural-specific solutions.
There is little mention of rural focus, and no mention of rural specific health spending in budget 2026. In fact, the word ‘rural’ does not appear in any specific funding initiatives or service allocations. The budget only acknowledges rural communities through tax increases and reduced homeowner benefits.
Rural access barriers remain under-addressed in Budget 2026
Distance, transportation, accommodation costs, and workforce fragility still delay or block care. In practice, when patients cannot afford to travel for specialist appointments, access becomes theoretical, not real. Meanwhile, many non-profits still do not know whether the Province will continue funding their work, and that uncertainty threatens essential travel supports. The Canadian Cancer Society, Hope Air, Angel Flight, Helicopters without Borders, and many others require stable long-term funding that is dedicated and known beyond year-to -year funding cycles and shortfalls. Given their impact, these programs are core services for rural BC, and the Province should expand them.
The budget does not mention travel assistance, and the current TAP program still misses most rural needs. To make timely access real, travel supports must cover both transportation and accommodation. Otherwise, people delay care, outcomes worsen, and costs rise for everyone. For that reason, we remain concerned about the ongoing lack of accommodation support for patients who must leave their home community to get care.
Housing is Healthcare has been a strong advocate yet their efforts remain unsupported and in spite of a desire to work collaboratively with the Province in bringing solutions forward. Our position on travel supports is clear: the Province must meet its commitments under section 12.1(a) of the Canada Health Act. It must ensure that all residents can have reasonable access to care without financial or other burdens. We advocate for this right at both the federal and provincial levels. However, the Province of BC holds the responsibility, and residents must receive the health coverage they are entitled to.
Seniors and long-term care are not adequately addressed from a rural perspective
This is one of the most serious gaps. Rural communities are aging faster, dementia prevalence is increasing, and families need stronger local supports now. We do not see sufficient rural-focused action on long-term care capacity, home support expansion, caregiver relief, and local dementia-capable services.
Many rural and remote communities have higher than the provincial average median age. In many communities that average is significantly higher than urban and sub-urban communities. Rural communities offer far fewer services for this population, and many residents must leave their communities to get care. Long-term care and closer-to-home programs are not available within many rural communities. Where programs do exist, care provision is often needs to be imported. This leaves many elders and seniors without the support they need most.
The office of the Seniors’ Advocate
BC Seniors’ Advocate, Dan Levitt has continued to champion for all seniors in BC and has repeatedly raised the concern on the lack of available long-term-care (LTC) beds in BC. We currently have an estimated shortage of over 3,000 LTC beds, we have an anticipated shortage of over 16,000 within 10 years! Blended provincial wait-times and lack of rural specific data also don’t do justice to the further inequity faced by many rural communities.
We need to build about 2,000 long-term care beds each year for the next decade to catch up. Right now, we fall far short, with only about 600 beds added per year on average. Unfortunately, this situation just got worse as Budget 2026 has delayed several LTC homes that are in the planning stages.
“Putting off those projects for the future will only make them more expensive, as the cost of building will be more expensive then.” – Dan Levitt
Finance Minister Brenda Bailey called some LTC build costs ‘unsustainable,’ with estimates up to $2 million per bed. We agree that the costs of building large scale, urban models of LTC are not only unsustainable but also impractical in accommodating the needs of rural residents and their families.
“Small-scale care homes”, which we have promoted for years, offer a practical alternative. Communities can build them more affordably, convert suitable existing housing, and scale capacity up or down as needs change. At least one health authority now recognizes small-scale homes as a better approach. We now need to see the resumption of building using this methodology and funding to meet the existing demand. We agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Levitt that any delay in moving construction forward will cost us all dearly in the future.
Youth assessment and early intervention pressures remain high
Delayed neurological and developmental assessments continue to create long-term harm for children and youth by delaying school and community supports. This requires targeted rural action with clear timelines. The tragic and recent events in Tumbler Ridge further highlight the need for strong supports throughout a child’s development. Many communities have no access to assessment in their community, many families can’t afford to seek assessment outside of community and yet again the cost to rural people and to the system are high and unacceptable.
Mental health cannot be separated from broader wellness infrastructure
Rural mental health outcomes depend on integrated supports across primary care, education pathways, social infrastructure, and community stability. Siloed investment will not close gaps.
Primary Care reform and non-profit community governance models of care must continue
The CARGA agreement between the BC Green Party and BC Government has ended but the work that is underway must not be allowed to stall. The initial investment of $15million to improve structures for the stabilization and expansion of Community Health Centres has created a starting point for this essential initiative. CARGA has ended but the work has just begun, we need a meaningful commitment from the Government to see team-based care become the standard for care in BC and this cannot happen without dedicated focus and funding.
Budget 2026 guarded optimism, narrowly defined
The budget does not appear to directly pull major dollars from front-end services, which means there is still an opportunity to allocate funding toward rural priorities during implementation. That opportunity must be used intentionally, not assumed.
What must happen next
BC needs explicit rural implementation commitments, including:
- Dedicated rural funding streams with transparent public reporting
- Rural seniors and LTC action plan including home care, caregiver supports, dementia capacity, and local continuity services
- Medical travel and accommodation improvements to remove practical access barriers
- Rural youth assessment targets and timelines with linked school/community supports
- Stable rural virtual specialist support as core infrastructure, not pilot uncertainty
- Culturally safe, community co-designed delivery with Indigenous and local leadership at the table
Bottom line
Rural communities are not asking for special treatment. Rural communities are asking for realistic policy and funding design that matches rural conditions. Budget 2026, as presented, does not go far enough on seniors, long-term care, and practical access. Implementation decisions over the coming months will determine whether this remains another missed opportunity or becomes a real correction.
