EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon this section of the Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Education and Training.

When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 1.(c)(1) on page 37 of the Estimates book.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Mr. Chair, I would ask leave to make some opening remarks. I have not had an opportunity up till now.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: The honourable member for The Maples is asking the committee for leave for opening statements. What is the will of the committee?

Some Honourable Members: Leave.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Leave has been granted.

Mr. Kowalski: I will make my remarks short. I will not infringe on the good will of the committee. First of all, I would like to congratulate the minister for her appointment. I have always prided myself on being a workaholic and spending quite a few hours here, but in the late evenings here when I am leaving, often I see the minister leaving at the same time. So I know we are going to have a hard-working minister in this branch. I hope that she will be one of the best Education ministers that this government has had, and I will leave off the snide remark that goes with that.

One of the blessings, and there are very few blessings from the results of the elections for myself, is that education has always been my first interest. Recently I have been given the role of Education critic for the Liberal members in the Manitoba Legislature, and that has been one of the blessings because probably education is what attracted me into politics right from the time I became a school trustee. It has been of a keener interest than justice because I see a correlation between crime prevention and the importance of education.

But my view of education is that throughout North America the debate on education has been captured by the corporations and other people from the right wing that have been saying what a poor job the educational system has been doing, in the meantime ignoring the fact that in North America job training by corporations, their spending is far less than anywhere else in the world, and by criticizing the public education system, it tries to deflect away from their responsibilities for job training and education.

Secondly, I think the debate has been steered to believe that education is nothing more than job training. Education is much more than that. It is creating individuals who are good citizens, people who are learners, and we should not equate education, both in our K-12 and in our post-secondary, just with job training. Our universities' and community colleges' job is not to provide employees to IBM and General Motors so that they can make a profit. It is to allow individuals to achieve the best that they can achieve as individuals and provide IBM, General Motors and other major corporations with good citizens, people who can learn. Then it is their job to train the people for their specific needs. I think too much of the debate has been--well, you could almost say it is a conspiracy to deflect from their responsibilities.

Some of the comments I heard earlier--I have to admit that, as much as I want to be a good critic for Education, because of our numbers and our lack of resources, especially in this first Estimates session since I have been appointed critic, I will not be able to give it all the attention I would like to, but some of the comments I heard about were that because the Conservative Party formed government that it is a complete mandate for everything that was in the reform package.

I would have to argue with that point. The thing to remember is that 57 percent of the population of Manitoba did not vote for this government. That does not mean that 57 percent of the people disagree with the reform package, no more than it means that 57 percent of the people disagree with gun control or any other issue. As opposition, if we take the election results of all government policies that it is a mandate to do whatever they wish, then the opposition might as well go home and come back four years later.

We have an important role. We represent people of different viewpoints. Nobody owns a good idea. I am hoping that my experiences as a student, as a parent, as a police officer, as a school trustee, just as every other honourable member in this Legislature brings experiences and knowledge, we could add to the debate and not always be in opposition, not always be in conflict, but we could do what is good for the students of Manitoba.

Just on standardized testing, I would like to make a few remarks. When I first got involved in the school system, first on parent committees and eventually school trustee, I shared many of the concerns many parents had with the educational system. Earlier in the Estimates process there were some claims that certain candidates in the last election discounted parents as being unknowing, but I have to admit that many of my views as a parent and even as a parent committee member in the schools changed as I became more knowledgable as a school trustee.

* (1500)

One of the best things I ever did was join the Association of Curriculum and Development and through the training courses, through them I not only learned the jargon about outcome-based education, performance-based assessment and that, I learned that education is not a simple thing. Every parent who teaches their child to count or know their ABCs thinks that they can be a teacher. Now I have a niece who is in third-year education, I have a daughter who wants to be a teacher and I have been a school trustee. I know some of the simplistic solutions that are sometimes offered and may be popular, that it discounts the expertise that we have in Manitoba about educational theory and practices. So I do not want to accept simple solutions to complicated problems dealing with complex individuals.

On standardized testing, I know as a parent what I wanted to know was at the end of 12 years of education where would my child be. I do not want any surprises. Standardized testing, will that tell parents that their child, in my case Seven Oaks School Division, has received an equal education to someone from a private school or someone from a different school division? It may or may not because there are so many other factors, everything from what happens in our home, what is happening in our community, what resources, and the most important element is the quality of teacher.

I have worked in the core area as a community police constable, I have been a school trustee in the suburbs, and the factor that seems to have the most impact on the success of the children is the quality of teacher and the caring of the teacher. If standardized testing, in some way, will assure that the teachers are the best that they can be, I would be all for it but I think it is limited. Standardized testing does not have to be multiple choice. It does not have to be a computer-marked paper.

In a course I attended in Toronto by the Association of Curriculum Development on performance-based assessment, it showed that everything from standardized marking of essay answers to standardized testing for process answers to take an unknown substance in science using standard practices that were taught all year to determine what the substance was and grading not necessarily the right answer but the process used is a form of standardized testing.

So I think we have to keep an open mind about it. I think we have to look at the objective. I hope we all work together to assure that Manitoba's educational system is the best it can be. Thank you.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: I would like to thank the honourable member for those comments.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Chairman, I would like to also thank the honourable member for his comments. I know the member to be a constructive critic, and I look forward to his input on our work as we carry on with education reform. I liked it when he said that no one owns a good idea. I agree with that. I am also pleased to hear him acknowledge the good that is in the present system because there is good in it.

When the member stated that things are not simple, things are not black and white and you should not be simplifying things down, it is also a statement I agree with because too often critics have said, I heard that standardized tests are not good, so therefore the whole package is not good, and not recognizing that we are not talking about standardized tests in the traditional sense of the word that I think you were referencing, and we are talking about measuring for standards.

A simple way to put it would be on a typical standardized test where you mark on bell curve, you have some students passing, some students doing well and others in that top of the bell, sort of in the average group, you have one type of testing, but when you are testing for standards, one analogy that I could use might be a swimming badge.

If you are taking your senior swim badge, everybody in the class will work toward that standard of achieving whatever the standards are for your senior swim, and it is quite possible that every single person in that class would reach the standard of being able to swim and life save to a certain level. So when that person indicates to anybody who is interested, I have my senior swim badge, the person knows the standard that has been met.

Also, before you can go on to get your senior swim badge, you must have your intermediate swim badge to know that you have the proper prerequisites and that foundation before going on to the next level of learning or acquisition of skills, or in this case, physical prowess that you need to be prepared at each level. If you do not know where a person is in terms of junior or senior swim, they could be put into a senior swim class with the foundations lacking and not meet success achieving that senior standard.

So there are different things that are meant by testing or different reasons the testing is done. When we talk about testing and probing to see if a person can problem solve, has been able to acquire, absorb and utilize knowledge to have some diagnostic tool available for that good teacher so the teacher can look for strengths and weaknesses and help improve that child's learning situation, those are things that are generally regarded as good by caring teachers and generally regarded as good by parents who like to be able to assess how their child is doing and if their child is progressing in a positive way through the education system.

So I guess when people talk about tests each person references that word from their own perspective, and each person will colour the word "test" with their own perception of what they think it means. So as we go through this, knowing the member to be truly and genuinely interested in education and also a constructive person, I hope that you will do that open-mind thing and look for pulling out the definitions that we are entertaining here and apply them to your own terms of reference to see if they fit with that thing you would like to see for your children when they graduate.

I will not go on too much more except to say I am pleased that the member has been assigned the Education critic position, and I look forward to his assistance and criticism as we go through this process.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: I thank the honourable minister for those comments.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Mr. Chairperson, yesterday we talked briefly about the Boundaries Commission. I would like to follow up on that area of endeavour. It was a major initiative by this government and one that is continuing.

Firstly, may I ask, is this the appropriate line to ask about boundaries, since it is not separated through the Estimates? [interjection] This is the appropriate place, thank you. I will be asking a series of questions on the Boundaries Commission.

One of the questions I have is, yesterday when we talked about the commission we learned that in '94-95 the cost of the commission was $370,000, in '93-94 it was $250,000, and we anticipate that in '95-96 it is $40,000. Is that the total cost incurred by the Norrie Boundaries Review Commission?

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, it is, Mr. Chairman. Just on this topic, you had asked yesterday and I had said I would bring some information for you today, which I do have. I will table it now. I have two copies that you may wish to share with the other members there, and that may assist you in asking the questions you want or seeking clarification on any of the points that might be on those sheets.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Let the record show that the Clerk will table and distribute to the members of the committee. I thank the honourable minister for the submission.

Ms. Mihychuk: Can I ask the minister, is the intention to hold the commission together as we proceed through the process? My understanding is that this will take two to three years before it is completed.

* (1510)

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, no. Once the commission itself has given its final recommendations it will be another group--and the commission recommends that it be another group that looks at any implementation, if there is any, of boundary changes. They have recommended that we use different people to implement, and that is the route we will go.

Having said that, of course, they have also indicated they will be available at the end of the phone if we ever needed them for clarification or anything like that, which we also very much appreciate.

Ms. Mihychuk: When would we anticipate the final report from the Norrie commission, and when would the new implementation group come on stream?

Mrs. McIntosh: We are expecting the Norrie commission to report back to us by September, and then we will take whatever their final recommendations are as a government body and peruse them and have our own discussions and analysis and then make our decision. I do not know how long that will take us to do because I do not know what the final recommendations are yet going to be. But the three-year period we are talking about between the October school board election in '95 and the subsequent election in '98, some point during that period, decisions will be made and implemented.

Ms. Mihychuk: Is the minister going to provide the final recommendations through this last review process to the public?

Mrs. McIntosh: The report will come to the minister. We are assuming it will be in written form although it could be in verbal form. After the government has taken a look at it and done its decision making, ultimately the contents of that report will be available for public exploration. Initially it will come to the minister and of course we would take a look at that first.

I cannot give you time lines, I am sorry, because I just do not know how long some of these functions are going to take.

Ms. Mihychuk: There is considerable concern in school division presently looking at these types of changes. The complications incurred when you amalgamate or change a boundary are complex and can be costly. Are there intentions by the minister and by the department to provide supports to divisions that are going to be affected by boundary review?

Mrs. McIntosh: I am not sure what you mean by supports.

Ms. Mihychuk: When you are looking at the amalgamation of two divisions, for example, there are not only the administrative needs to amalgamate the policy decisions that are different between each division that require negotiation and to merge the two divisions--that administratively is going to take a great deal of time and effort--there are also the financial implications which result from trying to merge two divisions with different collective agreements.

Mrs. McIntosh: I understand what the member is saying because, in looking at the merging of divisions both in the urban setting and in the rural setting, the complexities of dividing up assets, for example, of looking at programs where you have divisions that have very different philosophies in terms of preschool programs, breakfast programs--some do, some do not--which program will be the ultimate one decided upon, how will the board merge, how will the wards be broken down, how will the whole system of the school trustee participation--in some divisions school trustees are freely in and out of the schools quite regularly, in other divisions trustees only go by invitation--even down to small things like that, you will find little traditions and very real definite policy decisions; the kinds of programs that are offered, the kind of busing policies the divisions have because, as you know, some divisions will bus elementary children up to Grade 6 for free and others will charge for busing, some charge for busing to French Immersion, it just goes on and on, the various differences in the way in which school divisions conduct themselves.

I was just reading in the paper this morning, the St. Vital board, for example, obviously is one board that does not have any parental involvement with the choosing or transferring of principals. Other divisions have great contact with their parents on things like that. So there are just different ways of doing things, and some of them will have financial overtones. Some divisions are much more cost-effective in the way they run the divisions. They have energy-saving programs in their schools and other divisions do not.

So you might have divisions where the schools, when they get down to a population of 100, for example, automatically come under review for possible consolidation or closure and other divisions even within the city that are content to let the students run down to 60 students before they even look at that type of thing.

So those kinds of policies and the policy manuals of school divisions require an immense amount of time between boards, trustees to trustees, administrators to administrators. None of those have costs attached. There is time to be taken but professionals do not count hours in terms of their time. They are paid on salary. School trustees are paid an honourarium. They do not count hours. They do not say I get so much an hour, at least none that I know take that attitude if they are salaried professionals.

When you come down to decisions that are made and there are assets and liabilities that need to be divided up, then I think it would be one of the things that we have indicated we need to talk more about as government. You will notice that of the 43 recommendations, there were some that we said we need to take another look at these and talk more about them. How do you ensure that no one division which has bitten the bullet and closed schools, for example, gets stuck with the costs of a division that has not had either the desire or the courage to do that and, hence, is more costly for that division to run itself?

So we will be taking a careful look at divisions of assets and liabilities which is one place where you could identify cost to divisions and cost to ratepayers. At this point, we have not seen any need to put money from the provincial government into the school divisions for any of those purposes, because we believe that ultimately if the amalgamation occurs--and we have not yet decided that and I stress that because we did send out the Boundaries Review committee. We have not yet said we are going to be amalgamating, although, in principle, we think that there is merit in doing some downsizing only if certain criteria are met.

You indicated the possibility of this being an expensive exercise. It could indeed be an expensive exercise if improperly done, and so that is something we have to be very cautious about. We certainly do not want to recreate the Unicity scenario which was a disaster for the taxpayers. They amalgamated all those seven cities and paid no attention whatsoever to the very important items you have identified. They let all costs rise to the highest level and they did not downsize.

If we do a repeat of the disastrous Unicity example, taxpayers will certainly be hit in the pocketbooks very hard, and you will see no downsizing of administration. So if you say put all the 11 divisions in Winnipeg together, hire one superintendent and keep all the other 11 superintendents in place with their salaries all red circled as deputy superintendents, you have really just created another level of government. So we do not intend to just create another level of government.

* (1520)

Ms. Mihychuk: That is reassuring and I hope that we can look for that wisdom when we look at the boundaries report and the final recommendation.

There has been some experience in other jurisdictions when they looked at amalgamation. I am aware of such studies in Ontario, Saskatchewan and B.C. This has been a popular endeavour by many governments across Canada. Most have backed off, for both, I understand, financial implications of changing boundaries as well as the philosophical one.

This is my question: Where the government seems to be moving to greater local control, greater parental and community involvement, how does that fit with a larger school division with greater bureaucracy?

Mrs. McIntosh: In fact there is a tremendously good dovetailing in those two initiatives, because as local schools are given more authority, the individual school itself being given more ability to make its own decisions and the local parents in that area being given the ability to make more decisions, then the body to which it belongs, the larger body, is one upon whom they are less dependent.

So one of the interesting factors way back at the beginning of Manitoba when there were so many divisions--I do not know how many, well over 1,000 individual school authorities in Manitoba in the initial stages--those schools were run with the involvement of the local people. Then divisions were created, and the schools were still run by the local people because there were plenty of school divisions and they were relatively small. The divisions then became larger, as they have now, and the individual schools began to lose that personality that they had.

What we are saying is the divisions have become larger over time. The last amalgamation--I forget the year, it slips my mind right now--was not all that long ago in an historical perspective--in '67, was it? Yes, it was not all that terribly long ago. I mean I remember it well, so it had to be very recent indeed, but when that new amalgamation came, schools once again became more anonymous, more having to fit a standard mold as they complied with divisional requirements and less of an individual unit.

So what we are saying is that even if divisions stay the same size they are, we do feel that schools really should still be able to keep some of their individuality. When the divisions got larger, in a way the baby was kind of thrown out with the bath water a bit. There were a lot of good things about some of the larger divisional boundaries that were created some 30 years ago, but the schools had to comply to this larger entity and one rule had to fit all, so to speak. So we are saying that is good to do, to have the schools have more ability to be themselves and to reflect the neighbourhood. In fact, it will probably be even more important to do that if the divisions become yet larger again, so they do not conflict, they dovetail well.

Ms. Mihychuk: Well, I may disagree in some cases, and I think the example of Unicity is one that rings very clear in our memories. We do have communities now that are choosing to leave the amalgamated model, and it gives me some reassurance when the minister is aware of the implications and does recognize that larger is not necessarily better.

There are some preliminary studies, I understand, by school divisions, St. James-Assiniboia and Fort Garry, that indicate that the amalgamation would be very expensive depending on how contractual settlements are negotiated.

Is the government going to provide direction in terms of contractual settlements?

Mrs. McIntosh: That is another one, as the member knows, from our announcement on the boundaries, that the Norrie commission had made statements on pensions and benefits and things like that, and that is another that we have said we wanted to take further discussion on, and we will be taking further discussion on it.

The member references a very good example that she has used of municipalities now wanting out of Unicity because of the problems associated with it. Yet you have other areas of the city where they have been able to obtain and keep their unique character in certain parts of the city. I am thinking in St. James, the Deer Lodge place area, for example, over on Corydon, over in that area where they have been able to capture and create their own personality, and St. Boniface, a prime example of a community working hard to retain its own distinct characteristics, just as individual schools are wanting to do. A good large authority will try to make accommodation, it seems to me, for that kind of need.

I have forgotten the rest of your statement. I am sorry. I wanted to respond to it, but it will come back to me, or if you can remember it, you can repeat it to me.

Ms. Mihychuk: Where two divisions are being amalgamated, my question is, some contractual positions may be more favourable to a local--through historic settlements and there may be a playoff, in other areas, they may not have the same provisions as others, but how are those things going to be settled?

Some jurisdictions, I believe Calgary, for example, settled at the highest level. What is the government's plan to help school divisions, or is there going to be some direction from the government?

Mrs. McIntosh: There are two ways in which that matter will be dealt with: one will be through our own discussions and decision making once the final report comes in; and the other will be through the implementation team that will be set up to help put in place any decisions that might be made.

I know what I wanted to say. I remember now. You talked about St. James, Fort Garry and Charleswood--[interjection] Pardon me?

An Honourable Member: Assiniboine.

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, Assiniboine South. When those discussions are going on and when those divisions have ideas about anything, up to and including costs, those views are currently being input to the Roblin Commission. That was one of the reasons that I felt it was really important we go back out and say to divisions, now you do have a definitive report, what do you think of it? Is there any aspect of this that you think could be a trouble spot? Is there any aspect of this that you think is really good? What do you think? Please give us your feedback to assist us in dealing with this report that has been presented to us.

I think I have said before, we do not believe in change just for the sake of change. If we can see some good coming out of any suggestions for amalgamation and where trustees have identified to us, as some have, that for their particular division they think it would be of benefit, that is very good feedback for us to receive.

* (1530)

We talk about boundaries, and I have given this a lot of thought and I am sure the member has as well. A boundary is a line drawn on a map. It is a line drawn down the middle of a street or along a river or stream, but it is an artificial thing. We have seen divisions poking holes in boundaries and permeating barriers without any boundary changes. One you would be familiar with would be the South Winnipeg Tech, three divisions coming together to create a technical school. We have seen it in other divisions. In my division in St. James-Assiniboia where I live, for example, they have a shared-services agreement with independent schools, so you will see them all riding the same bus, for example, because they could both reduce costs that way, those types of things--poking holes in barriers and we are encouraging that regardless of what happens with the Boundaries Review.

We are saying to divisions, get up and start poking holes in those boundaries, start pushing down the barriers, start doing anything you can to bring down costs in a partnership way, joint purchasing, shared services on transportation, whatever you can. Think of what would be of benefit to you, something that you in both or multidivisions would like for your students; can you get together and make it happen at a lesser cost.

Those things are happening, period. Boundaries ultimately, it seems to me, come down to an administrative financial function. If the push towards sharing things continues, if the South Winnipeg Tech examples becomes the attitude that boards take in dealing with each other, instead of always viewing each other as so many do as well--you know, I am over here in this division and my division is better than your division and we do things better than you do things and that type of turf protection, turf mentality as opposed to seeing the good that could be gained by working as partners.

Ms. Mihychuk: It is, and I agree with the minister, a case where a lot of time and money can be spent into something fairly artificial. I am hopeful again that the government will also move very cautiously.

One of the concerns that has been raised to me is the time line. Many divisions and many parent groups, people in the Brooklands area, the Winnipeg School Division and other school divisions, any school division in the province is in a particularly tight time frame.

We are now in June, an extremely busy time for the education system as we look at graduation and staffing and preparation for September. We are coming to the close of a year in the school cycle. Basically things shut down for July and August, particularly if you hope to get community feedback in responding to the boundaries report.

Would the minister consider postponing the September deadline? We do sense her interest and her flexibility. Divisions are saying, we appreciate it, but we need a little bit more time.

Mrs. McIntosh: I have to indicate that many of the divisions--I do not have the number in my mind, I am pausing to see if I can count them all up--had already written in their response before we even announced that we were going out to them, so the majority of them already have their responses ready and either into us or on their way to us. Parent councils, I have not checked to find out, but some of them are sending them to me. I am just forwarding them on to the Boundaries Commission.

I know school closes for the summer but, in my experience, I am not aware of board or school division administrative functioning stopping for the summer. Maybe we just had a different kind of a division where I come from, I do not know. But people do not all take holidays at the same time, and in most divisions it seems to me that there would be at least one meeting a month for the summer.

The other thing of course is that most divisions and groups, like all of the groups who have been presented, all of those people that we are inviting to respond back to us have already clearly thought through the issue.

Most of them have already presented an initial petition to the hearing, and all we are asking them to do, which is what they are sort of coming back with, is, you made an initial presentation to the hearings and, in that presentation, you said you wanted all the schools painted red. We have got a recommendation from the Boundaries Commission saying they want to paint them pink. Is that all right with you? They can write back and say, no, we insist it be red, or, yes, pink is fine, or maybe if it is a deep pink we can live with it.

I mean, I am using an analogy that does not make any sense but, just to give you an example of the thought processes that have already gone into it, most of the divisions and advisory councils and groups that were presenting have already thought through what their initial position was and should not have too much trouble taking their original position, putting it in juxtaposition with the recommendations, noticing the differences and deciding if the differences are meaningful and negative to them or of no significance or positive, and, hence, I think that is why we had divisions sending in their comments even in advance of us announcing that we would be seeking feedback.

Ms. Mihychuk: Well, my experience is that parent councils, school councils that are in some divisions quite settled and quite developed actually do not meet in June, July or August. For example, the Elmwood community, in that area there is an advisory committee struck of each school in that area. They meet on a monthly basis. That advisory council which is the district area is not intending to meet now till September. That area, for example, clearly came out and said we do not wish to be moved, and yet the Boundaries Commission made that recommendation. They do have a lot to say. That community will be hard-pressed to meet your September deadline.

Can the minister perhaps give us some opportunities for groups like that, that do wish to meet and provide response?

Mrs. McIntosh: The member references parent councils and I acknowledge that I was, in my remarks, speaking primarily to school boards and school divisions. I appreciate that there is a difference in that the parent councils may not meet as frequently or as regularly as school trustees do nor do they have the legal obligation to deal with problems that come to them. So I appreciate the difference there.

I think for the school boards and for the school administrators, they have a legal obligation to deal with educational matters, and there is nothing in The Public Schools Act that says, okay, it is summer holidays now; you no longer have any obligation to deal with educational matters of importance to your community because it is summer holidays, and you do not have to be responsible during that period of time.

I would suggest that if any group like that is having difficulty meeting a time limit, they maybe give us a call because while they are not having hearings--like we are not going to go back and sort of do the public hearings and the review all over again--we certainly do not have any desire to prevent people. In fact, the whole goal is to try to get their input in as timely a fashion as possible. So perhaps if anybody is having that kind of difficulty, they want to give us a call and let us know whatever their time line problem is, and we will see what we can do to get their input. It may even be possible to have a get-together if that is convenient.

The commission, as I say, is not having the hearings again but I am receptive to meetings. I have indicated to the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) that if she wished to bring some of the Brooklands' parents in to meet with me, I would be most pleased to do that and sit down and take a look at their problems.

* (1540)

Ms. Mihychuk: That is helpful.

Some divisions, as you are aware, are going through a co-operative amalgamation--divisions like Lakeside and Evergreen. Winnipeg School Division, for example, has taken the initiative and provided a purchasing option and because of its size can secure a lower cost on goods and has made that available for other divisions. There is the Child Guidance Clinic which provides services to many urban divisions. So there are a number of what we would say open boundaries or flexibility, co-operation amongst divisions.

Would the government consider facilitating this type of co-operative sharing and look at that as an option? It is my understanding, for example, that the Saskatchewan government basically took the recommendations of boundaries, encouraged divisions to participate, provided a small incentive and that there was a voluntary amalgamation in Saskatchewan.

Would this government be open to that type of model?

Mrs. McIntosh: As I indicated earlier, we very much are already supporting that kind of initiative, saying punch holes in those barriers, permeate them, start co-operating, do things like joint purchasing, share what you can and start being partners with each other, stop the turf protection, it is counterproductive. We are already on that in terms of encouraging divisions and hoping they will continue with that. The Norrie commission, when it comes back, may well hear that kind of thing said from divisions and trustees.

I guess what I am saying is that at the moment everything is on the table. What comes in from the commission will be taken into consideration with everything else we have heard. When we sit down to make our decisions, it will be at that point that we will respond to many ideas such as the one that you have presented. In the meantime, any and all ideas are most welcome. I will consider everything but at the moment commit to nothing because we do not want to pre-empt our own report.

Ms. Mihychuk: One of the assumptions that the Boundaries Review made was that the amalgamation of divisions would result in fewer administrators. Is there any evidence that we would see fewer superintendents, for example, in the city of Winnipeg with boundary change?

Mrs. McIntosh: I am not aware of any empirical evidence. The Unicity example would almost provide a contrary-type evidential experience. So those types of questions which are exactly the right questions to ask are ones that we need to take a careful look at, because clearly if you end up with the same number of administrators in your central board office at the same salaries, with a brand new CEO on top of them all, you have indeed created an expensive exercise as opposed to a less expensive exercise.

While we know that you can reduce administrative costs if an amalgamation is done well and properly, it may take a political will to have that accomplished, political will either at the trustee level or at the administrative level or at the provincial level. It is something that needs to be looked at carefully when you are deciding what you are going to do. It is a very good question you have asked.

Ms. Mihychuk: Just one final question on the issue of boundaries, can the minister assure educators in our school system that we can be focused on education reform, which is absolutely essential. I think that the majority of partners in the education system want to change and focus on the important issues of making it a better learning environment for our children, and not focus on drawing lines on a map, sitting around a negotiating table arguing about where the boundary is. The fear that many have is that exactly what we are going to end up doing for the next three years is focus on a boundaries commission and argue about lines rather than dealing with the important issues of education.

Mrs. McIntosh: I think it is critically important that everybody keep their priorities straight as we go through some of these exercises that are on the horizon right now in education. In my first two weeks as minister, I have met with some 20-odd organizations connected with education, still meeting with them as time permits. This week I met with MAST and had my second get-together with the St. Boniface College people.

With each of those groups I made the statement and received positive nods of agreement, which I believed were sincere and hope I am not wrong in that belief, to the statement that schools are for students. Educational institutions are for students. They are not for teachers, they are not for professors, they are not for school trustees, they are not for Ministers of Education or governments or provinces, they are for students. If that is kept as our first priority and never forgotten, then we probably will not get too mixed up when we decide we are going to spend our time sitting around arguing about lines on maps or trying to find improved and enhanced and enriched ways of determining how well Mary is absorbing the knowledge that is being presented to her. When we get our priorities mixed up, we can get off track.

That is not to say that dealing with the boundaries issue is going to degenerate into the worst-case scenario or the nightmarish image that you have unfolded there which, I think, is within the realm of possibilities, I hope not within the realm of probabilities. It is possible for intelligent people of good will who have done their homework to sit down and make a decision on boundaries that will not take ages and ages and ages to go through and result in horrendous arguing. It is possible to do that while you focus in on delivering a better quality of education, better than it currently is.

I wish to stress, every time I say that, that I am not saying that there are not good things happening in classrooms. I challenge anybody to take away from me my devotion to some of the people who are doing things in the schools in this province. I have been on record consistently for that for about 17 years. I am just making reference now to the member for Wolseley's (Ms. Friesen) opening comments when she indicated we should be saying good things about schools instead of harping on the negative all the time.

It is a misperception to think when we say that things could be improved that we are implying that everything is bad. Things have, in comparative purposes, placed Manitoba further down on the scale than we should be, not to say everything is bad, but things can be improved.

I think, as we look at boundaries, my intention of looking at boundaries is how can we ensure that as we look at boundaries, we offer something that can further enrich and enhance some of the renewal and the reform that is going to take place in the actual learning experiences in the schools. If we effect this particular boundary change, will it result in better delivery of education for this child? Will it result in reduced costs for the guardians of these children in terms of taxes? Will it result in increased co-operation that will provide better materials, better use of staff and facilities for this child? If it will do that, the boundary change is probably good, and if it will not do that, then it is probably not a good recommendation and we should not move the line right there.

We are like the member from the Maples who has got an open mind on this issue right now. We feel it is a topic that needs to be explored, there may need to be some changes, but we do not accept change for the sake of change. Change has to be done for good reason.

* (1550)

Mr. Kowalski: The word "amalgamation" is used repeatedly and I am wondering, is that the way this should be thought of or should we be thinking of this as dissolving the old school divisions and creating new school divisions with new policies, new contracts, a new board, as opposed to an amalgamation? My concern is if we view it as an amalgamation any place where we have a larger board going together with a smaller board that the larger board's policies or contracts, their administrators, will have more of an influence. Should we be thinking more of this as creating new school divisions?

Mrs. McIntosh: I think the member addresses a sensitivity that needs to be very carefully addressed when you talk about school division boundary changes because along with all of the things that I just mentioned to the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) about will this improve the delivery of service, will this--better facilities, blah, blah, blah--all of those things that I said will be coloured by the emotion. We have had a couple of things happen in the area where I live. We have been through three amalgamations actually there of school divisions, and to this day, when you say St. James-Assiniboia, you better say St. James-Assiniboia and not leave off the Assiniboia portion. Because that was an amalgamation, where both divisions voluntarily came together. Each retained their original name, and each retained certain characteristics that were important to them. But they came together and created a new entity, got a new name--St. James-Assiniboia. But still there was the emotional tie to the original entity, and that is human nature.

We have closed some 14 schools in our division, we closed 14 schools during my tenure as trustee. We called them consolidations because when you actually ended up closing school A and sending the children to school B, you consolidated the two student bodies into one. In those cases, they retained, they kept the name of the new school. The old school was closed and the new school did absorb--the words you used--the other school population, still bringing with them, though, certain characteristics and things. There was always emotion in those exercises. I mean, ultimately people felt they were good ideas, obviously, because all the trustees who voted for amalgamation or consolidation were always returned to office, and those who voted against them were never returned to office. So the public accepted the concept, but they still had the emotional tie and the sorrow at losing the thing that they were familiar with.

So the terminology we are going to use, the philosophy we are going to use in terms of absorbing or creating new or closing down old, I do not know at this point. But what I do know is there will be a very strong need to be sensitive to that issue that you have raised, because it will have meaning to people.

Mr. Kowalski: Yes, I think it relates to something else I was going to talk about when we talked about boundaries being lines drawn on the map, and sometimes boundaries recognize identifiable communities' neighbourhoods. When people refer to the north end, some people have different ideas. What does the north end mean? I do not think within the city jurisdiction they have moved around what they call District 3, and Works and Ops is a different area of District 3 and that, but the community knows what the north end is--you could ask anyone from there, and they say, yes, I am from the north end.

Now, with this amalgamation or whatever of the different school divisions, in some school divisions they reflect the community's standards, the community's priorities, and if we amalgamate a smaller division that has strong sense of neighbourhood, strong sense of community, where that community has said their priority is for early years education as opposed to a baccalaureate program, and they amalgamate with a larger division, my concern is that if you view it as amalgamation because the majority of administrators, majority of people involved in the system will be from that larger division, that the community's values from the smaller division will be lost. And that is why I asked that question. I see it as a message that in the smaller divisions now, you are being taken over by the large divisions. The values, the priorities of that division, will be maintained and will be lost in the smaller divisions.

Mrs. McIntosh: You have a good sensitivity to the emotional aspect of this, and it is not one that can be ignored, and as we move through this exercise, it is not one that will be ignored.

I do not have answers at this time, but I am aware that so far in the Estimates today, the points raised by you and by the member for St. James (Ms. Mihychuk) have been credible points that are constructive in their criticism, and I appreciate them because they are ones we need to keep in mind.

Mr. Kowalski: I do not know if this is the right area to discuss this, but because of the boundary review--I will be very parochial. In my constituency which is governed by the Seven Oaks School Division, there has been a problem for a number of years in that it does not comply with The Public Schools Act in that the electoral quotient for The Maples area, that ward, I think is 25 percent.

Now, because of the Boundary Review Commission, the Board of Revision, it was felt, would not entertain any change, but now that we know there will be one more election, that means three more years where the people in The Maples--and I am doing it from memory. I believe it is 17,000 eligible voters who are represented by three school trustees, whereas in another ward made up of Garden City, West Kildonan and that area, with 15,000, is represented by five school trustees.

My understanding of The Public Schools Act is if 25 people from the area present a petition to the Minister of Education, that the Board of Revision will look at it. Now, that does not leave much time before the next school trustee election, but a number of people who were considering this action, even the school board who looked at it, held off because of the Boundary Review Commission with anticipation that the boundary may change.

What can be done to correct the inequity of representation in The Maples?

* (1600)

Mrs. McIntosh: Did you say that the board has made representation to the minister?

Mr. Kowalski: No, the board struck a committee, looked at it and decided not to take any action. Rightfully or wrongfully, it was felt that the Board of Revision would not entertain any changes because of the pending Norrie report.

So now it has come out late for the Board of Revision. I think the time lines for the Board of Revision to look at something like that is much longer than what the period of time is between now and the next school board elections.

But there is a serious inequity that can have a dramatic effect not only in the next few years, but there will be a certain amount of jockeying and positioning for different programs, different resources in The Maples versus other areas.

I am admittedly very parochial here, but there is a serious inequity, where the people of The Maples have far less representation on their school board than people from other areas in the same school division.

Mrs. McIntosh: Just a quick question again for clarification. This is a problem between boards where one ward has a disproportionate number of people than another ward in the same division, right?

Mr. Kowalski: In the wards. There are three wards in the Seven Oaks School Division.

In one ward, there are five trustees from that division. In the other ward, there are three, and in the other ward, there is one, and if you look at the electoral quotient, it is in contravention of The Public Schools Act and has been for some time now, because, again, I repeat, of the Norrie commission. It was waiting to hear a response from that, and it came too late to do anything for this school board election, which will mean that the inequity will continue for at least another three years.

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, I would invite you to ask your board to contact me, and I do not know what can be done but I do know that we had indicated we did not want the Board of Reference making decisions that would pre-empt decisions made by the Boundaries Review, and this situation may not be in that category. Perhaps you could just invite them to call me or see me.

Mr. Kowalski: With the board's make-up the majority of trustees are from the ward where they have large representation, so I do not know if the board will be that interested in, as a board, doing it. There are individuals in the community of The Maples that are very concerned about their representation and those would be the people that would be interested in something being done before the next school board election.

Mrs. McIntosh: I will take this matter under advisement, and we can maybe talk later because you have identified a dilemma there, and I understand exactly what you are saying.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Is it the will of the committee that we take a break for recess for about 10 minutes. Agreed. We will resume back here at 4:15.

The committee recessed at 4:03 p.m.

________

After Recess

The committee resumed at 4:18 p.m.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Would the committee please resume, the time being now 4:18.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Chairman, I have got, I think, one last question on 61(c), and that is looking at the policy and planning aspects of the location of MERLIN. As I look on the organization chart, I see it reports directly to the minister, and I am wondering how that works with all the other things that need to be co-ordinated from education with MERLIN: the purchase of software, the links with libraries, the links to the Internet and all those kinds of things. So it is the organizational chart that I am interested in.

Mrs. McIntosh: I am not sure if this exactly addresses the member's question, but the staff in the department provide support and information and services to MERLIN. MERLIN, itself, I believe, has its own line coming up, but in terms of its relationship with the other groups of the department they serve, educational services and so on are provided from the department to MERLIN.

* (1620)

The mandate of MERLIN is to provide education and educational technology services for education and training in Manitoba, and MERLIN will provide direction and management in the educational use of telecommunications networks. It will act as an honest broker, so to speak, of services to meet customer needs, and it will provide service offerings that support educational institutions, kindergarten to Senior 4 and post-secondary, in the application of technological tools that will enhance and expand program delivery, and will identify, in partnership with the private sector and with economic development agencies, economical development opportunities arising from the application of technology to education and training. It is not an accrediting body; it does not develop curricula.

I do not know if I am answering what you are looking for or not. It supports departmental policy. MERLIN will work with both deputy ministers because it is not tied to one level of education, but rather crosses all of the educational groupings. It will work with schools, with school divisions, with the department and it will provide with universities, colleges, and it will provide related technological services at a cost, fee-for-service basis. It is a cost recovery; the divisions would pay for some of the services it gets. It can negotiate on behalf of divisions, network services, rates, system management, those types of things.

Staff has indicated to me that in the roles of MERLIN, it can co-ordinate the provision of Internet for education, including the developing and implementing Train the Trainer workshops, where you train people to go out and in turn train others, for users to establish a World Wide Web site for education, developing computer application to limit connect time and auditing new accounts for errors and those types of services.

Ms. Friesen: I know we have another opportunity to look at MERLIN as a special operating agency separately, and its role and function. I know that this is a transition year so that many of the responsibilities that the minister has just outlined, I believe, are still contained in the responsibilities of areas of line departments. What I would like to do as we go along is look at areas where those are going to be taken away from departments and moved to special operating agencies. I will just be trying to pay attention to the special operating agency, I have been trying to pay attention to that as we go along.

What I was concerned about here was how departmental policies will be communicated to MERLIN? For example, the minister said that no curricula will be developed here. The purchase of curriculum materials, the collective purchasing, the large-scale contracts, and possibly even the commercial developments of curricula, all will take place here. What is the connection between the kinds of needs that the new curricula will have that the new curriculum committees that are developing curricula--how will that connect into MERLIN? Does the minister, for example, have representatives on MERLIN? What proportion of the MERLIN representatives represent ministerial policy?

Mrs. McIntosh: MERLIN deals more with technical issues, as opposed to instruction-type issues, but the provincial councils will give an overview and there is going to be a very strong working relationship between development and MERLIN and the provincial councils will be a strong influence. That is one way of providing direction.

Ms. Friesen: Just for the record, the minister should indicate the provincial councils for Distance Education and Technology.

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister add what the representation of the department is on those provincial councils and on MERLIN, and is there any difference between the two?

Mrs. McIntosh: The make-up will include, as I said earlier, both deputies are involved, but you have John Carlyle, deputy for K to Senior 4 and Paul Goyan, deputy for post-secondary. You have the MERLIN CEO, you have Henri Raymond who is the member for kindergarten to Senior 4 from the department. There is also a subcommittee at the post-secondary level, and that is chaired by a school superintendent, Bill Schaeffer.

Then you have local consortia at other levels that are, again, representative of local issues and concerns and those involved directly in education.

Ms. Friesen: So MERLIN then consists of three people from the department who are looking at the management board of MERLIN? What is the phrase that is used?

There are three people from the department, Mr. Raymond and both deputies, and then there is a CEO separately and a separate person for post-secondary. Is that the gist of it?

* (1630)

Mrs. McIntosh: I was referring to the provincial councils when I was giving that particular make-up. I thought that was what you were asking, but MERLIN itself, yes, has its CEO.

Ms. Friesen: Again, I wanted to ask about--it is again the link between the department and MERLIN. The example I was using was that multimedia or any kind of curriculum purchase that would be recommended by the new curriculum committees, this would then be communicated, those types of suggestions and ideas and selections and policies of the department, would be communicated to MERLIN through the provincial council and through the minister's representatives on that council.

Mrs. McIntosh: There are the two lines of communication to the CEO; one, through the provincial advisory committee which links back to the minister, so, you know, they have that linkage, and directly to the minister, of course. There is a communication flow between the minister and the CEO. So we have those two vehicles of communication.

Of course, you have the agencies working out ways to communicate and have input into MERLIN, going up to MERLIN. So if you look at a diagram, the minister is at the top, provincial council off to the side and MERLIN in a direct line under the minister, then underneath that, agencies flowing up and services and so on, marketing administration, flowing back to various groups.

Just, you know, to give you one example, the department can approve a curriculum, have a curriculum available, and MERLIN can be used then to do bulk purchases for various divisions and other entities wanting to access that. So it is going to be a central co-ordinating body for technical resources.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 1.(c) Planning and Policy Co-ordination (1) Salaries and Employee benefits $428,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $208,200--pass.

Item 1.(d) (1) Human Resource Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $354,000.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask some questions about affirmative action and career development initiatives.

Could the minister give us an update on the affirmative action policies and results in this section of the department?

Mrs. McIntosh: All staffing authorization requests must include an affirmative action strategy, and affirmative action as a selection criteria is weighted in all competitions with the same value as all essential criteria. Wherever it is possible efforts are made to place affirmative action candidates in vacant positions.

Are you looking for numbers or--

Ms. Friesen: I thank the minister for the general statement. What I would be looking for, as well, is what the experience has been over the past year. Have there been hirings, promotions, and how has the affirmative action policy been effective in that area? I notice that there have been a number of advertisements over the last six or eight months for both short-term and longer-term personnel in the department. I wondered if the department has been able to hire any candidates in that category.

Mrs. McIntosh: I will give you the statistics we have got here with the indication that increasingly we are seeing people who would qualify to be affirmative action candidates who choose not to declare that as a status because they do not want it considered in their applications. So, understanding that, we do have a number of people who would qualify for affirmative action status who choose their right not to be identified in that way, so they will not be included in the statistics even though they are present in the department because that, at their request, was not a factor.

Of those who were willing to declare that they were affirmative action candidates and were willing to allow that to be considered in their applications, we have 446 females, and that is 67.78 percent of the department staff. We have 19 people who declared themselves to be native and that is just under 3 percent of the department staff. We have 20 people who declared themselves as disabled for affirmative action purposes. That is slightly over 3 percent of the staff. We have 12 people who registered as visible minorities working in the department. That is about 1.82 percent of the staff. Of course, we will not include the others who fall into those categories who asked not to have that taken into consideration as a factor in their employment.

Ms. Friesen: My further question was in the hirings that the department has been able to make in the last year. What proportion have been able to be dealt with under an affirmative action criteria?

* (1640)

Mrs. McIntosh: Staff advises me to get it within a specific time line. They will come back with those figures. They do not have them broken down into, you know, how many in the last period of time. They give you the current status. We will get you that.

Ms. Friesen: Could I clarify it as the last fiscal year?

Mrs. McIntosh: Just while staff is getting that, I would just like to indicate to you that, specifically in line with some of the questions that were in Question Period the last couple of days, in terms of advertising for the Northern Adult Literacy Coordinator and regional consultants in the Winnipeg, Dauphin, Thompson area, we have indicated that preference be given specifically to aboriginal candidates, just for information on that.

We can bring you the last fiscal year tomorrow, if you wish. We do not have it here today.

Ms. Friesen: I do not know if it would be helpful to the department. I suggested the last fiscal year simply because that is the way numbers are kept, but my guess is that the number of hirings was not as great in the last fiscal year as, perhaps, it was in a more concentrated period of months, say, since August, which would not come into the last fiscal year. So if the department has two sets of numbers, that would be useful. Otherwise, we can deal with it next year on the basis of fiscal years.

Mrs. McIntosh: We did fill 41 regular positions last fiscal year. How they broke down into terms of categories or quotas, I do not know. We have 41 positions filled, but we can bring you back the information as to the types of individuals who filled those positions.

Ms. Friesen: My other question dealt with promotion, and, I guess, it would connect to the career development initiatives for people in affirmative action designations in 16.1(d). Could the minister give us a description or an account of how many people have been promoted in those categories? What kind of career development initiatives are currently in place in the department?

Mrs. McIntosh: I just want to indicate that we could have the affirmative action hirings staff advised, say, by about 5:30 today, if the member would like, in terms of promotions and training for job advancement.

In terms of the representation of women in senior management and middle-management positions, we have one female assistant deputy minister. The chair of the Public Schools Finance Board is a female. We have eight female directors of the following directorates: Native Education, Special Projects, Official Languages Program, Administrative Services, Library and Materials Production Branch, Program Development branch, school programs division, Literacy and Continuing Education, Program Implementation Branch, school programs division, employment development programs.

We have 15 female managers. They are, in the following areas managers, either co-ordinators or assistant directors: private vocational schools, labour program, evaluation and development unit, labour market analysis unit, Single Parent Job Access Program, New Careers in Thompson, Gateway Program, Intergovernmental Affairs, Winnipeg regional teams, school programs division, blind and visually impaired services unit, school programs division, Curriculum and Exams, Apprenticeship, project manager MIS, co-ordinator humanities unit, School Programs Division, program analysis and development, Schools' Finance Branch, assistant director of Planning and Policy Development, project manager Curriculum frameworks in school division programs.

These are the females who have identified themselves as qualifying for affirmative action and wish to have that designation included as one of the criteria for employment.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, and the other categories of native, disabled and visible minority, have there been any promotions in the past year of people in those categories, first of all? Secondly, what career development initiatives are there for people in those categories to enable them to receive training and promotion?

Mrs. McIntosh: Just before we leave the female component, we have had five females promoted into senior management positions in the past year.

In terms of the other categories of people, that will also come back to the member. It is here; it just has to be pulled out and counted. So if we want to carry on, then as soon as that information comes, I will give that to you. It just has to be taken out of the file here.

Ms. Friesen: I would be happy to receive that at a later time, and just to be clear, it is the native, visible minority and disabled peoples who have been promoted in the past year, and secondly, what the career initiatives are, career training, that are available for people in the department for that. I am prepared to pass this line now, if you wanted to do that later.

Mrs. McIntosh: I will bring that information back to you at another time.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 1.(d) Human Resource Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $354,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $57,600--pass.

Item 1.(e) Financial and Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $905,500.

* (1650)

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, I had a couple of questions here. One dealt with the underspending in '93, I think it is by eight something?

I wondered if the minister could give us a sense, a greater longitudinal sense. Is this the first time there has been underspending by the Department of Education?

Mrs. McIntosh: I am making an assumption here that you are talking about the major cost reduction we were able to achieve in 1993 across government. Is that the area you are referring to?

Ms. Friesen: I am looking at page 90 of the annual report for '93-94, and I am looking at the decrease in spending from the estimate--[interjection] Page 90, and what I am looking for is a longer longitudinal perspective on that. Is that the first time that there has been that underspending, compared to the estimated amount and the amount voted on, or is that a common amount?

Mrs. McIntosh: Staff advises they believe that may have been the first time because prior to that in previous years, we had had high inflation and all of those things, and there was not the same concentrated effort in trying to contain costs. There were many efficiencies built in right across government in trying to reduce costs at that time.

They believe that was the first year that they managed to come in under budget, instead of having to spend money just because it was there. You know how the old mentality used to be back in the good old days when you set a budget and then you worked like crazy to try to spend every cent of it, instead of setting a budget and trying very hard to come in at it or under it if possible, which is the much more responsible way to proceed than the old way. It used to be in educational finance when people did not pay attention to the cost to the taxpayer the way they have to now.

Ms. Friesen: I think some of those savings may well have been administrative savings, but I think some of them were also at the expense of programs, particularly some reductions in ACCESS programs and others.

I would agree with the minister that money should not be spent simply for the sake of spending money. I think there were certain program implications for those changes. What I wanted to ask was, presumably I can go back to each annual report to look at the relationship between estimated and actual amounts. I just wanted to check while the staff was here whether in previous annual reports, to the best of their knowledge, numbers are reported in the same format and would they be comparable.

Mrs. McIntosh: When the interest rates went down, and a lot of our formulae and so on are tied to those kinds of things, we experienced a net decrease in that '93 period. That may be what you are looking at in terms of the cost to government not being as high as it was when inflation and interest rates and so on were higher.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about departmental auditing, particularly the auditing of the Workforce 2000 program. Could the minister explain the internal auditing pattern? I assume there is a cycle, is there, of the auditing of particular divisions and departments within the branch? Could the minister give us an update on where that is and at what point Workforce 2000 is included or has been concluded?

Mrs. McIntosh: The auditing has been centralized through the Department of Finance, so it is no longer done in the Department of Education. The Department of Finance now provides that function.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about the Lotteries money. I noticed that last year for the first time, I believe, Lotteries money was included in the Department of Education. This year there is a substantial increase in that amount of Lotteries and the focus for which it is used, or the different focuses for which it will be used. Could the minister give us a sense of how--are there any different procedures for administering that? How will that be dealt with in the departmental financial system?

Mrs. McIntosh: All the internal processes will be identical to what they are now.

Ms. Friesen: How will the special operating agency be dealt with in financial terms, insofar as the department reporting lines and those kinds of things are concerned?

Mrs. McIntosh: That will be reported through Finance to MERLIN.

Ms. Friesen: So the minister means that that goes directly to MERLIN from the Department of Finance. It does not come at all through the Department of Education?

Mrs. McIntosh: We make our own contribution, but then they control their own dollars. Finance does the audit on that.

* (1700)

Ms. Friesen: I assume--I am looking at page 145 of the Supplementary Estimates--where these Lottery programs are listed, this is for 1995-96. There will be a vote, then, a separate vote, 16.8 a resolution on this Lotteries money in the Department of Education, and yet it does not--I am just trying to get the organization straight, it does not pass through the minister.

Mrs. McIntosh: $744,000 of Lotteries money is Education's contribution to MERLIN. MERLIN can then acquire other funds by fee for service, cost recovery, that type of thing.

Ms. Friesen: And that $744,000 then comes to Education from Lotteries and goes from Education to MERLIN? [interjection] Okay, I understand.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): I just briefly want to go back to an answer the minister gave a few moments ago, and I would like to explore it a little bit. She indicated that, under Expenditures in '93-94, may have been related to interest rate changes.

I wonder if the minister could point out the line in the annual reports or the lines where that might have been the fact causing that difference.

Mrs. McIntosh: I do not think that you will see that particular item on a line. What you will see is cost coming down. I do not believe it is identified the reason we are able to have a cost not be as--is why it did not cost as much this year as last year was of a change in the rate of inflation or interest. I do not think you will see that in the report.

Mr. Sale: That is why I asked the question because I do not think the answer is accurate. I do not believe there are places where interest rates have that kind of impact in public schools finance. I think that the answer to the question is contained quite adequately in the explanations from pages 91, 92 and 93, which note that in the main the reductions were due to cuts in programs, pure and simple.

Cuts in PDSS areas, Child Development Support Services and a whole range of lines. If the minister wants to look at the notes, I think they are quite clear. They have nothing to do with interest rates whatsoever at all and have everything to do with deliberate either reductions in programs or reductions in staff.

Mrs. McIntosh: One example that the member may wish to disagree with if he chooses, when you are paying out money and it is tied to a formula that is based upon--has as one of the components in it, cost of living, rate of inflation, interest rates, whatever, you will pay out less if those rates go down. You may choose to disagree with that. I think fundamentally most people would accept that if you have a formula that has in it a component, a factor such as that and that component goes down, in all likelihood the money that you pay out would be lessened. I may be wrong on that or the member may continue to disagree with that, but I think there are some mathematicians who might think that there is some merit in that particular point of view.

Also, the member talks about cuts in programs and should also recognize that every time there is a reduction in expenditure it does not necessarily equate to a cut in program. It is the kind of fallacy that a lot of people have when they say the only thing you need to do to fix education is to pump more money into it, without recognizing that it is quite possible to deliver a higher service at lower cost. One example, one prime example, it is a health example not an education example but the theory holds true. The member having been, I think, a health consultant at one time, were you, or was it environmental or maybe it was both--health consultant--will recognize the benefits of home-managed care, for example.

Elizabeth Semkiw, my good friend Elizabeth Semkiw, who may be known to the member--I will just wait till he is finished talking and then I will continue.

I am not finished. I was just waiting until you finished your conversation so you would be free to hear the answer to the question you asked.

Elizabeth Semkiw, who is a quadriplegic confined to a chair, used to under the old way of doing things be looked after. She was looked after by government, dependent on the good will of government for her care. That cost the taxpayers of this province $52,000 every year. For that, Elizabeth had a Home Care worker come at the hour appointed for the Home Care worker's convenience to give Elizabeth her bath at an hour which may not have been the hour that Elizabeth wished her bath. So she was on a rigid schedule that was suited to fit the bureaucracy and that was tailored to fit the needs that were available on a list for people in her situation.

A pilot project a year or two ago was just to say to Elizabeth, your needs cost the taxpayers $52,000 last year, here is $52,000. Take it and manage your own care, which she did with great delight, because she was able to hire the person she wanted to bathe her when she wanted on her schedule, at the time of day she would like to be bathed. She was able to tailor her program to meet her specific desires and needs, and at the end of the year gave us an A-plus-plus-plus-plus on the program and returned over $2,000 to us.

Higher quality, better care, at less cost: quite possible, quite probable, if people are willing to get out of old-think, which says if you have underspent it is bad because it must mean that you somehow diluted service. If you have overspent it must be good because it means obviously you have improved the quality of service. Those are not assumptions that necessarily are rooted in reality, and, in fact, in some cases, they are erroneous assumptions held in the minds of people who cannot get out of the past.

Unfortunately, the people we service tomorrow will not be living in the past, they will be living in tomorrow, in an era when there is not the same kind of money that there used to be, when creative thinking needs to be brought to bear to improve service and reduce cost.

* (1710)

I, just by the tone of the questions, capture the flavour of your imagination, sir, because by the tone of your questions, you and your colleague who is the official critic for your party say, you have underspent, what have you done that is bad, instead of saying, you have managed to come in under budget, what creative thing did you do to help achieve that for the people of Manitoba, who have to have the finances brought under control if we are going to salvage anything of importance for the people of this province and our children and grandchildren who are going to live in a world where a debt, planned as carefully as we plan it, is going to take 30 years to get the people out of.

So I just say, I do not know, I was not Minister of Education. I am not saying that is a reason why I should not know, but I do not know exactly why some of these lines were underspent. Maybe it was some great, evil, terrible thing. I do not know. Maybe it was due to some very logical thing such as interest rates and inflation which I still kind of think do have a little bit of a factor to play in keeping budgets under control or maybe it was because of Elizabeth Semkiw situations. Again I do not know, but we can get you some of those answers.

You can choose to disagree with me, absolutely, and I recognize you do, but there is a philosophy inherit in your question that quite frankly scares the living daylights out of me in terms of following through on that kind of thinking. I have children in their late 20s. They are going to live in this future a lot longer than I am, and I am not going to see them live in it burdened with a debt that leaves them nothing at all. We are paying so much now on our debt, and that debt is growing and I think you have some sense of finances and some sense of economy and realize that interest compounds, debt grows, more and more money having to go towards debt leaves less and less money for education.

We have got choices. We could spend more and more without paying attention to the debt and let the debt grow, which will give us less and less to spend, until we will not have any choices sitting around the table about whether we can underspend or overspend. The choice will be made for us. The choice can be made for us by people outside, by people who live across great bodies of water who decide--pardon me?

An Honourable Member: And wear red suspenders.

Mrs. McIntosh: I do not know what colour their suspenders are, but I am telling you that people who grant us our credit ratings, people in the international money markets who look at Canada as a place to invest or not invest, can decide for us whether we are going to have any money left for education.

You probably do not like to hear the words New Zealand, but let me assure you that they had the same cocksure absolute optimistic attitude that no harm would befall them. So long as they kept spending money, credit would be theirs and no one would ever cut off their credit because they had the third-highest standard of living in the world, and they did one day. The next day, they had the twenty-second lowest standard in the world because their credit got cut off.

An Honourable Member: What country are you talking about?

Mrs. McIntosh: New Zealand.

An Honourable Member: Table the information.

Mrs. McIntosh: Oh, I will be glad to table the information. You do not know about the New Zealand situation?

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. I would remind the committee that remarks at committee are to be relevant to the item you are on.

I am bringing to the attention, for the benefit of the committee, that we are on line 1.(e) Financial and Administrative Services, and I would expect that all members would remain relevant and stay for benefit of all members of the committee. The minister can conclude her remarks, please.

Mrs. McIntosh: I will conclude; I will bring in information about New Zealand to indicate how they had to close 700 post offices in one morning, and do all of those things, because their credit rating did not stay the way they thought it would and the consequences of that because I think it would be of some use for the member.

Mr. Sale: Well, that was one of the most interesting rambles, Mr. Chairperson, that I have heard in response to what was actually a very simple and technical question.

I would simply say to the minister that I was part of the group that lobbied for self-managed home care. I did research on it, and Elizabeth Semkiw is also a friend of mine. I have known her for many years and I know she does wonderful work on behalf of the people for whom she is employed.

I completely agree with the minister's comments. I just take a somewhat exception to the notion that this is somehow supposed to be new information.

The minister might want to be the Minister of Health and that would be good.

I will simply say, for the record, that the reasons for the over- and underexpenditure are given in detail in the pages that I referenced. There are some three pages, 38 explanations, and the 38 explanations on a quick scan do not ever mention interest rates or inflation. I simply wanted to say, for the record, this is not one of the reasons that is given by the department that tabled the report, that the reasons are here and in the main they stem from over- and underexpenditures on programs.

I would also say to the minister that, having been an assistant deputy minister in this department, I worked very hard for efficiency, as I think all civil servants do. I do not think efficiency is an idea that this government suddenly discovered and no other government knew about, so I take the minister's comments that we want to have efficient and effective and innovative changes, but we are always interested in seeing what some of these might be. I simply heard an explanation that did not hold water, and so I wanted to find out where the explanation was given in the notes and to get some sense of why this was seen to be a reasonable explanation.

I take the comments from the minister, but I found the long exploration of self-managed home care not particularly relevant to the discussion.

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, I believe we were asked in what environment the funding that was referred to in the question came about, and I believe we have responded with the type of environment that existed at the time. I believe that is entirely appropriate.

I also feel that we can sit here, if you would like, and I gather from the amount of time we are spending on 1993, that we probably would like to sit here and go through a report that has already been gone through in detail, I would imagine, by--I mean, I presumed that through 1993, Estimates of Expenditure were gone through by the then Minister of Education and that these matters were delved into. We can go through them all again. Heck, we can go right back to 1988 and go through all the way money was spent in 1988 and rip it apart if we want to. If you would like to do that, we will go get the 1988, the '89, the '90, the '91, the '92, the '93, the '94, and maybe we will get to the current year, which is what we are here to do.

I also say, Mr. Chairman, that I think using examples from other departments as to high quality and low costs are entirely and absolutely appropriate. When a generic thought is put out, it is quite appropriate to respond with another generic thought, unless we want to go with the principle one rule for you and one rule for me, which I do not really adhere to because when people are courteous and polite, as the previous two questioners were, they will get courteous and polite back, but when innuendo and when there is something in the question that has a tonal quality, such as I get sometimes from one or two people, they will get it back.

It is not inappropriate to respond to a generic statement with a generic example. It is not inappropriate to refer to external influences that might have effected a cost reduction or an expenditure reduction, when I am asked what might be the possible causes for an expenditure reduction.

If you think it is inappropriate, then I can keep my answers really short and you will not get the full answer to the thing that you actually asked.

I have, by the way, Mr. Chairman, the information that was requested by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), which I indicated I would get by 5:30 and we are 10 minutes ahead. May I put that in now?

The member for Wolseley had asked about the '94-95 fiscal year, the year we are in. She had asked about how many affirmative action candidates had been promoted or trained for promotion, I believe was the question. We have one female native curriculum consultant who was recruited from an educational institution. We have one visible minority who is now a Policy and Research analyst for Advanced Education. We have one disabled clerical employee who was redeployed from another area. We are in the process of conducting a very intense search for a principal for the School for the Deaf, who would actually be deaf as well. That has been a very wide and intense search, as those who follow that issue will probably know. We hope we will be successful there. If not, we do have a fully bilingual principal there right now who is totally fluent in ASL.

I have to qualify this again because we do have people who have asked not to have their affirmative action qualifications noted, so those are the ones who have declared their affirmative action status and asked to have it recognized. We cannot record people in any of those categories who do not wish to have their membership in any of those categories declared. While others are there, we cannot count them because they do not wish to be counted as an affirmative action candidate, but we do have those who have been promoted in this '94-95 fiscal year.

* (1720)

Ms. Friesen: I thank the minister for that and I will come back to that in a minute, but I did want to put on the record a response to the minister's earlier comment where she appeared critical of our desire to look at 1993 numbers. I just wanted to tell the minister that the reason we are examining those is because the Annual Report for Education and Training of '93-94 was very properly just tabled last week.

This is the most recent issue of annual reports, where we do have the ability to examine both the actual and the expenditure so that is the reason we are using the '93-94 numbers. If we had '94-95, we would certainly be using those, but obviously those are understandably not ready yet, so it is not from any archeological or arcane desire to look, as the minister said, back to 1988. These are the most recent.

My question at the time was not specifically the environment that this happened in, but it was to establish whether this was the first time that that had been underspent. If I were to go back to previous annual reports, would I find comparable material where I could find out for myself whether in fact there had been the same pattern, whether I could look at the same pattern in earlier years? That was the intent. That was with the kinds of words that I used at the time, and I think--well, I will leave it at that. That is an explanation of why we are looking at 1993.

In response to the material that the minister has just tabled, I did ask an additional question and that was about training programs, career development for visible minorities who might want to be promoted or might be looking for those kinds of opportunities. What exists in the department and have people been able to take advantage of government-wide initiatives on this?

Mrs. McIntosh: There are no training programs specifically geared to any particular category of employee. The department, however, does have very intense training available for those who are employed within the department, and they encourage all those who are interested to take advantage of those training opportunities, and that would include the people in these categories that are under discussion.

So there is no program designed or geared specifically to them, but they are encouraged to participate in a very wide variety of training opportunities that are there through the department.

Ms. Friesen: I realize that we have actually passed this line. This was on 16.1(d). My questions were really coming from the line that said that this department, Human Resource Services, was responsible for continued career development initiatives for people in affirmative action positions.

Is that something that has changed, or has it always been the policy--or how has that line been fulfilled? I guess that would be the most straightforward question.

Mrs. McIntosh: Just to use one example, we have people who have been moved from a clerical position into a more senior position, and they are being trained on the job, so to speak. At the end of the on-the-job training, their skills are upgraded as they are moving into the new position, and then when the training is complete, they are reclassified into that.

It is individualized in that sense, and people are encouraged to accept those kinds of advances. We do have specific programs for members of all designated groups, so for females, in particular, moving up the ladder, so to speak, from clerical into management and receiving training once they are there, specifically for what they need to do while they are there, will result in a reclassification and promotion for them.

Ms. Friesen: What I am hearing then is these are not specific to the department, that they are general across the civil service, and the department's role then would be to identify and encourage people to participate in those.

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, it is both, and we do have one visible minority person right now who is in that particular situation, who has been trained and has been given the opportunity to move into high-level computer technology; just that very example that I gave.

Ms. Friesen: I guess, for the record, I am moving back to 16.1(e) that we are on, which deals with Financial and Administrative Services. I wanted to ask the minister about the proposed increase in Supplies and Services and in Equipment Rental.

The Supplies and Services, first, goes from $79,900 to $142,600. Can the minister give us an account of what is anticipated there?

Mrs. McIntosh: I think if we had "rent" at the beginning it would make more sense, because what we are talking about is that item we talked about yesterday where we had the 270 and some odd thousand dollars and we had within that fluctuations. This is a rental accommodation line that we are talking about. It is harking back to that same item we discussed yesterday. I think if they put "rent" at the beginning it would--instead of right now it looks like it is renting and equipment, which it could be, but it is also renting lease space.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, actually there are two lines there. There is one equipment rental which goes from 54 to 115, but the one I was asking for first was Supplies and Services from 79 to 142.

Mrs. McIntosh: Okay, the 115 that you are looking at there is one of the parts of the breakdown of the 142 in the next column. I am advised that in there we have accommodation costs.

* (1730)

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, yes, I made a mistake on that line.

The equipment rental then is the portion of the increased rental for this year that is charged back to this department for the sort of Ness-two-sides-of-Portage Avenue move. Okay, I understand.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 1. Administration and Finance (e) Financial and Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $905,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $218,600--pass.

1.(f) Management Information Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $597,000.

Ms. Mihychuk: My question is in regard to the proposed student ID system. Is this the appropriate line for discussion of that item, and if not, could you let us know where that would be included?

Mrs. McIntosh: 16.5(c) apparently is the line that would come under.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, I would like to explore a little bit the connection between the Management Information Services and the student information services that does come up later.

Some of the material collected seems similar, at least in the bald outline that is in the appropriation books.

Could the minister give us perhaps a brief description of the differences between the two and are there overlapping areas, or are we in a process now where some aspect of Management Information Services are going to be phased out and added to the student information services?

Mrs. McIntosh: Both the MIS and the EIS are in the same branch. One, the MIS will gather all of the information in. The EIS--I am getting it backward here, sorry.

The EIS gathers all the information in from the divisions, so that is information from schools, that detail. The MIS provides the technology to the departments for that. One is coming in and one is going out, and they both work in the same area, the same branch.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, when the minister says EIS, is that the same as the student academic record system? Is that the area that she was identifying under 16, or are we looking at three different systems here?

Mrs. McIntosh: The schools information system which was called EIS but it is one and the same.

Ms. Friesen: So we have two systems, one which deals--and this is the later one, the student, formerly EIS--with the gathering of information from schools and school divisions.

When I look at the annual report for Management Information Services Branch, when it talks about the production systems of the school personnel system, the public schools finance system, the independent study program, the student academic record system--and I am on page 14 of that annual report. Is that then talking about the SIS, the former EIS? It is dealt with in the annual report under the Management Information Services and that is what led me to think that there appeared to be considerable overlap.

Mrs. McIntosh: We are essentially talking about two systems, SARS, which is the old system. I say old; it is the one that has been in place. It just strictly collects high school marks. All the high school marks go in, are stored and spat out. That exists right now. In the developing stage, not yet ready for implementation is what is called an EIS which would be a more comprehensive information and data-gathering system than SARS. That is still in the development stage.

When it is ultimately ready and has passed all the criteria that we have that we need it to meet, it will then replace SARS and you will have ultimately a more comprehensive--more ability to trace without having it moved from school to school to school. You will still be able to have those records followed and not lost and so on.

* (1740)

Ms. Friesen: That replacement of SARS is what is discussed on the--I should get that number right--16.5(c) was it? Okay. The other elements under the management information system which are in the unit that is called the application development unit also deal with external agencies and public schools, the personnel system, the independent study program and then some which are internal, the voucher finance system, and I assume the public schools finance system.

So some of those are internal, some of those are external. Do those still remain under Management Information Services? Are some of those functions going to be moved to this other line?

Mrs. McIntosh: Eventually, ultimately, we expect that all the external systems that are out there right now will become the EIS systems, and they will work in concert with school divisions, gathering data and forwarding data electronically through technology.

They will also service the department, giving us our most up-to-date data, so that we have an ability to, not just in terms of being able to provide information for the students' benefit, but also so that we can track data, statistics, standards, mobility, all of those things we are asked about and we need to have in mind as we plan educational functions and programs for Manitobans.

As I indicated, ultimately all the external systems will come under that. The old systems then will be phased out. We are not there yet, because we still have criteria that need to be met for our own standards, but the technology is certainly there and extremely exciting. The potential for the kind of background that I had as a child, highly mobile, moving from school to school to school, is wonderful because it would certainly enhance moving into new systems and moving into new areas in ways that were not there for children in the past.

Mr. Sale: I wonder if the minister could outline when she expects to have a beta system ready to go on this for a beta test.

Mrs. McIntosh: We do have a line that we will be coming to that delves into this in full, and at that time--I think that might be a more appropriate time to go into it because it is a very large area. The technological work is well underway, but there are still a lot of other questions that need to be answered in terms of exactly how the information will be used, privacy protection, a whole wide variety of items like that, so I cannot tell you right now exactly when it will be up and running.

I know the technology component is available in there, but I need to get those kinds of projections from the staff who have been involved in working on it. I come new to the department. I have been here four weeks now, and those types of specific issues and details on projects that are underway I do not have at my fingertips, but when we come to that line, I could probably be able to give you a more complete answer.

Mr. Sale: I thank the minister for that answer. I am quite prepared to come back at that time, but maybe I could flesh out the kinds of things that I would like to ask at that time so that staff might be prepared.

There has been some discussion about the unique identifier, as to whether the unique identifier would have use beyond education. Is there a plan to develop a single provincial-wide unique identifier for every Manitoban, essentially assigned, well, probably at birth or whenever that person first comes in contact with a provincial system, whether it is the medicare system or whether it is the school system, but is that part of the EIS proposed plan, so that information around how is this identifier, and that leads into the questions the minister alluded to, which were dealing with confidentiality and that sort of thing.

Secondly, could the minister provide the identification of the companies or consultants who are involved in developing this program, or is it being developed entirely on a house-staff basis?

Thirdly, could the minister share with the committee the degree to which the current school divisions of Manitoba are using off-the-shelf or off-the-shelf-modified programs which do in very large measure what the minister is talking about? I refer to companies like Columbia, Trevlac and other software suppliers. There are even a couple of Manitoba suppliers which I think probably a very few schools may still be using, Norcon, being one that comes to mind. Well, I am not sure whether Norcon is even still in business, but it is a small Manitoba company.

Fourth, could the minister respond to the question of the current student records branch, which I believe is in Roblin, is it, or Russell--Russell? When I was last aware of that branch, which is now a couple of years ago but some years after I was fired by that department, I think there was, at that time, something like eight years of records unentered into any data systems. I would appreciate the minister letting us know what the backlog is in that branch. I would assume that since SARS is basically at this point I think an archive system that is--it is a historic system with no recent data in it as far as I am aware, no recent exam results in any case. Perhaps the fairer way to ask that is: What is the current status of the SARS system? What is the data backlog and what are the plans, if there are plans, to deal with that? It may be that you are planning simply to wait until you have EIS and then deal with it all at once.

* (1750)

Those are some of the questions that I would appreciate being able to get some answers on at the time that we deal with this issue. I would like to say, I know the minister considers me argumentative--and I do not particularly want to be argumentative on this, but it troubles me to no end that we make a great deal about policy evolution in Manitoba in terms of education programming, and unless something has happened in the last year between the time Mr. Manness appeared at Kelvin High School on a panel at which he confirmed that there was no student information system and that there were no student records available on computer for use in any kind of way that one might study retention rates or drop-out rates or patterns, course patterns or anything like that, then I have become very concerned about the basis on which we are making far-reaching decisions about program evolution and change.

Because so far as I know, for example--and Mr. Manness at this time at least said this was the case--all of the drop-out data, retention-rate data apparently, again according to Mr. Manness, comes from StatsCan and not from Manitoba sources. That is not from the Department of Education being able to speak about the retention of children from kindergarten to 12 or whatever.

I hope the minister will really dig into this area, because this is not an area that our government could be proud of in the 1980s, in the early '80s. We were in a position in 1986, '87, '88 to recover the damage that was accruing at that time. That plan was ended by Mr. Derkach who was then the Minister of Education. He froze that program. From that time forward there have been attempts to solve the problem.

In 1988-89, Manitoba was wider-regarded as being in a leadership position and that was at a time when your government had taken office and we were working on the initiative to try and bring student records up to some kind of semblance of usefulness. We had conferences in Winnipeg at which people were looking at what we were proposing to do with great interest. Since that time, we appear to have moved in a completely new direction, which is to develop an in-house solution to something which school divisions across North America, far larger than Manitoba, have long since had solutions for.

School divisions in large American cities, with far larger enrollments than Manitoba has, have run information systems for years. The Trevlac system, the Columbia system, both of which were tendered in the original request for proposals which we made, both of those systems have the capacity to do exactly what the minister spoke of and that is to do electronic data transfer, to do electronic student record transfer, to do divisional roll-ups, to do statistical examination of patterns of course enrollment, course drop-out by gender, by age, by family type. Those capacities are there.

Manitoba, at one time, owned a site licence for the province for that system for which we paid $200,000. That program was installed in, I think, 200 schools before I left my position--out of our 700-and-something schools--and some divisions had it installed in all their schools and were using it as a divisional system--Brandon, Pine Creek, several others. It is in wide use in Fort Garry. It is in increasing use in Winnipeg No. 1. St. James, as you probably know, used Columbia. It is also a very good system.

So I am really puzzled about this whole area as to why it has taken seven years and we still do not have a beta system.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. As agreed, I would like to suggest that this section of the Committee of Supply temporarily interrupt these proceedings so that Madam Speaker may resume the Chair to permit the House to determine whether there is agreement to amend the previously agreed to sitting hours for tomorrow morning.

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Agreed and so ordered.