LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Monday, May 10, 1993
The House met at 8 p.m.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
(continued)
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent Sections)
FAMILY SERVICES
Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): The Minister's Salary, item 1.(a)‑‑pass.
This completes the Estimates of the Department
of Family Services.
Resolution 9.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $7,628,200 for Family Services, Administration and Finance,
for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994‑‑pass.
The next set of Estimates that will be
considered by this section of the Committee of Supply are the Estimates for the
Department of Education and Training.
Shall we briefly recess to allow the minister
and the critics the opportunity to prepare for the commencement of the next set
of Estimates?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: No?
Okay, we are rolling.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Does the honourable Minister of Education and
Training have an opening statement?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): Yes, thank you, Mr. Deputy Chair.
I am pleased to introduce the Estimates for
the Department of Education and Training for 1993‑94. I would like to set a context for this
introduction by giving you an indication of my department's accomplishments and
then describe where we will direct our energies in the coming year.
It has been a little over a year since I
became the Minister of Education and Training.
In that time I have made personal visits to schools across
I have also spoken to our partners in
education, and I have heard them express their concerns. In addition, I have gotten to know members of
the staff of my department, and I have come to appreciate their dedication and
their hard work. It has been a
challenging time for all of us in the department but an exciting one too. I truly believe that the course we have
chosen to guide education into the next century is the right one. That does not mean, of course, that we do not
face some considerable challenges, but I am confident that we will meet them.
We have begun a process of educational reform
in this province that I believe will successfully steer us into the
future. In fact,
The review of The Public Schools Act: The report of the panel has just been released,
and our education partners are now taking the time to review the 106
recommendations. These recommendations
have organizational, legal and financial implications on our current education
system and will eventually contribute to the new legislation.
The task force on Distance Education and
Technology: I will be releasing the
report of the third and the final stage of this task force shortly. I expect that the report's recommendations
will positively affect our technological capacity in education and help meet
the needs of Manitobans in all areas of the province.
Francophone Governance: We will introduce legislation in this session
to implement the governance structure, with the election of regional committees
and school boards taking place this fall.
A committee, chaired by former Chief Justice Alfred Monnin, will work in
partnership with parents and other interested individuals on the model and the
implementation of Francophone Governance.
High School Review: Many of the strategies recommended in
Answering the Challenge have been implemented.
Current work is focusing on instructional methods, improvement in
curricula and in the learning environments.
The University Review: The commission has concluded its hearings and
has received 237 briefs or submissions.
These are being reviewed and analyzed for the commission's
consideration. The members hope that they will have a draft report or an
interim report ready this summer.
* (2005)
The consolidation of all skills training
initiatives within my department: A new
division has been created within my department that brings together all the
skills training initiatives of government in one place. Consolidation will result in a more effective
delivery of programs and services.
Workforce 2000: This is an initiative that ensures ongoing
training within the workplace so that knowledge and skills remain up to
date. The number of partnerships in this
area is steadily increasing.
College Governance: The incorporation of the community colleges
under boards of governors will allow the colleges to be more responsive to the
needs of the community in the education and training area.
These initiatives have already resulted in
real educational benefits to Manitobans, such as expanded high school, college
and university program offerings, higher performance standards for students and
a greater community involvement. I think
you will have to admit they amount to an impressive record of action designed
to address the challenges of the future.
These reform initiatives are also designed to ensure that our programs
and institutions reflect our commitment to lifelong learning.
I would also like you to note that each of
these has involved consultation with our partners in education and training.
Educational reform has been and will continue to be a consultative
process. My department and our
government are committed to meaningful participation and openness and have
accepted the responsibilities and the rewards that come with these.
At a recent educational forum, I described my
vision of the future of education in this way.
It will involve partnerships of all sorts, including those among
parents, schools, business and industry, between schools and universities and
between community colleges and schools.
Education in the future will also be accountable and responsive to the
needs and the aspirations of Manitobans.
So you can see that the partnerships and public consultation with all
members of the community are an important part of the future. They are also the means that we will use to
get there.
Manitobans know that the responsibility for
educating and training our citizens is a shared one. Each of us has a role to play in the
process. The department provides
leadership to ensure that there are high quality education and training
programs for Manitobans throughout their lifetimes so that they develop their
own potential and contribute to the economic, social and cultural life of
To ensure that the future of education is a
sound one, we have had to make some tough decisions. We can no longer ignore the fiscal challenges
facing us. We must take action to reduce
and to eliminate the budget deficit.
Manitobans have sent us a very clear signal that they do not want to pay
more taxes. They expect us to eliminate
the deficit by keeping our spending under control. They also believe in accountability and our
ability to do more with less.
In February I announced a 2 percent reduction
in provincial funding to school divisions for the 1993‑94 school
year. Per pupil support to independent
schools was reduced by the same amount.
In keeping with our commitment to taxpayers to restrict increases in
taxes, I also announced in February a 2 percent limit on the amount of
additional money school divisions can raise through property taxation in a
fiscal year. That limit remains in
effect for the next two years. The
Educational Support Levy rates, however, stay the same in 1993 as in 1992.
It is important during these difficult times
that all public sector organizations control spending. Therefore, grants to school divisions for
administration have been reduced. School
divisions now have an option of closing their schools for up to 10 days
allocated for in‑service or administration. We have already introduced a similar measure
in the provincial government for both MLAs and civil servants.
The schools finance branch has worked closely
with the Advisory Committee on Education Finance last spring and summer. They
made recommendations which I accepted in six areas, and these have resulted in
better recognition of smaller class size in small rural high schools, the
enhancement of Level II and Level III funding for special needs children,
additional funding for northern divisions, funding for Distance Education and
fairer funding for transportation. Also,
phase‑in funding for '93 and '94 will assist school divisions in making
the transition to the new funding formula announced in '92‑93.
In February, I announced a 2 percent reduction
in support to universities and a cap on tuition increases and tuition changes
for visa students. I asked that the
universities examine their spending and identify cost savings in the face of
extraordinary fiscal challenges. Again,
it is important during these difficult times for public sector organizations to
control their spending. The time has come to find creative and innovative ways
of controlling spending while ensuring a high quality of education and training
for Manitobans. We have both recognized
the need and found ways of doing so.
Meeting the wide‑ranging education and
training needs of Manitobans is a high priority for this government. One of the ways we intend to do that is with
the introduction of a new education information system within my department. Its comprehensive database, which includes
information on students, schools, divisions, teachers and professional staff,
courses and facilities, will be used for planning and developing policy.
* (2010)
Now I would like to turn to other initiatives
and issues affecting K‑12 education.
I have spent a good deal of time this past year consulting with people
who have a stake in the improvement of our education system. My consultation with educational partners
have been very successful in identifying issues in need of attention. Among those we have identified are preventing
violence in the schools, parental involvement, early literacy, teacher
training, student and program assessment, vocational and career education. We will have an opportunity in a series of
Education Innovation fora to consult on ways of addressing these issues as
well.
I recognize that violence in our schools is a
very serious problem. It is a problem in
the whole of society, and it will not be resolved by educators alone. We need to work together. We have already
begun forming partnerships that include parents, schools, community agencies
and various government departments. We have worked with school divisions to
create a resource list of 80 people who can provide support in dealing with
disruptive students.
My department has also been presenting a
series of training workshops on prosocial skills. These workshops focus on managing student
conduct and conflict mediation in schools.
The response of those attending has been very positive.
My department also organizes second step
workshops that provide support for violence prevention. One hundred and twenty‑three educators
have been trained to be trainers in this series. In addition, 222 educators have been trained
to implement violence prevention programs in classrooms.
The Student Support branch has funded school
programs on Behaviour Management and Violence Prevention in 62 schools in 15
divisions. The $358,000 allocated to
these programs underscores our commitment to this issue.
Also, an interdepartmental committee has been
formed that includes Education and Training, Justice, Family Services and
Health. This committee is looking at
ways of improving the co‑ordination of services in various areas
including serving students with profound emotional or behavioural disorders.
As you can see, we are working hard to combat
violence in the schools. We know we need
community involvement to be successful in meeting this challenge. We know that parental involvement has a very
positive effect on student attendance, achievement and discipline. When parents are involved in their children's
education, students have greater motivation and a more positive attitude
towards homework and school. It is not
surprising then that these students do not usually become school dropouts.
My department is actively reviewing the most
effective ways of involving parents. The
Student Support branch recently completed a study entitled Parents and Schools,
Partners in Education. This describes
the benefits of parental involvement and the dynamics of involvement programs.
Both the Curriculum Services and Native
Education branches have created parent guides on a variety of subjects. The Dauphin office of the Native Education branch
has held a parent empowerment conference that dealt with, among other things,
parent‑teacher interviews and legal rights.
Recommendation on parental involvement is also
included in the report of the legislative reform panel. I personally believe that increasing the
involvement of parents in the school system will be an effective way of
addressing many of the social challenges in the classroom. We also know that parents play a crucial role
in early literacy.
The issue of teacher training is a concern as
well. We want to make sure that teachers
have the appropriate training to meet the demands of both the present and the
future. That means ensuring that
preservice as well as in‑service training is relevant to them.
We must find innovative ways of providing
opportunities for ongoing professional development. My department provides supports to teachers
in the use of effective instructional methods in the classroom, and we know
that the ability to collaborate and work in teams is important for students to
have. Co‑operative learning has become an important practice.
The Student Support branch, in conjunction
with the federal Stay‑in‑School Initiative and the Winnipeg
Education Centre, is organizing a co‑operative learning program for
Manitobans have also told us that they want a
more clear picture of how well students are performing in the province. They
know that our future economic well‑being depends on it.
* (2015)
Teachers also want to know that what they
teach and how they teach is appropriate to children's abilities and needs. Our approach to student and program
assessment has five prongs and involves the inclusion of student assessment
guidelines in curriculum guides, cyclical assessments in major subject areas,
the use of departmental examinations in the last year of high school,
professional development activities to enhance educators' abilities to assess
student achievement and collaboration with the faculties of education to ensure
that teachers in training develop a wide repertoire of assessment and
evaluation skills and activities.
Discussions with educators and other partners
in education have identified the need to have strong programs that incorporate
what we have always thought of as the basics and the new basics. According to
the Economic Council of Canada's employability profile, the new basics
comprise: academic skills; communicating,
thinking and learning skills; personal management skills such as positive
attitudes and behaviours, responsibility and adaptivity; and teamwork skills
such as working together.
We are working with our partners in education
to devise strong programs. An
interorganizational curriculum advisory committee has recently been established
to provide input on curriculum matters.
Currently under review are the new science and math curricula.
Our consultations have not stopped at our
border either. We have also been working
with our partners in the western provinces to develop computer‑assisted
courses in math and science.
Recently completed was an interactive video
disk pilot project for middle‑year science students. This action research project took place in
six rural and six urban schools. The
results have been very exciting. They
suggest that the use of this technology may be an important way in encouraging
greater participation and achievement of all students, particularly girls, in
science.
This next year, we will continue strengthening
our programs. Strong student achievement and high‑quality programs are
important elements of future reform.
The last issue I will deal with in K to 12
education is vocational or career education.
We want to ensure that students making a transition from school to work
have a smooth passage. Providing work experience, co‑operative education,
business education partnership programs and the skills for independent living
course at the high school level gives students an opportunity to use skills
learned in school and develop new ones they can use when they enter the
workforce.
Mentorship and job shadowing programs give
them a taste of the real world of work, and decide whether an occupation is for
them or not. Funded vocational programs
have industry advisory committees that play a role in defining expected
outcomes and ensure that the skills students learn adequately prepare them for
the workplace.
The recent switch to unit credit funding for
vocational programs encourages a wide variety of students to become
involved. The new funding formula makes
it possible for all students, including the academically inclined, to take the
course as electives. The unit credit
funding formula has been widely praised across
We are very concerned that all students can
make the transition from high school to work or further education and training
and that Manitobans have opportunities to pursue lifelong learning. That is one of the reasons that we published
Manitoba Prospects, a career‑planning tabloid, this winter just before
the two‑career symposia. The
tabloid and career symposia work well together to inform students of vocational
options and their educational or training requirements.
* (2020)
That brings us to the initiatives in the area
of post‑secondary education and training.
We have just made major changes in the post‑secondary education
and training area to consolidate all government skills training initiatives
within a single division. Programs have
been transferred to our newly created Advanced Education and Skills Training
division from the Departments of Labour, Family Services and Rural Development
and from my department's former Post‑secondary Adult and Continuing
Education, or PACE division.
The new division will oversee the delivery of
programs to meet wide‑ranging education and training needs of all
Manitobans, including programs for youth, for employed and underemployed
adults, for various equity groups including aboriginals, women and the
disabled, for social assistance recipients, some of whom are single mothers,
and for Manitobans generally seeking higher levels of skill training. Apprenticeship programs are also included in
this division. The division will offer
programs that will be delivered in a variety of settings for both sequential
and nonsequential learners. The
reorganization will ensure that education and skills training initiatives are
linked, effectively co‑ordinated and strategically focused, to improve
the employability of all Manitobans.
Our challenge in making these changes has been
to respond to education and training needs of all Manitobans in an efficient
and a co‑ordinated way that will support the skill requirements necessary
to make
In partnership with Employment and Immigration
Canada, we have already established a management committee with representatives
from both levels of government to ensure that the spirit of the agreement is
fulfilled. In
College governance is another step we have
taken to improve our capabilities in the labour market area. Through this initiative we are changing
institutional arrangements to address current and evolving labour market
needs. As of April 1 the three community
colleges in
Our Workforce 2000 initiative continues to be
our key response to an increased demand for work‑based training that
meets the skill needs of industry. In
collaborative effort with the private sector, Workforce 2000 has forged new
partnerships and new models of training through its industry‑wide human
resource planning component. To date,
May 1991 to March 31, 1993, 53 sectoral partnership agreements have been put in
place.
Within the area of training incentives to
small‑ and medium‑sized businesses, 1,704 contracts have been
initiated and, further, 285 contracts with large companies have been signed to
provide support through payroll tax refunds.
These two initiatives have resulted in training for 51,238 employees
since the program's inception in May 1991.
* (2025)
Through the initiatives that I have described
for you, my department is addressing important issues and making significant
improvements to
I am proud of the members of my department who
have recently been honoured with awards.
Last summer, Physical Education Curriculum Consultant Rick LaPage was
given the R. Tait McKenzie Award of Honour by the Canadian Association for
Health, Physical Education and Recreation.
In November, the director of the Literacy
Office, Devron Gaber, was honoured by the Association of Canadian Community
Colleges and Xerox
Just recently, Guy Roy, Assistant Deputy
Minister of the Bureau de l'Education Francaise, received a Canada 125 Award
for significant contribution to community and
I am proud of my department and its
achievements. I have every confidence
that the measures we are taking now to reform the system will ensure that
Manitobans have access to the highest quality education and training
programs. I know that Manitobans will be
prepared for the 21st Century long before they enter it.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the Minister of Education and
Training for those comments.
Does the critic of the official opposition,
the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman), have any opening comments?
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I have a brief comment. I wonder if the minister has a copy of her
statement that we could have. The
Hansard for this evening will not be along for maybe a few days. The afternoon
Hansards are usually quite prompt, but the evening ones are not, so I am just
wondering if we could get that before this evening is over so that we would
have it for tomorrow's sitting.
Mrs. Vodrey:
We will make a copy for the member.
Mr. Plohman: I
want to deal with a few of the issues the minister has brought forward in her
statement. I am sure we will have a
chance to deal with more of them throughout the Estimates.
My colleague the member for Wolseley (Ms.
Friesen) is the post‑secondary critic, and she will be dealing with many
of the issues involving the community colleges and the universities. As well, the Labour critic will deal with
some of the training areas and the employment enhancement and so on that have
been consolidated in this department for the first time.
So I will be dealing basically with K to 12
and the concerns that we have with the minister's handling of that area of the
public school system. Of course, K to 12
also involves the private school system and the concerns we have with the
government's action there.
If we look back over the last five years, it
is quite clear to us that the government has not placed a high priority on the
public education system. I released
figures in the House, and the minister indicated to the press that she had
other figures that show‑‑and she has even included it in letters to
individuals that she has funded, and the government has funded, public
education, elementary and secondary education for the last five years at above
the rate of inflation.
The figures that we have, which are from
Statistics Canada and are figures that I believe do not mislead, do not
misrepresent the picture but tell the facts to the public when provided to
them, would indicate to us that the minister and her government have
significantly underfunded public education and eroded the quality of education
and the ability of school divisions to provide quality of education over the
last five years on the basis that funding has not kept pace with
inflation. It has also resulted in an
offloading factor, which means that local school divisions have had to increase
the local levy in order to offset the reductions from the province or the loss
in real purchasing power of the dollars provided.
* (2030)
If you look through, since 1989‑90, we
could see a 6.1 percent increase in public school funding. In '90‑91 it was 4.6 percent; '91‑92,
2.05 percent; '92‑93, 3.05 percent; and '93‑94, minus 2 percent,
for a total of 14.2 percent in the increase to the public school system as
announced by the minister in January, February each year, in total funding by
the province.
The increase in the inflation rate over that
same time has been 5 percent in '89‑90; 4.4 percent in '90‑91; 5.6
percent in '91‑92; 1.5 percent in '92‑93; and 1.5 percent in '93‑94. So the inflation increase has been 18
percent.
So there is a difference of almost 4 percent
between what has been provided by the government in increased funding to the
public education system versus inflation.
Having said that, the real crunch and crisis
has come about this year with the rather significant decrease in funding of 2
percent. When you combine that with the
1.5 percent inflation, that is like a 3.5 percent drop in real dollars to the
public education system. When you also
consider that several school divisions see cuts of 3, 4, 5, 6 and, I believe as
high as, 9 percent‑‑the minister will be providing those figures I
hope at the closest opportunity for us so that we will be able to see exactly
how the impact of the minus 2 percent has been felt in the various school
divisions.
What we have seen there is a significant drop
in school division funding. The variance
between the minus 2 percent and the other figures that I mentioned is not
always directly related to the relative wealth of the school division. Many school divisions that are the very
poorest have felt the biggest cuts.
What it tells us is that the minister has not
attempted to ensure fairness or an easing of the impacts with the reductions.
In other words, equalization has not been realistic in terms of the impact on
these school divisions, so divisions like Transcona‑Springfield are
feeling a real pinch this year after a reduction last year. As a matter of fact, they have been required
to actually reduce the local levy by some $41 per household. Now we will find out, I guess, if the
minister has done anything to ease that impact for the school division, because
reducing it on top of the cut they took from the minister this year means a
serious erosion in the quality of education in the Transcona school division.
In addition to that, because of Bill 22 we are
seeing some school divisions eliminating professional development days, not
because, as the minister says, it is a matter of an option that is available to
them, a matter of choice really, in the decision. Whether they want to cut professional
development days or to cut classrooms is what it amounts to‑‑cut
teachers, cut classes. They really do
not have a choice, so they are having to eliminate professional development
days, whereas other school divisions are not doing that. So you are going to see a tremendous
variation from school division to school division with this new policy that the
government has put in place.
It is going to be chaos out there for
teachers, and I think it is a tremendous erosion of a very important activity,
one that the government has targeted for some time. I do not think it is based on sound
educational data that in‑service days and professional development are somehow
ineffective or not worth paying for, or whatever the case might be, but on what
they believe or they perceive to be, or what they believe to be, on the basis
of polling, public opinion that says professional development days are
something the public does not agree with or does not support.
So I think the government is implementing
their own agenda based on polling, on political opportunism, as opposed to on
the basis of sound educational data and decision making. Of course, in doing that they are going to
incur the wrath of many people in the province and the teachers and school
divisions will be the primary public that will very much object to this, and I
think rightfully so, and will have our support in so doing.
What we have seen by this minister is an
intrusion into local decision making by way of Bill 16. The minister writes in all of her letters
that it is to keep property taxes down.
Again, we do not find that kind of a statement any more credible than
the statement that she has funded Education above inflation. In fact, the property taxes have been
increased by this government substantially, not only this year has the $75 and
the $250 minimum for many homeowners meant a much larger increase, but in addition
to that, over the last couple of years, there has been substantial offloading
by the government onto local taxpayers as a result of what I talked about
earlier, the funding at lower than inflation.
As a result of that funding that was not
adequate, many times applied very unfairly because of the equalization
mechanism in the funding formula not being sufficient or sensitive enough to
realistically respond to many of the problems that small school divisions are
dealing with, we have seen then a massive offloading in property taxation.
So we have seen the offloading take place over
the last number of years and then a major increase by this government. Yet the
minister writes in her letters time and time again to the public, when they
have expressed concerns, that her only desire in placing a cap on the special
requirement of school divisions is to keep property taxes down.
I do not blame them for being very cynical
about reading stuff like that from the minister after what her government has
done, and even what her government did right after the announcements were made
in the funding of Education. The
minister had to be aware of what was being contemplated as the Minister of
Finance (Mr. Manness) was preparing his budget‑‑this $75 increase
right across the board. People look at
that, and maybe they do not all notice it right now because they do not have
their tax bills, so they will not see it right away and they will not connect
the two. That is obviously what the
government hopes. When we are looking at
it from the total picture, we see immediately that when the minister is saying,
well, we do not want property taxes to increase and then we increase them by
$75, there is no other way to describe it but a hypocritical way of approaching
it.
I hope the minister has some way to explain
herself in writing these letters and justifying it on the basis she wants to
keep property taxes down when, in fact, that is not what her government has
done at all, especially property taxes, and especially in light of what has
happened over the last four or five years in offloading the taxation onto local
property owners. So we will want to
pursue that with the minister.
We want to explore the impact of these cuts on
public schools throughout the province and just see how the quality of education
is standing up to scrutiny right across the province from division to division,
from school to school.
* (2040)
In addition to that, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I
am going to raise concerns with the minister about the cuts in the services to
special needs kids, especially as it applies to the Diagnostic Centre, the
layoff of clinicians. The minister is
very proud to say that she has increased funding to Levels II and III Special
Needs categories, but she never speaks about that in the same breath as the
cuts, the 66 layoffs of clinicians. When
she talks about the clinicians, she always talks about a $45,000 grant, but she
never talks about the fact that the actual costs to the school divisions are
higher than $45,000 when you consider all of the operating costs. So somehow those school divisions are having
to find additional dollars to employ these people, if they will be employed in
their divisions, for the operating costs associated with it and perhaps even
some salary costs.
There are additional costs. It is an offload onto the local school
divisions, and the minister should admit that rather than trying to skirt the
issue with regard to special needs kids and the impact of her policies‑‑[interjection]
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) has a comment?
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I also want to raise
the issue of the access cuts‑‑university social allowances, the
cuts, the program that was in place‑‑or the Student Social
Allowances Program, I should say, the Access cuts, a substantial amount, I
believe, over 16 percent, the elimination of bursaries. This is something that it is rather mind
boggling to consider that the minister has eliminated these support programs to
so many students.
The Minister of Finance sits there with a big
grin on his face. He thinks all of this
is funny. He should think about what
this does to the kids who may not be as affluent or have as much of an
opportunity that he had when he went to university, or perhaps his children
will have.
There are many kids in this province,
especially with the hikes in tuition fees, who just are not going to be able to
afford to go to university‑‑many kids in poverty, many
disadvantaged people who have no way to break out of the cycle of poverty‑‑yet,
again, just as was pointed out by many of our critics during the Estimates of
Family Services, these are the people attacked by this government, the most
vulnerable, the students.
We see it with the Access Programs. We see it with the social allowances
program. We see it with the elimination
of the bursaries, and we see it with the cuts in the clinicians. It is really something that when I said mind
boggling, it is so unfortunate that the minister, her department and the
government that she is a part of have not seen what they are doing to these
people, or did not care enough, even if they saw it, to stop those kinds of
negative decisions.
We want the minister to be responsible for
some of the things she has inherited from other departments and had a part in
making of the decisions as well, because I want to say to the minister, under
employment enhancement, the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) did
not want to talk about the Human Resource
The Minister of Education is now responsible
for those programs and therefore is responsible for explaining those decisions
under her Estimates. I can assure her
that we will be pursuing with the utmost vigour the elimination of the Human
Resource Opportunity Centre and Program in the
The minister, I hope, will have a better
explanation of that elimination, that cut, than her colleague the Minister of
Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) had when he tried to explain the
unexplainable with regard to the crisis centre in Flin Flon‑‑absolutely
indefensible, unexplainable in terms of any rationale that could be judged to
be fair.
It was an insidious, political decision, one
they thought they could get away with, so they did it without regard for the
impact on the people affected. I hope
that the minister has a better explanation for what she is responsible for in
the cuts under the Human Resource
We also want to talk to her about the Distance
Education cuts. She talks about the
Distance Education and technology initiatives, and yet we see substantial
reductions in dollars for those in those areas.
The minister will have to explain how she can rationalize an initiative
with those kinds of reductions. [interjection]
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) says she
will. Now, he may have just woken up
here, but I just finished explaining how his colleague the Minister of Family
Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) was totally unable to explain the decision of the
Crisis Centre in Flin Flon, for example, other than what we can only assume was
the reason, the rationale, that it was an insidious, political decision by this
government. There was no rationale at
all that would be something that would make any of us feel, any of the people
in the area feel comfortable with.
We will want to look at the legislative reform
document that the minister took six months to get translated and released. We will want to know why she sat on it for
all that time and why she was afraid to release it publicly, other than the
fact that the decisions being made were contradicting many of the
recommendations.
We will want to know what the government's
position is on many of these recommendations since she has kept it at arm's
length and said, well, this is just a panel, a board, that has handed in a
report. Now it is time to go and, I
guess, consult some more on these issues.
We will want to know what the minister's position is on these
recommendations. Where does she stand on
this? Where does the government stand on
the recommendations that are included in that report?
We will want to pursue the issue of provincial
and national testing with the minister.
What does she hope to gain? Is
she ensuring that this is being applied fairly for students in
The issues of violence in the schools, the
impact of poverty, what the government is doing about it or not doing about it‑‑we
would contend that the government is contributing to the growing poverty in
this province. How is that impacting on
fair and equal opportunities for education?
What kind of partnerships has the minister
really developed? She talks about consultation, and yet I am hearing all over
that people feel uncomfortable about what the minister has actually done with
consultation. I was told, for example,
that the
Point of Order
Mrs. Vodrey: I
do not know how the member thinks he has got that information. I would dispute his information on that, and
I do not think that he has any ability to have a look at my schedule or what
the conflicting events have been for the past two events that he has mentioned.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister did not have a point
of order. It is a dispute over the
facts.
* * *
Mr. Plohman:
Well, I thought we were going to get some more revealing information
from the minister. I thought she would
at least try to have the courtesy to explain to the members of the Legislative
Assembly why she was not there rather than simply saying that I did not look at
her schedule. I can only go by what
groups and organizations have told me in terms of how the minister has
responded, and we can only assume that the minister tends to avoid these kinds
of gatherings.
* (2050)
I do not think that is contributing to a
consultative mode. I do not think that indicates that the minister wants to participate
in public discussion, hear what the public has to say, if she avoids attending
these kinds of forums. I hope that she
will not be doing that in the future because, clearly, that would indicate to
us that she is making very little attempt to consult in a formal way or an
informal way with the educational community.
So I guess, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the
Estimates process will be one of a great deal of confrontation. However, I hope that we will be able to have
a productive discussion in many areas. I
am certainly looking forward to it as critic, having had the opportunity to be
critic for about three or four different departments and as minister for three
different departments, but never in Education.
It is a learning experience for me, and I look forward to this first
opportunity to be involved in this process in the Department of Education,
especially as it applies to K to 12 and, as I indicated, my colleague the
member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) will be dealing primarily with those issues
of post‑secondary education.
In concluding my remarks, I have to say that
the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) that we see at the present time has
presided this past year over a terribly negative process of decision making in
the
We can see that with the situation in Family
Services, as we discussed this afternoon the issue of the crisis centre in Flin
Flon‑‑no contingency plan, no alternatives. We saw that with the issue of clinicians,
when we find out that many small school divisions are not going to be able to
hire the clinicians with the kind of expertise and in the numbers that they
require for their children.
So it indicates to me that the cut was made,
but yet the minister did not even consider, well, let us look at reform. Maybe
a regional delivery of some of these services among several of those school
divisions would be the way to go. Have
that in place, give notice a year ahead of time. Do not work on the Minister of Finance's (Mr.
Manness) timetable, where he says I want 10 percent this month, find 10
percent. That does not make for
planning, and I have to say the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) may not
always be totally responsible for that lack of planning and foresight.
It may be the Minister of Finance by his
timetable, because the Minister of Finance did not plan for the reductions, for
the massive increase in his deficit this year.
He should have known that. He is
the minister responsible for deficits now.
It is not a label he likes, but he tries to leave the impression, after
bungling the economy over the last five years, that this was a total surprise
that came about when the federal government cut the transfer payments and
dumped the bill on his lap.
He never knew this was coming. He has all of these experts, these finance
experts in his department, who we know give daily updates, daily updates to the
Minister of Finance, and let me tell you, he acted like he had a surprise‑‑well,
what am I going to do, I have to go back to the departments.
Now he goes to the Minister of Education‑‑I
am giving her the benefit of the doubt here.
She may have come forward and said, I want to make these cuts, please
take these programs here, we do not need them.
But I have a hunch that it came about as a result of the Minister of
Finance's directive, and on that basis he has to share a large part of the
blame for these cuts.
So in conclusion I have to indicate, as the
minister has said, that we have to explore these issues and ensure that the
Minister of Finance, who is sitting with us tonight, is part of those
discussions because he has to share some of the blame.
But we will not let this Minister of Education
off the hook on this because she answers for education in the province. She is the person that the education
community is wanting to hear from. She
is the one who they want to hear justification from, and if there is no justification,
they will hold her accountable. They are
doing it already, because they see the empty rhetoric in her answers in the
Legislature, empty rhetoric to answers day by day that we ask questions on in
the Legislature. We only see empty
rhetoric, empty words, in response; it is unfortunate. The educational community, the children of
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the critic for the official
opposition for those remarks. Does the
critic for the second opposition party, the honourable member for Osborne (Mr.
Alcock), have any opening remarks?
Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I must confess I have
been so enthralled by the statements of both of the former speakers that I
would like to just dive into the Estimates.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the critic for the second opposition
party for those short remarks.
Under
At this time, we invite the minister's staff
to join us at the table, and we ask that the minister introduce her staff
present.
Mr. Vodrey: I
would like to take a moment to introduce the staff from the Department of
Education: Mr. John Carlyle, who is the
Deputy Minister of Education; Mr. Jim Glen, who is the Acting Assistant Deputy
Minister of Administration and Finance; and Mr. Tom Thompson, the Director of
the Finance Branch.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The first item will be 1.(b) Executive
Support (1) Salaries $370,500.
Mr. Plohman:
Yes, this section deals with the minister's staff as well as the deputy
minister, I would think. How many of the
eight SYs here are from the minister's personal staff, secretarial and
political staff?
Mrs. Vodrey:
There are five staff. Three are
secretarial support; one is a special assistant; one is a political assistant
also.
Also in the deputy minister's office, were you
asking for the minister's office alone or the deputy minister's also?
Mr. Plohman:
Just go ahead.
Mrs. Vodrey:
On the deputy minister's side, there is a secretarial position and a
program analyst position.
Mr. Plohman:
Can the minister indicate how her office is going to be handling the
reduced workweek that is being planned and also how this will be applied to the
department?
Mrs. Vodrey:
The Department of Education will be closed Fridays in July, which has
been discussed as a potential for the government of
Mr. Plohman:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the Minister responsible for The Civil Service
Act (Mr. Praznik) sent out a letter on April 27 outlining those days. Those are the ones that will apply to the
whole department?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Yes, that is correct.
* (2100)
Mr. Plohman: I
said the whole department, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. My question, is there any designation of
essential services in the Department of Education?
Mrs. Vodrey: No,
there is not a designation of essential services in the Department of Education
during those periods.
Mr. Plohman:
Has the minister estimated the saving in dollars as a result of this
measure?
Mrs. Vodrey:
The savings will be approximately 4 percent of salaries and the amount
is approximately $120,000.
Mr. Plohman:
Was this the estimate prior to Estimates or is this the estimate at the
present time or has it changed at all?
Mrs. Vodrey:
It is the estimate at the present time.
Mr. Plohman:
So did the minister meet the target that was established prior to this
decision being made? Each of the
departments were targeted for a certain amount of money. If it was 4 percent, it was applied?
[interjection]
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) speaking
from his seat said there was no target.
Was there a target of 4 percent or was there not?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Government did look for the same procedure across government departments
and the Department of Education then, in applying this, has come with the savings
of approximately 3.84 percent, which, with that number of days, is the
percentage that is arrived at.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item (b)(1) Salaries $370,500‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $105,300‑‑pass.
Item (c) Planning and Policy Development (1) Salaries
$386,800.
Mr. Plohman:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this area has been changed in name. Perhaps the first question would be why is it
changed from the previous year?
Mrs. Vodrey: I
would like to just take a moment to introduce Mr. John Didyk who is the
Director of the Planning and Policy.
Yes, there has been a change. The Planning, Research and Policy
Coordination branch was renamed to Planning and Policy Development to better
reflect the department's emphasis on a corporate strategic direction and to
formally reallocate research tasks to individual units across the department.
Mr. Plohman:
Has there been any change in function of staff? I see the numbers have not changed.
Mrs. Vodrey: I
would just like to take a moment also to introduce Jean Britton, who is the
assistant director of the branch.
No, there has not been a change in function.
Mr. Plohman:
In the Expected Results, the minister indicates, "Management focus
on results. Improved education and
training outcomes. An effective and coherent
overall policy framework. Sound program directions. Effective and efficient utilization of
departmental resources."
Can the minister just give a brief overview of
the major activities that will provide those expected results?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, this branch does have a number of
activities. First of all, in
consultation with the minister and senior staff they will complete a
departmental strategic direction document.
They will also plan and prepare information for the public Education
Innovation fora. They will prepare
strategic direction documents for senior management by working with issue‑based
departmental committees which have representation from all divisions.
They also assist department units in preparing
one‑year operation plans which merge the branch objectives and activities
with departmental objectives and financial allocation. In addition, they serve on departmental
committees which are developing policy statements or documents, and these
include issues such as teacher training and parental involvement, assessment
standards, gifted children, adult education and special needs. They also have assisted our Student Support
branch and continue to assist our Student Support branch in our policy for at‑risk
students. They also work with senior
management on developing some broad policies and procedures relating to issues
such as curriculum development and also our labour force development strategy.
Mr. Plohman:
The strategic directions plan, was that something that just began this
year? Is that for the public education
system, or is that for the department?
Mrs. Vodrey:
Their work is to update a document which we have released called
Building a Solid Foundation for our Future, and this was our strategic plan for
the years 1991 to 1996. We are now
approaching the mid to latter part of that time frame. This deals with both the K to 12 side and
also the post‑secondary side.
Mr. Plohman:
So that is an activity that has just begun this year, to update that
document. Is that what the minister is
saying?
* (2110)
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr.