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 16.2(g) Student Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits on page 39 of the Estimates book.

Item 16.2 School Programs (g) Student Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,896,300--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $735,700--pass.

Item 16.2 School Programs (h) Manitoba School for the Deaf (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $2,663,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $331,100--pass.

Resolution 16.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $20,448,800 for Education and Training, School Programs, $20,448,800, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1996.

Item 16.3 Bureau de l'éducation française (a) Division Administration (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $129,900.

If I may beg the indulgence of the committee, the minister would like to table some items for the benefit of the committee.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): The following information had been requested, and we now have it for tabling. It is two items. One is the regional breakdown of ISP students, and the other is an item on teacher librarians. I have these available here for tabling.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: I thank the honourable minister for this submission. The Clerk will enter and distribute to the committee.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I do not have many questions on this line, but I am interested in enrollments in the immersion programs and the français school division, really enrollment trends as much as anything.

Mrs. McIntosh: We have at the current time 4,270 pupils in the new Francophone division. We have 1,400 students in other divisions in the français program. In French Immersion we have 19,354 students in 104 schools in 25 school divisions. In the French first language we have 5,600 students. In terms of stability, the Francophone division is new, so it is obviously a growth. The French Immersion is reasonably stable, I think a very slight decline but for all intents and purposes stable. The French first language is stable.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about federal funds and whether the minister had experienced any changes in federal funds in the past year and what the next fiscal year looks like in terms of federal funds. Has there been any change, any notice of change, any anticipated changes?

Mrs. McIntosh: The trend is showing that in the infrastructure, you will see, in terms of Canada's historical contribution to the financing of the official languages in education program, in Manitoba the trend is down, ranging from--in 1990, for example, we were getting $6,330,000 and we are now receiving in the '95-96 year $4,500 with a projection--I mean $4 million, I beg your pardon, pardon me, that is not quite that a reduction, but trimmed down to $4,500,000, and a further indication that for '96-97 it will be dropping to around $3,800,000, so that is definitely declining fairly substantially.

Under the minimum guarantee it is relatively stable. Again using 1990 as a base, we see it going from $2,534,000 down to $2,200,000 projected for '96-97.

* (1450)

Supplementary funds have remained reasonably stable for the last four or five years. In 1990, it was at $1,162,000; in 1992, it dropped to $550,000, which is quite a drop, but it has remained at $550,000 in supplementary funds since that time. It is projected to stay at that amount through to '96-97, so those are the trends we see in those categories.

Ms. Friesen: I am not very familiar at all with the format and accounting of this program. I understand from what the minister said, there are three types of funds which come from the federal government. The first one where the largest declines were, could the minister tell me what the purpose of that aspect of the funding is, and what accounts for that decline?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, in terms of the infrastructure category, you will find out of that category such as grants to school divisions, grants to private schools, the University Grants Commission, the grant to École technique et professionnelle, Bureau de l'éducation française.

An Honourable Member: Très bien.

Mrs. McIntosh: Merci beaucoup.

An Honourable Member: Ça te vient pas pire.

Mrs. McIntosh: Oh, merci. Danke schoen. Okay.

Those are the areas that are funded or receive federal funding from--

An Honourable Member: From the bad Liberals, is that--

Mrs. McIntosh: I do not even dare comment on that, Monsieur Gaudry.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, what has been the impact on provincial programs of that decline in the infrastructure area. Has the government prepared any evaluation reports? Are there any sort of benchmarks that we could look at?

Mrs. McIntosh: I think the short answer to the question is that we have been able so far to maintain the funding levels for basic support and for the bureau.

Ms. Friesen: Has there been a formal evaluation prepared of the impact of federal funding?

Mrs. McIntosh: If you could just give us a sense of what you mean by formal, because I can indicate that the staff has taken a look at what kind of impacts they think we might experience. I am not quite sure what you mean by formal. I do not think we have done anything for public--

Ms. Friesen: Yes, I was looking for something that was available to the public. Here we have a long-term trend. Had the department, for example, in order to meet with a particular group or to talk to parents in the new division, prepared something for parents that might be available more generally?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, there is a protocol that is in place. It is a five-year protocol, and it was up two years ago. At the end of the five-year protocol, Canada and Manitoba would sit down and sort of negotiate new circumstances. That is still ongoing.

In the meantime, what the staff have done is they have prepared internally some sense of direction that we need to be moving toward in light of the trends. It has not been prepared for public presentation because they are still having this internal negotiation, interjurisdictional negotiation, continue.

What we are doing to make sure that we are able to maintain the levels is that we are simply doing what we are doing with so much of Education, Health and Family Services. We are just bringing in money from other areas in terms of general revenue, and we are making sure that the program can still be maintained.

Just one important point to note on those negotiations; they are bilateral, not collective. So you will get a one-on-one, so to speak, as opposed a federal jurisdiction with a 10-member entity. It is bilateral.

* (1500)

Ms. Friesen: While those negotiations have been going on, there is obviously a continuing drop. Is there a formula for that? How is that decided upon?

Mrs. McIntosh: I am advised that Canada can just do that arbitrarily, and they do that. So they have cut their funding, and we have been, as we are in so many other areas, picking it up to ensure that programs that are deemed to be important continue. I do not know where we will be at the end of the negotiating, but, in the meantime, they can arbitrarily vary the amount that they present to us for our use, and they have.

Ms. Friesen: How would I track this in the Estimates booklet? Where would I find the amount recoverable from Canada? How do I find or how does the department demonstrate the amount that it has picked up?

Mr. Chair, there is probably a gap in Hansard there, or logical gap anyway, while I was looking for page 40 of the general Estimates book, which is where it is.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: 16.3 Bureau de l'éducation française (a) Division Administration (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $129,900--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $24,300--pass.

3.(b) Curriculum Development and Implementation (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $859,800.

Ms. Friesen: I was interested in the phys ed curriculum here. I understand that one of the people who is developing the new phys ed curriculum is developing it in French. Particularly, I had forgotten to ask earlier, there was quite a thorough evaluation of immersion students, a comparison of immersion and English-speaking students at the Grades 4 and 11 levels in physical education. The last time that I asked about this in Estimates, there was no evaluation report ready. The actual numbers had been published, and they did show significant differences between the two groups of students.

So I would like to ask about the phys ed curriculum that is being developed here. Is it addressing some of the evaluation points that were made? Is that evaluation available yet?

Mrs. McIntosh: I understand that a report involving the evaluation of all programs such as you indicate will soon be before me, may, in fact, be there now and I have not just yet gone through it. The review will take all of those points into consideration. I look forward to perusing it and to examining its contents. It has been addressed, and it is in the process of being presented to me for my information and approval.

Ms. Friesen: In the new curriculum that the minister is anticipating, could she give us some idea of the relationship between the health curriculum and the phys ed curriculum? There have been concerns expressed to us about the loss of activity time. I think it has been raised in Question Period as well. I wondered if the minister wanted to add more to the responses that were made then.

What I think people are concerned about is that the health curriculum seems to be being lost at the moment--sorry the other way around in fact. The activity time is being reduced in order to accommodate the health aspect of the curriculum. I wondered what the minister's response to that was and how the curriculum development process was proceeding under the new type of organization.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, this does not pertain directly to language of instruction, although certainly, whether the students receive their instruction in French or in English, they will still be looking at a new curricula. The proper response, I suppose, to the member would be to indicate that the same rules that apply to those who will be receiving their instruction in English would apply to those who will be receiving their instruction in French.

I note the concern that she has raised and assure her that we will do all we can in the curriculum development to ensure that the activity level is not ignored or compromised in any way as new curricula comes in.

The direct answer to the question is that the same rules that apply to the other schools will apply to these schools, because it is not a language of instruction as much as it is a content.

* (1510)

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Est-ce je peux demander une question en français, s'il vous plait? I am just joking.

I see you have had an increase of a staff year. It says your provision for the acceleration of education renewal initiatives. Can the minister explain?

Mrs. McIntosh: We have employed a person who will be developing the standards in français in French Immersion. As you know, the curricula is being developed, and we are working with other provinces on curricula. Our standards, we wish to have prepared here for the français, and that person is being assigned to that particular task.

Mr. Gaudry: Will there be a report in regard to working with the other provinces that you have indicated?

Mrs. McIntosh: Oui.

Mr. Gaudry: Will it be available very shortly, or what is the time frame for the report to be available?

Mrs. McIntosh: En mars '96.

Mr. Gaudry: Merci beaucoup, Madame le ministre.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: 3. Bureau de l'éducation française (b) Curriculum Development and Implementation (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $859,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $154,600--pass.

3.(c) Educational Support Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $219,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $64,700--pass.

3.(d) Official Languages Programs and Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $457,000.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, this brings us back to the negotiation of the infrastructure agreement. Could the minister give us an update on that in the sense of how often does the group meet? Is there really negotiation taking place? Is it something that--well, I do not know what else to ask. What is happening over the last two years that no agreement has been reached?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, it is a good question and there are, in fact, two parts to that negotiation. There is an overall agreement that is negotiated between Canada and CMEC, the ministers of Education. They meet two or three times a year to try and negotiate this particular overall agreement, and that is where there has been some tough slugging. It has been difficult.

The second part in terms of process has been much less difficult, even though the amounts have come down, but the second part of the negotiating process is that each province negotiates bilaterally their own appendix. So we will negotiate an appendix to that overall agreement that deals specifically with Manitoba, and that is bilateral, and I made reference to that before. That is a bilateral agreement between Canada and Manitoba.

The process for that one seems to be working all right. It is the overall one where there has been a struggle to come up with something that is acceptable.

Ms. Friesen: That overall one then involves all the provinces, so everybody is at the table then trying to negotiate an overall agreement.

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, in terms of who is the ultimate authority. In the actual negotiating, it would be the executive of CMEC. It would not be all the ministers all of the time, but it is an executive given the delegated authority by the ministers, and they are working on trying to develop that or to get that agreement to where we would like it to be.

Ms. Friesen: Has Manitoba been represented on that executive over the past two years?

Mrs. McIntosh: We do not have anybody this year on the executive. We did last year. The Deputy Minister for Education and Training for kindergarten to Senior 4 was on the executive last year, but this year, we do not have executive representation.

* (1520)

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, I am puzzled by the difficulties of a federal government which I assumed had a strong commitment to French language education outside of Quebec. I am not even sure how to phrase the question.

Is there any policy shift that the minister senses that would account for these difficulties?

Mrs. McIntosh: Very definitely I think the member asks an excellent question because the federal government wants to reduce dollars for ongoing programs and maintenance funding and instead put forth money to seed projects. Essentially what they are saying is that they are going to be or want to be announcing new programs, but they are cutting us off funding the ones that we have. It is essentially using the seed analogy again, that they are quite wanting to make babies when they cannot afford to support the ones they already have in existence. We are saying, do not neglect the babies in existence.

I think ministers are understandably quite worried about that trend, because while it is great to have wonderful new programs announced with great fanfare in the press and all of the rest of it, if there is not any money to sustain the ones that are currently in existence and have a proven track record and have the acceptability of the population, they are more and more putting provinces in the position of having to do what I just described earlier which is to top up.

The provinces are not rolling in money right now with transfer cuts in Education and in Health and those essential areas. We feel that is where the focus of the funding should go is on strong maintenance for things that have stood some test and are serving a purpose. There is a difference. There is a change in direction and it is a worrisome one, and I think it is why, I have not been at the table myself, but I think it is why you are seeing a bit of a logjam there trying to get an overall agreement. The ministers are understandably wanting to have assurances that existing programs will be maintained.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 3. Bureau de l'éducation française (d) Official Languages Programs and Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $457,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $257,500--pass; (3) Assistance $486,000--pass.

16.3. Bureau de l'éducation française (e) Library and Materials Production (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $419,700--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $187,900--pass.

Resolution 16.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,261,200 for Education and Training, Bureau de l'éducation française $3,261,200, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1996.

Item 16.4 Training and Advanced Education (a) Management Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $636,400.

Ms. Friesen: I recognize this is a management aspect of the department, but I am not sure I see another line to ask these questions on. I wanted to ask about The Vocational Schools Act. I have had an issue raised with me by a constituent who took at considerable expense as somebody who was on an extremely modest income and made really quite important sacrifices to take correspondence courses in a Natural Resources diploma program from a correspondence school. I am not sure which one it was, but it certainly was one that was--it may have been ICS, one which is--

An Honourable Member: Approved.

Ms. Friesen: That is the word. I was looking for the right word-- that is "approved" by the department.

He understood that approval to mean that it was a career certification that would be acceptable, and when he came to apply to a branch of the Natural Resources department in Manitoba, he found that his qualifications were discounted or counted for very little as a result of that. He went to, as I say, enormous--the family made sacrifices for him to do this and so he believes that there is--well, there is a problem here. He wanted to ensure that I raise this with the minister directly to see whether, in fact, there is a remedy, what the department actually means by "approved" and whether the minister believes that this is communicated in an appropriate way to people who are taking such courses.

(Mr. Mike Radcliffe, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

* (1530)

Mrs. McIntosh: I thank the member for raising the question because this is an area that I need to learn a bit more about. I could give a generic statement and then an indication on the specific instance.

The generic statement, to begin with, I should indicate that my understanding is these private vocational schools can work with certain aspects of industry to develop a program which they can then register with the department. It does not mean, however, that every place that the person applies upon graduation will want the particular aspects of whatever the course is. That is just a generic statement. In other words, I suppose, no guarantee that every employer who employs people with that type of training will want the specifics that course offers.

Having said that, with this particular situation, if you are able to provide more details--and I do not mean to say that you need to read them into the record if you are concerned about a person's confidentiality--I would appreciate that. There is a complaint procedure. If you are able to provide more details here or off the record later, we would follow up looking into that for that individual.

I am not able to say at the present time if the course that he took--because apparently there are quite a few listed under Natural Resources--was not acceptable to the place he applied for a specific reason. Maybe they were looking for a specific skill that was not inherent in that course, but maybe the qualifications he had might be suitable for another type of job in Natural Resources, I am not quite sure. We would be pleased to look into it for the member and appreciate her raising that individual's concern.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, I do not think there is an issue of confidentiality here. I think the constituent would appreciate what you have suggested. We have taken up the issue with the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Driedger). I thought there might be an opportunity for discussion here as well that could be helpful. I will certainly send some material on to the minister, and, if she could follow up on it.

One thing that occurred to me was, a number of years ago I think we did raise a number of questions about vocational education, and essentially the consumer information was provided to students who were looking at private vocational colleges, generally, not just correspondence schools. The department did produce a very useful leaflet subsequent to that of advice to consumers.

I know in the last year I have been contacted by a number of--well, in fact, two, I believe, private vocational schools who were essentially looking for business. It was a marketing plan on their part. They were contacting local residents. When I asked further for information certainly at least one of them enclosed that consumers guide in its information to me. I was very pleased to see that. I wondered if in this case, with the correspondence schools, whether the minister might look at--one remedy might be to ensure that correspondence schools who were dealing with Manitoba students enclosed that particular leaflet of advice to consumers.

Mrs. McIntosh: I think that is a very good suggestion. I am not familiar with the booklet, but I will search it out and certainly take that as a suggestion.

I have it right in front of me now. The deputy has just handed it over. This is the one I think you are meaning about private vocational schools, Be an informed consumer. I think you have made an excellent suggestion. I appreciate it, and I will certainly take it under serious consideration and discuss it with staff.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, I do want to go on to discuss the Access Programs, but I think we will do it on the next line, if that is possible.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): Item 16.4. Training and Advanced Education (a) Management Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $636,400--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $229,800--pass; (3) Advanced Education and Training Assistance $1,766,500--pass.

4.(b) Access Programs $6,498,200.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, I think the minister knows of my interest and concern about this program, and I notice that the minister in the House has recently suggested that the number of students in Access Programs has increased. I know that subsequent to that statement there have been newspaper reports that in fact Access student numbers have decreased and that there is a further anticipated decrease in the coming year.

I wonder if that is the minister's experience and if she has those numbers, the change in numbers from last year to this year.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the enrollments have gone up, as I stated in the House. My statement in the House was the correct one. I do not know the source of the newspaper article's information, but it was wrong. The enrollments in 1994 were 781 and in 1995-96, 850. It is a 9 percent increase. It is, on a percentage basis, a 9 percent increase.

* (1540)

Ms. Friesen: The newspaper report, I think, was in the downtown newspaper, which may be called Uptown, and the reporter was Tim Broadhead. I think he was quoting Sue Matusik at the University of Manitoba. I do not know if that is something the minister would like to follow up.

How many Access students in this coming year and in the past year will be students who used to be previously called nonfunded? How many are remaining who are receiving funds not of their own bringing to the program?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I want to just take the opportunity to point out our ongoing distress over the federal government having sort of again left this province in the lurch in terms of the money available for programs such as Access. Having said that, it is a fact and a reality, and we did pick up the slack there for awhile.

At the present time, there are 850 students who receive funding of some sort or another in the program; 200 of those will be Access funded; 650 received their funding from other sources such as band councils if they are Status Indians on reserve, that type of thing. So they will either get money by other sources or through Access, and total funded students are 850, 200 of those being Access.

Ms. Friesen: My assumption is that that 200, that number will continue to decline as students who began in the program graduate. Is that the way that will happen?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the numbers for this year are actually up slightly, so you will see a slight increase this year, actually a fairly good increase if we really think about it, because we are going last year from 189 students up to 200 this year under the Access funding.

So you are seeing stabilization occurring and a 6 percent increase, so it is stabilizing, slightly increasing. We will be replacing each graduate with a new student. The stability has come to that point now that as a person graduates he will be replaced with a new student coming in the other end. So I think when the member refers to an ongoing decline that is not what we are seeing happen, and it is not what we are planning to happen. We are planning a stable, slightly increasing enrollment.

Ms. Friesen: When the minister says Access funding, are we referring there to that third level of bursary that students with particularly significant needs get? I understand now that every Access student must take a Canada Student Loan, then they are eligible for a Manitoba Student Loan based on need, then there is a third level of a small bursary available. Is that what is meant by Access funding for those 200 students?

Mrs. McIntosh: Access students who still have an unmet need after the Canada Student Loan will have those needs met to whatever level. It could be $20,000 if that is what they need. That is not repayable. They do not have to repay that. They would repay the Canada Student Loan of course, but they do not have to pay the money Manitoba gives them. It will depend on what they need. What they need is what they will get. The amounts are certainly high in terms of what they can receive if their need is high.

They do not have to take out a Manitoba loan. They just take out the Canada Student Loan and then whatever they need above that we provide, and they do not have to pay it back.

Ms. Friesen: And that is what is meant by those 200 students who receive Access funding?

Mrs. McIntosh: That is correct.

Ms. Friesen: What is the average amount those students receive, or what would be a typical amount? Up to $20,000, for example, how many people are receiving $20,000?

Mrs. McIntosh: Some interesting comparisons here in terms of the advantage given to Access students versus regular students. While they can receive any amount they require up to--there is no ceiling on it. It could be way more than $20,000. The average, of course, is much lower. You see, the Access student, their loan average here would be $4,800. The bursary we would provide as a gift on top of that is $4,900. So the bursary on average is about $100 more than the loan for a total of about $9,700 they would have. Of the $9,700 on average that they would receive, they would only have to pay back the Canada Student Loan portion which would be the $4,800.

Regular students, on the other hand, taking out a loan, the average loan they would take out would be $4,600. The average bursary they would get on top of that would be $11 for a total of $4,655. So you can see, in terms of the advantage that Access students have over regular students, the advantage is in the neighbourhood of a $4,890 advantage which is a pretty substantial advantage considering it does not have to be repaid at all to the taxpayers of Manitoba, to the people that provide it.

Those are the averages. As I say, there is no ceiling. I do not know what the lowest and highest rates would be for the Access students, but I do know there is no ceiling.

* (1550)

I can provide the member with some figures, actual people, real amounts. I will not read the names in because I do not have permission to use their names. In terms of the amounts that have been given out over and above--I say the average, as I point out to the member, was $4,900 for the gift that we provide, but they have gone up as high as $23,736 for one individual, $21,072, $19,276, $18,575, $17,838, and so on. We do have bursaries that we give out in those amounts there at the high range. We would, of course, then have some we give out that are much lower than the $4,900. Obviously, if the average is $4,900, there would be some less and some above, but just to indicate that there are indeed--when I say it could go up as high as $20,000, I am not just plucking a figure out of the air. We have in fact had some go up higher than that.

Ms. Friesen: One of the concerns of Access students, particularly those who are taking both the loan and the bursary, is, sometimes but not always, that they are in 11-month programs, and that the approximately $9,000 or $10,000 that this comes to does not take account of an 11-month program where they are not able to take a summer to earn money, one of the assumptions, I think, which is made in the Canada Student Loan Program. I am sure the minister or the previous minister has encountered questions of this or appeals to the minister. I wonder what kind of response or what kind of flexibility there is in the system for this.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I have two points in response to that question. First of all, I should indicate just a general statement again that as regards regular students who are in a 34-week program, a regular student in a 34-week program with a Canada Student Loan will incur a debt load of $9,350. An Access student in a 48-week program will incur a debt load of $7,920. So, even though it goes for longer weeks, they still have well over a $2,000 advantage over a regular student who goes for the shorter year. I just want to emphasize, it is still the big advantage for the Access students over regular students. I think the fact that a regular student in a normal university year incurs a greater debt load by a substantial sum than an Access student in a 48-week year shows a significant advantage right there.

The other thing that we were told over a year ago--and we are still waiting to have it occur, and we are presuming that it will occur. Although with so many things the federal government is letting us down, we are hoping that they will not let us down on this one. They have promised to introduce a deferred bursary program, and they did that well over a year ago. Of course, that was something that we anticipated, and still anticipate, will be of assistance here for those students who are in the longer programs.

Ms. Friesen: I think the point that the students would make is that the regular students in that two-month period have an opportunity to be employed and to make some repayment on their debt as they are going along, rather than have it accumulate to the point where, when the interest starts to begin as they graduate, they feel very much the impact of that at graduation.

I wanted to ask the minister about the impact on Manitoba of that federal delay. For example, these large amounts of $20,000, $18,000, $17,000 that the minister indicated, is Manitoba being required to pay out large amounts in those bursaries because the federal government is not deferring their bursary program or is not making the changes to their program as quickly as anticipated? Would that have any impact on what Manitoba would pay?

Mrs. McIntosh: No, because the federal program will forgive to the student the debt load that they have, and it does not really impact on the Manitoba government.

I just want to indicate that, while I appreciate that students might have the opportunity to work for a couple of months this summer and start paying down their student loan, in my experience I have never known a student in my entire life who has worked in the summertime and used their summer earnings to pay down their student loan. If you know of anyone, I would be pleased to meet them.

What my experience is, Mr. Chairperson, is that most students that I am aware of use their summer to try to earn money to help offset the costs of the year to come. I have never known anyone to use the summer months between university years to pay down their student loan. So my experience tells me that most students in regular programs do not begin to pay off their student loan till the conclusion of their program; and, while it may be short spans, say, maybe a four-year program that has 34 weeks in each year, they still would not be able to begin paying it off in most circumstances until after graduation. Then they have four years worth of debt to pay off, whereas the Access students would have only 11 months of debt to pay off. Granted, they have come consecutively not in two separate years. I just want to say in my experience that, although they maybe have the opportunity, I have never ever met anybody who has ever done it that way.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about Engineering Access at the University of Manitoba. I wonder if the minister has had any recent reports on the future of the Engineering Access program. It has had its difficulties. There have been years when it has been suspended. I think there was an intake of students last year. Can the minister tell us whether there is a long-term commitment, that is to graduate this next intake through Engineering Access?

* (1600)

Mrs. McIntosh: I am advised that that program should not change. Our funding commitment has remained. We are not reducing it in any way, and it may be that the university itself decides to have, like, one program facilitator or something for several programs as opposed to one for each or some other thing like that. Our commitment to the program remains unchanged, and we anticipate still seeing the same draw on the population as currently is there. We do not expect to see any change because we have not changed our funding commitment to that.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us what the longer-range plan is for Engineering Access? The government's money I understand is still on the table. Students are still being accepted and are still graduating. Does the minister have an estimate of say over a five-year period from '93, five years on, how many students will have graduated in Engineering Access and how many students will be going through the program?

Essentially I am looking for the scale of the program and to ensure or to at least find out whether it is being maintained or not.

Mrs. McIntosh: Just to give an indication, for '95-96, which is this year coming up, we have an increase in enrollment of 13 percent from 98 to 125 students, so by anybody's stretch of the imagination that is not a decrease, it is a very substantial increase in Engineering Access.

I am just looking here now at the anticipation, the intake for '95-96 is at 12 and the enrollment is at 44, the graduates are expected to be at six. The year before the intake was 12, the enrollment was 40 and the graduates were three. What year did you say--you wanted to look ahead.

We are expecting the university to replace all graduates with new people, so we are saying as people graduate they should be replaced. Looking back, I think you asked to go back to '93-94, again, the intake was 12, the enrollment was 44 and the graduates were two. You can see stability. In fact, you can see stability and slight growth from '93-95. The figures in '93 and '95 are identical except for the number of graduates. In '95, six will be graduating, four more people than graduated in '93-94, so we expect to see that stability continue. We do not have projections, but I did indicate what we are expecting which would be a person graduates, a person is replaced. Kind of like a tree in a forest when you are harvesting trees.

Ms. Friesen: What does show here is an increase in retention rates and graduation rates. If the government stays very strictly to that graduation rate replacement intake, it may not result in the continuing growth of graduates.

Mrs. McIntosh: The member, of course, expresses a reality. We do not know of those who enter how many will stay till the end of the program. We are hoping and expecting that we will continue to see people being retained and graduating. It is impossible to predict, but she raises a valid point, and I hope that--I am sure we both hope that we will see the number of graduates being maintained or enhanced as time goes on.

Ms. Friesen: Of the 650 students who come with their own funding, could the minister indicate where that funding comes from? What proportion, for example, comes from band funds?

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes. I can indicate to the member that 45 percent of other source funding would be First Nations. The 26 percent would be what we call the CSL Access Bursary, which is us, provincial. Eight percent stay on social assistance, so there is eight percent who are social assistance recipients. There is 21 percent that comes from a wide variety of other sources which I do not have broken out in terms of the source, but 75 percent of them we can identify for you, over 75 percent, about three-quarters.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask some questions about Access Programs in the community colleges.

Could the minister give us an idea of the numbers of Access funded programs, and I guess I am talking not just students here but also administrative funding at the three community colleges?

Mrs. McIntosh: We have the four colleges--well, the three colleges rather, Red River Community College, Community College Access Program North and South. It provides opportunities for a variety of college diploma and certificate programs to northeners and to rural residents, as well, and we have 125 for the '95-96 year.

Again, at Red River Community College, we have the Southern Nursing Program, and that provides training to southern residents to obtain a registered nurse diploma. We have 63 people in that.

At Keewatin Community College, we have the Northern Nursing Program, and, again, that provides northern residents the opportunity to obtain a registered nurse diploma. We have 55 people registered in that. Again at KCC, we have some certificate and diploma programs, and we have eight people in those. They are sort of a variety of things. It is not like the registered nurse; it is a variety of certificate diploma programs. Those are two community colleges that have been identified there.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister give me a sense of the enrollment trends at the two community colleges which have Access students?

Mrs. McIntosh: We are anticipating stable enrollments because just as we indicated for universities, the same holds true for the colleges in that we are looking at a person graduating being replaced by a new entry at the beginning level.

Ms. Friesen: Has that, for example the 125 at Red River Community College, been stable for the last number of years? What have been the changes there over the last few years?

Mrs. McIntosh: Going back again to '93-94, we can see that at Red River Community College we had 44 students at the intake. We had 90 enrolled, and we had 12 graduating. In '94-95 we had 64 at the intake, 98 enrolled and 17 graduating. In '95-96, the year that we are about to enter, we have 74 at the intake and enrollment of 125 and graduates at 26. So you can see the trend is definitely on the increase in all three categories by a fairly significant percentage.

* (1610)

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister give me the same information for KCC?

Mrs. McIntosh: I can give them to the member both for Access, The Pas, and for the Northern Nursing Program. Again, just going back to the '93-94 for the northern nursing, we had an intake of 20, enrollment of 57, graduates at 11; '94-95, intake of 19, enrollment at 55, graduates at 12; '95-96, intake of 20, enrollment at 55, graduates at 14. So the trend there shows that the intake and the enrollment fluctuate one or two people or remain stable, but the graduates are increasing each year.

At the Access, The Pas, again, '93-94--intake eight, enrollment 25, graduates 19; in '94-95--intake four, enrollment 29, graduates 12; in'95-96--intake 10, enrollment eight and graduates eight, so the trend in that one, you see, is that the intake has fluctuated from eight to four and up to 10. The enrollment has gone up and then down, and the number of graduates is decreasing.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us why there are no Access Programs at ACC? Have there been in the past, and there are not at the moment, or have there never been?

Mrs. McIntosh: I am advised that there never has been an Access Program there. The Northern Development Agreement was put in place some years back, as the member probably recalls, and that was to assist with those affected individuals either being trained for work in the North or for work in the south, but there never has been Access money put into that particular community college.

Ms. Friesen: Does the minister have any available statistics on the BUNTEP program at Brandon University, again the enrollment trends and the source of students?

Mrs. McIntosh: I should just indicate before I go on to the next answer that Assiniboine Community College has never requested an Access Program either, so it is not as if they have requested one and been denied. They have never indicated that they wanted one, so I will indicate now the other answer.

In terms of BUNTEP at Brandon University, again, going back a couple of years to '93-94, the intake then in '93-94, we had 16, enrollment, we had 109, graduates were six. In '94-95, intake was 97, enrollment was 136, graduates were 31. In '95-96, we have intake at 25, enrollment at 158, and graduates at 20. So the trend there is that the intake went from 16, scooted way up to 97, back down to 25, which is more than the 16, but less than the 97. The enrollment, though, the retention, we have gone from 109 up to 158. Graduates are down by 11.

Mr. Chairman, staff has just indicated in terms of the trends in graduation, because of the nature of the BUNTEP program and the way in which it is structured, that you are not always able to have the graduating group reflect what might be a normal graduating pattern.

Ms. Friesen: One of the arguments the government used to change the funding of the Access Programs was the high rate of employment upon graduation of students. Many of the students at the time contested this and said that might have been true in the past but in the areas of education and social work in particular, where many of the students were in those programs, they felt their employment rate had not been nearly as high in the most immediate years and their employment prospects were not as good as they had been in those disciplines.

I wonder, is the minister continuing to track those graduates, and do they have numbers on employed graduates for the past year subsequent to those changes?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the Hikel report is the last sort of official report we received. I think that was last year that was given to us. It indicated that the students coming out of the Access Programs actually had a higher success rate in terms of obtaining jobs in those areas than regular grads do.

I have some statistics that might be of interest that could clarify some of this, because in the last three years a total of 90 percent of the Access graduates either found employment or continued their education and 9 percent would be unemployed. Of those employed, over 95 percent are in jobs related to their field of study. It is one of the reasons that we still feel it very important to try to keep the Access students coming into the program, because we see that while it is an expensive program, and I grant you that, we have I think, by going to the part loan part bursary, been able to make it available to more people so that more people can access Access.

* (1620)

Given the statistics show what they show, we felt it was important to try to maintain the number of people who could enter this as opposed to being able to fund a smaller number at a higher level. We want to be able to fund a much larger number with the loan component, Canada Student Loan, and then the gifted bursary from the province. That does, in fact, seem to indicate--because the numbers show growth and we know the success rate is good. I think those are really quite excellent statistics in terms of coming out of a program and being able to put all of those skills to use in a way that enables people to contribute and earn money to support themselves and their families. It is a good program.

Ms. Friesen: I think the Hikel report's last numbers available on employment were '93-94 and possibly even earlier than that. What I was asking was, has the government continued to track that postgraduation employment and/or further education, and what has been the result of that?

Mrs. McIntosh: We are always a bit behind in gathering that because the program reports will get filed with the government, but we do not get them till after the students have graduated. So we are always just a little behind. We will be getting the '93-94 ones very soon, but we did not have those, obviously, four months ago. So in that sense, yes, we are tracing them but always with a lag.

Ms. Friesen: The government has eliminated the Student Appeal Board, and we will come to that in a minute, but I wanted to know what happens to Access students who have difficulties or believe that an appeal is required? What recourse is open to them, and how many of these has the minister heard from?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, just for clarification for the record. I think the member knows that the appeal process that used to be in place was an appeal process that we can no longer administer because we cannot hear appeals on Canada Student Loans. Aside from the fact that the number of appeals had dropped by about 80 percent, there is also the very real factor that we have no authority to hear appeals on Canada Student Loans, so there was nothing we could do even with the few remaining people who were appealing because we could not hear appeals on another jurisdiction.

We do have an appeal process in place. Any Access student who has an appeal on anything the provincial authority is doing can appeal, and the information will be taken straight to the deputy minister. We have bent over backwards to be more than fair as far as Access students are concerned. If they have a complaint or a problem, they have the ability to appeal. What we do not have any more is a formalized structure for hearing appeals on the federal authority for two reasons. As I indicated, one, we are not able to hear appeals on a federal body and we do not have any authority to do that; two, those who were appealing that, the number of appeals had dropped dramatically by more than three-quarters. Those are the two reasons that went.

We still have the appeal, most definitely, for our Access students. We also have a Student Assistance Committee for all Access students made up of program directors of all the participating institutions. That is an asset for them as well.

Ms. Friesen: How are students made aware of this appeal process, which sounds like a very informal process, and how many appeals have there been in the past year?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the program directors all know that students can come forward with any kinds of concerns or complaints they have.

Just to give you an indication of the types of things we are doing, over and above the gift of money we are saying that we have had about five or six appeals--I am not sure of the exact number but it is in that ballpark. They, as a result of those appeals, have been granted extra money, for example, for books and supplies. For expensive disciplines such as dentistry where the books and supplies would cost more than they might for another discipline, they have been granted extra money for those books and supplies. If they have some special transportation costs, they have been granted special transportation costs over and above the provincial nonrepayable bursary. Those are the types of things that come up.

The program directors are aware of these things. The students are informed. It is an informal process, in that they do not have to go through reams and reams of red tape and 16 different authorities and committees and all of those things. They can just go to their program director who passes it up through the department and the appeal is heard right at the senior level. As I say, people are bending over backwards to try to be more than fair and accommodate whatever they perceive to be some special circumstance that would warrant an appeal for more money over and above what they have been given. I do not have specific details on whether it is five or six or four or seven, but just to give you an indication.

* (1630)

Ms. Friesen: I think some of the students who felt they were caught unaware--as indeed they were by a change in direction of this program, the financing of it, who entered it under one set of criteria and then half way through were required to take loans--I think that group of students or that particular belief has been put together in a court case. I wondered if that court case is still outstanding or whether there is a resolution on it.

I am not asking the minister to discuss the content but really the timing of it.

Mrs. McIntosh: Apparently that court case is still pending, and a decision is expected within the next few months. Because it is pending I am sure the member appreciates I will not comment and run the risk of pre-empting or tainting the process in any way by a ministerial comment.

Ms. Friesen: I was not asking for that, just simply, what stage is it at? Have the hearings been held? Is it simply a matter now of waiting for the decision?

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, and I appreciate that the member was not asking for more than that, and just an indication that we are currently waiting for--I think all of the arguments have been made and we are waiting for a judgment to be handed down.

Ms. Friesen: One of the other concerns that students in Access had in other years, and also the staff, was that the change in policy meant that there would be, they believed, a substantial change in the selection process of Access students, that when one of the requirements for acceptance into the program becomes bringing a portion of your own money or, in some cases, of 45 percent of them, I gather, bringing money from First Nations bands.

I think the argument there was that the selection was not being drawn upon as wide a group of students across northern Manitoba and elsewhere as had been possible before and that the constraint of bringing ones own funds limited the--maybe not limited the number, but limited the range of applicants to Access Programs.

I wonder if the minister has been meeting or talking to program directors while they are in the middle, or towards the end even, of their selection process now to look at some of those concerns that have been raised over the last couple of years.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I just want to indicate a couple of things. We never used to means test, so we had people who had zero need of money getting money when people who had need were not getting it. The non-Status aboriginals and the Metis, for example, do not have band money, and in some cases, because the money was spread out and given to Status people who already had money and did not really need extra money, some of those non-Status and Metis people were not having the advantage of an Access Program.

Just to give you an example, in not means testing, we sort of made the assumption that everybody was poor, and if they applied for Access, they would be applying because they needed the money because they had no access to funds, yet, upon doing the means testing, discovered that some of those families had incomes around $90,000 a year and were getting Access money. Some of the Metis people were not getting any ability to be part of it because they had not made application before someone else.

So when we go to means testing, a $90,000-a-year family would be seen as someone who maybe did have access to some funds, that they could maybe help pay for their own education and that the money that we have available could be used for people who do not have that kind of access. So I do not see the new system as denying opportunity but as rather opening up opportunity to those who really do need help and saying to those who have access to money, be it band money or whatever the source, you do have access to a sizable amount of money, perhaps far in excess of what most people in Manitoba would have, and we would ask that you use that so that we can have our Access money go to those who do not have another source into which they can tap. That way, then, we maximize the number of people who are able to become educated and contribute both to their own livelihood and future benefit but also to the benefit of the community and to those people with whom they live.

One of the things that is nice about some of these programs is that so many of the people do return to their home communities upon graduation or work in some area that benefits people who really can relate to those graduates. So I think what we are saying is that we look, first of all, for a general improvement in quality of education. We look for maximizing the number of people who can acquire post-secondary education. We look to fund those who are most in need. We ask those who have incomes, substantial incomes, to assume some responsibility for paying their own way.

We ask those who have the ability to repay a loan to repay that, but we still do provide bursaries over and above the Canada Student Loan for those in need, up to whatever amount it is that they need, be it $5,000, $10,000, $15,000, $20,000, $25,000. If they need it, it is a gift. It does not have to be repaid over and above the student loan which does have to be repaid. We say, since the success rate in this program is what it is, a very successful program with 90 percent of the Access graduates finding employment and most of those in jobs related to their field of study, that they then would be in a position where they would have a salary which would enable them to repay the student loan, as do all other people who take out student loans repay, to the people of Canada.

We advance on their salary, is how I always refer to it with students in my acquaintance. Do not complain about your loan. Never renege on your loan. Reneging on the loan, if you have income, is despicable. If you have a loan and you have a salary, think of the loan as an advance on your salary because, in a sense, that is really what it is. So I do not think we are penalizing band people if they are being sourced by the band. I think what we are doing instead is opening up opportunities for non-Status and Metis to have the same opportunities that the band people, in many cases, can afford.

* (1640)

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, my question was not based on the assumption that we were shortchanging band people. The issue was really the accessibility for the Metis and non-Status students who do not have as wide a portion of funds, even including the Access funding that the minister is mentioning, as do First Nations people with band funds specifically earmarked for education. It was that loss that seemed to me to be the one of concern, that they were essentially drawing on a smaller pool of money than were the First Nations people.

What I was asking was: Has the minister met with program directors who were concerned about what they saw as a narrowing of the selection field? Has she met with or have her staff met with those program directors, as this year's selection process has been underway, to ensure the original purpose of the Access Program, that is, a wide selection field and a very intensive interview process, a consideration of the family as well as of the individual and the ensuring of that high success rate that the minister made reference to, that that is ensured because of very careful selection processes? Those were some of the areas of criticism that were brought by a wide range of people at the time that the government changed direction on the funding of this program.

I am wondering what monitoring has been done, what assurances the government has that those conditions are still in place.

(Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the department works with the program directors on a fairly regular basis, and the department will continue the monitoring. The member is asking, do we monitor? They are looking at, with special interest, the status of the--I guess I am using words that are similar here but in different ways. I was going to say the status of the non-Status and Metis, the situation being faced by non-Status and Metis peoples, because we wish to see them being able to avail themselves of these opportunities. That is why I indicated to the member earlier that we are trying to broaden the base so that we can get more people in. We are trying to, by going to the part-loan-part-bursary style, hoping to be able to provide ability for more people to take advantage of the program. We have told the program directors that the provincial-funded spots would be generally maintained for the '95-96 year back to the concept of having graduates and leavers being replaced, and we do maintain a liaison and a contact, most definitely, as to how the situation is unfolding.

Ms. Friesen: A similar question dealing with the target group of immigrant students, what resources are immigrant students able to have access to, other than the provincial funding? For example, are there funds for immigrant students to come to college or university that exist elsewhere in government programs, either federally or provincially? Are there particular means or voluntary funds programs that enable immigrant students to have access to university programs? I am thinking, for example, of some of the immigrant programs that deal in the inner city, where they are assisting teachers and that sort of thing. Are any of those kinds of funds, the Gordon Fund, for example, applicable to immigrant students at university--it seems to me one of the groups that would have the most difficulty in bringing their own money to a program.

* (1650)

Mrs. McIntosh: We do not provide provincial money for off-shore immigrants. By that, I mean we do not have any programs where someone, say, from Africa could write ahead of time and apply and opt into it. What we do have, though, is for people who are already here, landed immigrants, people who have come here and said, we are going to live in Canada now and make it our home and become Canadian citizens. We have some special programs for those types of individuals, and we have them through the Winnipeg Education Centre, particularly in social work and education. Through Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, we will have programs in English as a second language, the ESL programs. So funding is provided through some sources. I do not have the names right here, but we have a variety of sources for landed immigrants but not for overseas people who have not yet come.

Ms. Friesen: I understand the distinction. What I am looking at here is a target group in the Estimates of immigrant students. Now that the program has been changed to deal, for the most part, only with students in an Access Program who can bring their own funds, I am wondering how those immigrant students are bringing their own funds to this program?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the Winnipeg Education Centre is open to students in much the same way that high schools are open to students, so they do not have to pay to go to the Winnipeg Education Centre. For those who are landed immigrants, they are, I am advised, able to apply for a Canada Student Loan, and they have the same ability to acquire. They are not excluded from being granted a Canada Student Loan. If they are landed immigrants, they are eligible to apply for a Canada Student Loan. One would not require obtaining funding for those programs at the Winnipeg Education Centre, and the others who are landed immigrants are able to apply for a Canada Student Loan.

I have just been handed a note here, and I am believing it says 8 percent--[interjection] That is okay; I just want to make sure--of the Access students are immigrants--just a piece of information for you.

Ms. Friesen: I wondered, in the first part of the minister's response, whether there might not be a confusion, for the record, of the Winnipeg Education Centre. The minister said that it was free. I think the Winnipeg Education Centre that does the social work and education programs in the Access Programs incorporates the same university fees as elsewhere. Maybe the minister was referring to another Winnipeg Education Centre, run by Winnipeg No. 1 School Division, where fees are not charged to residents of Winnipeg?

Mrs. McIntosh: Apologies to the member because what she is saying is absolutely correct. The immigrant students, in terms of if they are regular Access students, would receive and not have to pay back any of the provincial bursary money. That is nonrepayable. In that sense, it is free money, so to speak, but the Canada Student Loan would still be there as a first obligation, and she is correct in that because the free part comes after the Canada Student Loan has been applied for.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask a question that is not directly an Access question. It relates to the kind of conditions that Access in the past faced, and that is the graduation rate in northern high schools, both band schools and across the North.

One of the difficulties of, say, the generation who is now in their twenties was that so many were not able to complete school in their own communities, and for some of them, it was not even possible to move to regional communities. Has the minister or does the department in any way track the changes in that if indeed there are changes? Are there an increasing number of northern Manitobans graduating from high school? If so, what is the rate of change?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the universities do tracking on high school students. When the other deputy is here on the K to 12, we may have some other information on high schools. The universities do tracking.

One of the things that the member and I were talking about the other day becomes evident here when I said that universities keep looking for consistent measurable standards from high school. We know that, as the students who graduate from the North come down south, they have a more difficult time. A lot of that is because of isolation in some places.

We look at measures like distance education, distance technology, measurable standards so that, when people go with a piece of paper in their hand that says I have Manitoba Grade 12, it will mean something that is recognized as a consistent standard. That is a goal of reaching for excellence, because it is known that they have a more difficult time for a variety of reasons. One, it is not always possible in certain high schools to offer, say, Physics 300 if your enrollment is very small. If you have, say, just one student wanting to take that course every third year or something of that nature, it becomes increasingly difficult.

When we look at distance education, that is one of the things that we are hoping--maybe not this September, but one of our goals is to improve those opportunities to enhance the education in remote areas. Does that answer your question?

Ms. Friesen: The universities, I think, only track the people who apply to them. What I am really looking for is some indication of how the general education picture has changed in the North, particularly in terms of completion.

I understand the issue the minister is addressing of availability of subjects and, of course, the distance that students travel, in many ways, to move south to university. Yes, those all, I think, have been there for a long time.

One of the issues, I think, that the Access Program had to address and has for a long time is that so few students comparatively have either had the opportunity or have been enabled in some way or other to complete high school in the North. I am looking to see whether that is changing. I do not, again, expect that is going to change overnight, and it does include statistics and numbers from band schools and from federal jurisdictions. So is there any way we have of looking at that problem?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, we can come back with specific details on that. We do not have that here, but we can obtain it, and we will. We will bring it back for the member's information and actually for mine, too, because it is a good question, and I do not know the answer. I would like to know it.

* (1700)

I am informed that the quality of learning that has been experienced by Access students is improving while we are still seeing people coming into the Access Programs from Grades 10 or 11, without the complete high school, of course. It was not that long ago that they were coming with Grades 7 or 8, and now they are coming with Grades 10 or 11. So there might be some deficit in some areas, but the situation does appear to be improving. There is always need and room for more improvement. The trend is encouraging, but there is still work to be done.

We will obtain those figures, though, to try to give her a more accurate picture as to what the tracking reveals, and we will bring that back as soon as we can.

Ms. Friesen: Is the minister looking at any changes to the Access Program in the sense of special programs such as there are in premedical studies or in the medical area? Are there any new additions that the minister is considering?

Mrs. McIntosh: We are looking at the Hikel report, working through the universities with that, but we do not want to do what the federal government is doing to us on the French side. We do not want to be introducing new programs if they are going to come in at the expense of valid existing programs. The answer is, yes, in the sense that we are going through the Hikel report with universities, no, in the sense that we will not bring in new programs if it is going to harm existing programs. If ever that event were to occur, the new program would have to be one that had a higher value attached to it. So at the moment, no.

Ms. Friesen: Where does the minister see the Louis Riel Institute fitting into this area? It is a bill before the House, so I am not looking for specifics. I am looking for principles and possibly where it might be seen in the next Estimates. What kind of line, what area is it going to fit in with?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, we have set aside $155,000 for the Louis Riel Institute. It is contingent upon federal dollars, matching dollars. The member is probably aware that this is to provide an increased awareness of early Manitoba history and the Metis role in early Manitoba history and the Metis culture today.

I just recently forwarded a cheque for some $35,000 to the Manitoba Metis Federation in anticipation of the work that they are doing in this area because this is not going to be a government thing. This is something that we are recognizing and funding being done by the Manitoba Metis Federation. We are supportive. We are a funder. We are expecting and asking them to identify the messages they want relayed and to develop a way of relaying them effectively to Manitoba students.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 4. Training and Advanced Education (b) Access Programs $6,498,200--pass.

4.(c) Student Financial Assistance (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,418,600.

Ms. Friesen: I am just looking from the minister for an update on where the federal government program is at the moment. There has been talk of an income contingent loan repayment. There have certainly been changes I think in the timing of repayments over the past year. There was an adjustment in September, October, I think, when the federal government found that its requirements were not appropriate for Manitoba.

I think there are also some questions in some students minds that I am sure the minister has also heard about, about the use of one particular bank for the Canada Student Loan Program.

These are a number of questions, I know. There are students who have dealt with credit unions in the past and have found that unless they were dealing with a particular bank their money was very slow in coming. Some students were perhaps given advice that was not very helpful.

It is the federal role, the changes that have happened over the past year--what is the federal government saying to the minister at the moment about prospective changes, particularly for income contingent loan repayment, and thirdly, the issues of the banks and the financial institutions that deal with Canada Student Loans?

Mrs. McIntosh: This is a Canada Student Loan issue actually, Mr. Chairman, and it probably should be directed to the federal government for further clarification. However, I will indicate because it is of interest to Manitoba students that over a hundred credit unions right now are participating with the federal risk premium, and most of the major banks, except for the Toronto Dominion and Bank of Montreal, are also participating, so federally that is what is happening. The Toronto Dominion Bank is not in; the Bank of Montreal is not in. But you will have the Bank of Nova Scotia and those other banks, some Caisse Populaires, and lots of credit unions.

* (1710)

Ms. Friesen: On a couple of occasions it was brought to my attention in the fall that students who were not dealing with CIBC were either being told or had been led to believe that their claims or their loans would be dealt with in a much slower process, two to three weeks slower, and some of them at least were offering evidence of such claims. Has the minister had any encounters with students who have had those kind of difficulties, and is there anything that the Manitoba government can do?

Mrs. McIntosh: I think because of the newness of this venture we have not had--this time last year nobody had a risk premium; last fall nobody had a risk premium. It is still quite new. We have not had anybody default obviously because they have not had time yet, but let us hope they never decide to default or they never have to default.

I have not personally received any concerns or complaints brought to my attention, but then I have not been here very long either so not to say they will not come. The staff indicates they have not received any either; the staff that is here with me today.

Ms. Friesen: The Informetrica Study of university enrollment futures that I raised in the Legislature with the minister, I believe it took a number of variables and related the perspective changes in federal policy. I realize this is a federal issue, but what they were suggesting was that income-contingent loan repayments would have an effect upon student enrollments, and they were doing it province by province.

What I am interested in is whether in fact the provincial government has a concern in this area and how it is dealing with it with the federal government, because the changes to Canada Student Loan--yes, indeed, and the risk premium, yes, indeed, those are federal issues--but they do have an impact on student enrollment. I am sure the minister is aware of certainly the concerns about student enrollment in Manitoba. Are they tracking this in any way with the federal government? Is there any kind of liaison nationally through the Council of Ministers or whatever that is looking at this?

Mrs. McIntosh: Well, first of all, I indicate that we do track students' enrollment through StatsCan. Secondly, regarding the income-contingent loan repayments that were put forward by the feds: not one province of Canada was willing to take up on it, so it was lifted off the table, and it has vanished somewhere into the lofty atmosphere and is not an issue anymore, because the offer was never taken up by anybody. So those who were concerned and worried really do not have anything to worry about anymore. It has gone like dust in the wind.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 4. Training and Advanced Education (c) Student Financial Assistance (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,418,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $613,300--pass; (3) Assistance $7,122,600--pass.

4.(d) Student Financial Assistance Appeal Board (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits . . . . .

4.(e) Labour Market Support Services $591,400.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, I am interested in a policy direction that the government indicated I think perhaps two or three years ago now that it would be providing a labour force development strategy, and I am wondering what progress has been made on that in the last few years.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, we were beginning to do that kind of analysis, that kind of a strategy, and we were preparing it in isolation, so to speak. By that I mean separate from the federal government. The federal government then, of course, did a number of things. It announced social security reform, which we are not quite certain what path it is taking us down. They also made some announcements of federal reductions for training across Canada to the tune of $1 billion as well as a reduction of several billion dollars for established programs. So we do not know, as we work with them, where we are going to be in terms of trying to harmonize activities.

We know that we have the Minister of Family Services, for example--a lot of these things cross portfolios--she is acting as the lead minister on some of the welfare-to-work programs that will be part of a labour force strategy. Again, though, we are trying to work within the federal government's plans so that we can harmonize or complement as much as possible and that we do not inadvertently start an initiative only to find out some action of the federal government has rendered what our initiative is invalid. So we are kind of at the moment waiting to see what kind of moves are being made federally so that we can plan properly and in accordance with whatever is going to be coming down the tube towards us from the people in Ottawa.

Ms. Friesen: I understand that obviously Ottawa changes are going to make a difference, but this is something that has been promised for many, many years, and certainly Ottawa funding does affect it, but one of the elements of a labour force strategy is the indication of high need occupations and consequently low need occupations in Manitoba, and the training strategies that are developed to meet those needs, advice to students, advice to young people.

I think in 1992 the government published a booklet on high need occupations which was one element of this. A second element has been the newspaper which really repeats elements of that booklet that is available to career days for students in Grade 9.

I am wondering what has happened since the publication of that booklet, what studies have been done that would have updated that. For example, I mean I think we probably all read the Canadian Federation of Independent Business' report on the increase in self-employment in Manitoba. I think we are all aware of the increase in part-time employment. So what studies has the department been conducting that would update the material that it published in 1992?

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Just for the benefit of the committee, I do want to read, and I believe it was read into the record, but just to be sure, item 4.(d) Student Financial Assistance Appeal Board, no dollars. I believe it was read into the record, but I wanted to make sure that it was read into the record. We are on item 4.(e). We are discussing that at this point--just for the benefit of the committee. Thank you.

We will take a five-minute recess. Is it the will of the committee? [agreed]

The committee recessed at 5:27 p.m.

________

After Recess

The committee resumed at 5:33 p.m.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Will the committee please come to order.

We are on line 16.4 Training and Advanced Education (e) Labour Market Support Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $591,400.

Mrs. McIntosh: In response to the question posed by the member just before we broke, the High Demand Occupation Report is updated every year, as is the Manitoba Prospects.

This year, the information is also being made available on the Internet, and we are developing a guide to post-secondary institutions, as well. New programs at colleges reflect high demand in the Framework for Economic Growth. There is also increased emphasis on literary training for welfare clients and expanded training for welfare recipients leading to employment and independence, so we have those things going on, in response to the question she posed.

Ms. Friesen: Where does one find the updated list, the annual updated list of occupation profiles?

Mrs. McIntosh: We can table that for you when we come back tomorrow. I am hoping we can have it here for tomorrow. We will make every effort to do that.

Ms. Friesen: Where would the general public have access to that?

Mrs. McIntosh: They can get it through the unemployment centres. They can get it through libraries. They can get it--all students in high schools. It is made available to the students in the high schools.

Ms. Friesen: The newspaper, I forget what it is called now, is made available to students in high schools.

Mrs. McIntosh: Manitoba Prospects.

Ms. Friesen: Yes, Manitoba Prospects is made available to students in high schools, but the information upon which that is based, the longer study, I assume, the greater statistical study, where would one find that? That is what I was looking for to be tabled.

Mrs. McIntosh: Data is available to anyone who asks through the Employment centres. We publish the list. We do not publish the background data, but the list can be made available through us.

Ms. Friesen: That list is Manitoba specific, is it?

Mrs. McIntosh: Yes, it is.

Ms. Friesen: I look forward then to seeing the most current list, if that is possible, tomorrow.

The other aspect of this is, of course, the training requirements that derive from the high needs occupations as the department lists them. So, again, I do not have the list in front of me, obviously, but what plans does the government have coming from this section of the department to meet the training needs for those which are suggested as high demand occupations?

Mrs. McIntosh: We work with the colleges to attempt to identify high demand areas and generate programs for high demand areas, is one of the reasons we have given such a substantial increase to colleges, that 6 percent increase to colleges. We also indicate, though, just for clarification, that you might see something that is high demand today that may not be high demand tomorrow. So all of those things have to be very carefully analyzed for high demand and for sustainability, and in that sense then, this staff works closely with the colleges. We have connections now between colleges and business, colleges and industry, colleges and the trades and so on, to try to identify where employers are saying they need more personnel or personnel trained in a certain way.

Ms. Friesen: In terms of the colleges then, what opportunities have opened up to high school students as they are looking at colleges or university students looking at colleges? What new programs have been or are being developed that meet the stated labour market high demands?

Mrs. McIntosh: That information is not with us in the binders we have today, but when we get to the section on colleges, we will make sure that we have it so that we can provide it for the member and try to give specific examples, which I think is what she is asking, like, what exactly are you doing? We will try to have some examples for your information.

Ms. Friesen: Another element in the planning of a labour force strategy would have been the Labour Force Development Boards. For the last several years, the government has argued that it has been interested in this, and various meetings have occurred at different times in different places. The last meeting I am aware of was in, I think, October of this past year, and I am wondering where Manitoba stands in relationship to the Labour Force Development Boards. I understand, for example, we have not yet signed an agreement. Are we still looking at signing an agreement? Is there still ongoing negotiation on that?

* (1740)

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, we just received a visit from a student who will be beginning school at the onset of the new millennium, so it was kind of nice to see a future student of Manitoba in the room for a bit.

I just want to indicate that, in terms of our experience with the federal government on this, it has not been too productive a relationship. We did, some years ago, have the federal government indicating an interest, and things started to get put together, but recently that is starting to fall apart in that the federal government has started to cut the expectations that the province was expecting. For example, they wanted the province to manage the co-op program and direct purchasing and so on, but they have now cut that, so what we see happening is, again, the federal Minister of Human Resources not being either willing or able to carry through with some of the money commitments that were going to be attached to this.

So the activities that were going to take place under this agreement have become so defused and diluted that we do not know where it is going to eventually end. The future structure of that federal labour force development programming is currently under review, and it is unclear what role, if any, boards will play in the new federal program arrangements. For that reason, at this particular time, Manitoba is not currently having regular discussions with the federal government on the development of a provincial Labour Force Development Board structure.

We like the concept. We would like to be able to proceed with something like this, but as with any agreement, you really have to have two eager participants to make the agreement work, and we do not see that eagerness growing. In fact, we see it shrinking from the federal perspective. So it has a delay in the process right now while, we hope, the federal government goes through whatever internal machinations they need to go through to come back revigorated and in strength and then ready to participate in this process.

Ms. Friesen: One of the advantages, I thought, that program had was that it brought together labour, business, the government, education and some of the people with particular special needs. Does the minister have any plans to develop that on a Manitoba base?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, in terms of the items that the member has identified, we concur in terms of the importance of bringing together labour, business, industry and those things, and we have indeed been reaching out in a wide variety of venues to have those kinds of contacts through the colleges, through the universities, through the Apprenticeship programs, indeed even through the high schools. So we are forming those relationships and find them to be useful and helpful and productive.

The area we would like to be able to pursue now would be to bring all those forces together in conjunction with the federal level of government, but unless or until they are able to come in as a federal government with an eagerness to participate, I cannot see that doing anything over and above what we are currently doing locally to include those groups would accomplish the goals that we had hoped to see accomplished through a federal-provincial partnership and agreement. So I suppose, in short then, the answer would be no, with that very lengthy preamble to kind of give the rationale for the "no."

Ms. Friesen: The majority of provinces have signed agreements of different kinds. I know there are still some provinces which have not, but could the minister indicate what disadvantages there are for Manitoba in not having signed such an agreement and having programs underway? What advantages? Where do we stand? How is it putting us in a comparative position?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I should indicate that there is only one province that has a signed agreement with Ottawa, and that is the province of Saskatchewan. There were several provinces that had, as we did and do, negotiations underway, moving toward signed agreements with Ottawa. The role of those boards was to be making decisions on federal funding, and with what appears to be a pulling back of the federal government, the other provinces are hesitating a little bit now to find out what in fact the changed nature of these agreements might become, because it does appear that there is now a different approach coming federally.

The federal government themselves seem to be unsure of the advantages, and they are currently reducing the Labour Force Development Boards' role, so with that in mind, we are still wanting to see things proceed if they could proceed as they had been originally outlined, but we do not want to rush into signing anything in the light of a changed attitude from the federal government. We have partnerships agreements as I indicated earlier, and the member is aware of them with business in a variety of venues, directly with government, through the colleges, through the universities and through other arenas, but we cannot see any particular advantage in signing an agreement that does not do for us what we thought it would do at the beginning.

* (1750

Not to say we are giving up hope altogether, because we are not saying negotiations should cease, we are saying we would like them to get back on track with the original perspective under the kind of thinking that was taking place when the discussions began.

Ms. Friesen: When the minister says only one province has signed an agreement, does she mean that only one province has signed an agreement with the new federal government? Because the last time I talked to the Labour Force Development Board in Ottawa, there were, I think, only three provinces which had not signed, and I certainly believe I have seen press releases from British Columbia very recently, within the last year, of their signing of an agreement and of the skills training programs that are being developed from that. I wonder if there is a difference in terminology or timing that we are talking about here.

Mrs. McIntosh: The member may be referring to the Labour Force Development Boards. There are two different things. There is the Labour Force Development Agreement and the Labour Force Development Boards. The Labour Force Development Agreements, most of them expired. Saskatchewan is the only one that has chosen to sign a new agreement. The boards have, I think, all but three provinces, Labour Force Development Boards established. We were, perhaps, confusing one with the other.

Ms. Friesen: I notice that there is an increase in staff years in this section of the department. Could the minister explain what those staff years will be used for?

Mrs. McIntosh: Two staff years, which were term, for the government in terms of social security reform that is coming from Ottawa, so we had two staff years used that way, on term appointments.

Ms. Friesen: So those term appointments are one-year term, or is it a two- or three-year term?

Mrs. McIntosh: The resources have been approved for a one-year term at this time.

Ms. Friesen: How will they be applied? Is this a planning position to deal with anticipated changes to federal programs?

Mrs. McIntosh: Basically planning and research to help prepare our government's response to proposals coming out of Ottawa in terms of the whole reform of the social security.

Ms. Friesen: What reports have been prepared so far on those issues? From the federal budget, we have at least an outline of a three-year process of what is going to happen. Has the department begun those research reports?

Mrs. McIntosh: The member may recall, in December--I think it was in December--Minister Mitchelson submitting a report called Manitoba perspectives on social reform that was tabled in the House. Our staff people worked on that. We also have prepared numerous, countless backgrounders and briefing papers et cetera for the government internally just for doing some analysis for ministers' benefits as they were working on trying to cope with any perceived or anticipated impact of things that were being talked about in the nation's capital.

Those are not reports in the sense of the Manitoba Perspectives that was tabled in the House. They are reports that are going to be bound and sent out to the public. They are more internally preparing ministers for an ability to react, in a knowledgable way, with some of the impacts that might come out of some of the announcements from Ottawa, or some of the work that is being done in Ottawa toward reform.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 16.4 Training and Advanced Education (e) Labour Market Support Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $591,400--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $123,600--pass.

Item 16.4(f) Literacy and Continuing Education (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $432,200--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $109,500--pass; (3) Grants $827,100.

Ms. Friesen: I do not have that line, I do not think, on my book. Are we still under 16.4(f)? [interjection] Okay.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 16.4(f)(3) Grants $827,100--pass.

The hour being six o'clock, committee rise.