4th-36th Vol. 49-Private Members' Business

* (1700)

IN SESSION

PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Emerson (Mr. Penner), that Bill 302, The St. Paul's College Incorporation Amendment Act--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I apologize, I thought you were going to give your committee report.

Mr. Laurendeau: No, I am going with my bill here, private members' hour. Do you want to start again?

Madam Speaker: Yes, please. The hour being 5 p.m., time for Private Members' Business.

SECOND READINGS--PRIVATE BILLS

Madam Speaker: Second readings, private bills, Bill 302.

Bill 302--The St. Paul's College Incorporation Amendment Act

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Madam Speaker, I will try a second time.

Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Emerson (Mr. Penner), that Bill 302, The St. Paul's College Incorporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le "St. Paul's College," be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mr. Laurendeau: Madam Speaker, I was approached by the Jesuit Fathers from St. Paul's College to bring forward these few minor amendments that would help them improve the method in which they will have to progress with business in the future, and I leave it to the House to make that decision.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 302, The St. Paul's College Incorporation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le "St Paul's College"). Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker: Agreed.

PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

Res. 31--Student Debt Relief Program

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I move, seconded by the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett), that

"WHEREAS according to Statistics Canada, student fees accounted for almost one quarter of operating revenues of universities in 1995, up from one sixth in both 1975 and 1985; and

"WHEREAS this means that, coupled with a sharp rise in tuition fees, thousands of post-secondary students are being forced to carry huge debt loads to finance their education; and

"WHEREAS the situation also affects college students whose average age is 28 and who frequently have dependent children and other forms of debt; and

"WHEREAS Manitoba has no debt relief strategy generally available to university and college students; and

"WHEREAS the huge debt required to finance an education is, increasingly, a deterrent, and in some cases a prohibition, to academically able people who should have access to educational opportunities; and

"WHEREAS in the 1997 Maclean's survey, all three Manitoba universities compared poorly in the scholarships and bursaries category to other provinces where there is a higher commitment of funds to universities for this purpose; and

"WHEREAS all these facts speak to the urgent need for a comprehensive strategy of debt relief to include bursary and scholarship programs, co-operative education opportunities and loan forgiveness programs.

"THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Provincial Government to consider implementing a comprehensive strategy for student debt relief for university and college students."

Motion presented.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, I am delighted to be able to speak on this resolution this afternoon, and I want to say at the outset that this is yet another case where the government, as it has moved closer to an election, has moved to adopt issues that the opposition has been urging them to do for many years.

I believe that I have introduced this resolution before. I believe that I have spoken to the minister in Estimates as well as in Question Period about the necessity of introducing a debt relief program in Manitoba. I believe I have even asked the Premier about the inconsistencies that are demonstrated when he makes recommendations to the federal government that they should bring in debt relief programs when, in fact, for many years now, under this government, Manitoba has been the only province. Manitoba has stood alone as the only province in the country which has had no generally accessible debt relief program to students. Yet the government felt that it could sign resolutions, perhaps even initiate them, urging the federal government to do this, while they were clearly not prepared to do this themselves.

So, Madam Speaker, what we see again is the government getting close to an election and deciding to, on one hand, turn the tap on. They have actually added some money into the funds of universities and colleges this year. What this does in the case of universities, of course, is bring them back up to the 1992-dollar level, which takes no account of inflation, and, of course, essentially maintain universities and colleges at the level of five or six years ago, not the direction which we see British Columbia, nor even the direction that we see universities and colleges going in smaller provinces such as New Brunswick and Saskatchewan.

It is a very, I think, transparent Tory strategy of cutting and reinstating as they get closer to an election. Similarly, as we look at this particular issue of debt relief programs for students, we will find that when the government came to power, there were indeed debt relief programs for students. There was a comprehensive approach to the funding of students who were able to benefit from college and university, but who might not have been able to provide the funds, a policy which recognized that many students were increasingly older students with dependent families, a policy which recognized that one of the enormous challenges for Manitoba was the education of the growing aboriginal population in ensuring that equal opportunities were available to that aboriginal population, encouraging them to be at university, to be at community colleges and to take advantage of the many programs that we had in the 1980s for students who were disadvantaged in one way or another.

But the Tories came in and they cut them. Now, as they get close to an election and as they see the polls, if they see the issue of inequality, the inequality which I believe they have deliberately created in many areas, as they see that issue coming to the top of the agenda, they do begin to reinstate the programs that they cut so many years ago. But the consequences of that have in fact been a lost generation of students who have turned away from post-secondary education or who may have completed only one or two years, particularly students from rural areas who incur enormous debts when they go to college and university outside of their own hometown.

So, Madam Speaker, what we have seen I believe as a direct result of Tory policies are people who could have benefited, communities which could have benefited from post-secondary education, but where people have been without the comprehensive program of student aid, debt relief, and access programs that we had in the 1980s. They have been deterred. They have looked at university and colleges and said: That is not for me. I cannot, at 35 years old, take on the debt burden that that means; I cannot ensure that I am going to get a job; I cannot ensure that risk is going to pay off for me at that older age.

* (1710)

Indeed, I was speaking to one of the people who was here in the Legislature today, who came from the programs that are being run at Mulvey and at William Whyte School. An older woman who said: look, at this stage, how can I take on that kind of debt? I have no way of paying it off. Yet she clearly had the energy and the desire to continue in education. Ten years ago she would have been able to, but, as a result of this government, that woman has been excluded from further education.

Why has the government done this? Why did it cut them in the first place? It seems to me that the government quite genuinely believes that there is a ideological basis to this. They believe that in post-secondary education the user must pay, and all of their policies, from the time of earlier ministers to this present minister, have oriented themselves in that direction. They believe that it is to the individual's advantage that they take on post-secondary education. And so they have argued that it is individuals who must pay. That is the kind of policy and ideological foundation that I think you will find across many of the extreme Conservative jurisdictions, whether it is Alberta or whether it is the United Kingdom under Thatcher.

But you will find for example in places like Quebec, where there has been a much more progressive policy in education, particularly on fees and on debt relief, you will find in British Columbia that there has always been a debt relief program and a very effective one. You will find in Saskatchewan that there has always been a debt relief program. This government in fact stood alone as the only government in Canada which did not provide a generally accessible debt relief program. And it was done deliberately, it was not by omission. It was done deliberately by this government when they decided that it was the user-pay which would prevail.

They ignored the arguments for accessibility for communities which have been excluded from universities and colleges. They ignored the social arguments and the issues for society as a whole in having a better educated general population. They ignored or chose to ignore the argument that post-secondary education should be an open door for those people who can benefit from it and who have the ability and the energy to undertake those studies and that it is the job of government to open that door, to ensure that equality and accessibility are the hallmarks of a post-secondary education policy.

The hallmarks of this government have been to cut programs that were in place, to reduce the funding for students, for student aid, to eliminate debt relief programs and essentially to argue, and it is their fundamental argument, that this is an individual benefit to the students and the students must pay for it because they will be able, it is argued, to repay afterwards. And some students undoubtedly will, but not all students. It depends upon their age, it depends upon the size of the debt.

I gather from the attentiveness of the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck) that he is anxious to respond on this particular resolution. I am sure that he will be able to tell us about the difficulties faced by rural students who must come into Winnipeg or go to Brandon or go into Thompson or The Pas for their education and the size of the debt that some of those students are carrying.

So, Madam Speaker, it seems to me that the government I think has clearly not served Manitoba well, not served Manitoba students well with their changes to the student debt programs, and they too have begun to recognize that as they get closer to an election, what is facing Manitobans is the inequality between rich and poor, the inequalities between aboriginal communities and other communities, the inequalities in access and openness to post-secondary education.

So they did in the last budget propose some new, at least, should I say, they call them new policies for post-secondary education students. They were in fact the policies which they had cut so many years ago and which have had such an impact upon students across Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, I think that when we look at the government's signature, the Premier's (Mr. Filmon) signature on the western Canadian premiers' letter to the government of Canada last year arguing for the Government of Canada to introduce post-secondary bursaries and loans and particularly a debt relief program, I think the hypocrisy was somewhat breathtaking. Here was a government which had cut its own programs, refused to introduce new ones, and which now was urging the federal government to introduce that which itself was not prepared to do.

So, Madam Speaker, I commend this resolution to the House. I believe that the government has recognized some of the electoral consequences. I will not say social consequences, and I will not even say ideological consequences of what they have done. I think they have recognized the electoral consequences, though, and they have made moves to make changes in their policies.

Madam Speaker, it comes too late for many people. Indeed, we have yet to see what the policy will be. I understand from talking to loan officers in colleges that the government yet has to indicate to them any details of this plan. So, whereas the government had one press release and one--no, I do not think they had a press conference on it, but certainly one press release dealing with this some months ago. There are as yet no details. I think that makes it very difficult. We are now at the end of May. Students who need to be looking at whether they will be enrolling, taking on that burden of debt in Manitoba, need to know those details. As yet there has been nothing from the government, no plan, no proposal, no indication of what it is going to do, no indication of how this will work with the federal proposals, no indication of any continuing meetings.

Now I look forward, if the minister is going to respond on this, to give us some idea of what those plans are and what the government's proposals are, because so far what we have seen is a decision arrived at because of electoral fortunes and essentially a plan which has yet no detail, no opportunities for Manitobans to examine what the real proposals of the government are.

But we look forward, Madam Speaker, in the spirit of private members' resolutions, with optimism, to a government which is going to acknowledge that Manitoba students are carrying a heavy debt, that Manitoba students do need access, that increasingly older students need support in their programs at colleges and universities, and that part of that support comes in essentially opening the door to them, that saying, yes, you can do this; yes, there will be supports. When you complete your degree or diploma or college, there will be the opportunity for those of you who have extraordinary debts to have some relief from that. That seems to me as good a policy now as it was 10 years ago.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): I am pleased to be able to rise and place a few words on the record about the many things we have done to try and assist students with the costs of their post-secondary education in Manitoba.

I find it saddening in many ways that the members opposite, who know the things we have been doing because their colleagues in other provinces acknowledge them, still must feel in every instance that they have to be negative simply for the sake of being negative. You know, to begin by saying that it is always--for the member opposite, to begin by crying for debt relief, saying that it has always been done in certain other provinces, whose predecessors, by the way, were not NDP, so it was always done in British Columbia and always done in Saskatchewan. It was always being done by governments that were not NDP governments, but never stopped here to say how ironic that in Manitoba it has not always been done in Manitoba where the NDP governed throughout the '80s and it was not done by our predecessors. The member stated that as a point for why she should continue with harsh negative criticism against this government for no reason other than just to be negative.

* (1720)

I find that that is sad because I think that together she really does care about student debt and I really care about student debt. It would be really good if, for a change, the two of us could agree that we both have the best interests of students at heart and that in their day they did some things that were good and in our day we have done some things that were good. All of us together have, under the circumstances within which we must function, we have had the reduced transfer cuts. We have had all of those things. We had the debt, ironically left to us by members opposite, that we had to cope with.

Having said all that, though, Madam Speaker, we have done some incredibly good things that have been acknowledged in writing by students, by the presidents of student bodies, thank you for these things that we have done. I think it is time that they were acknowledged by members opposite in order for no other reason than to enhance their own credibility. They are seen and perceived to be people who just criticize, criticize, criticize, and they could enhance their own credibility by acknowledging some of the good things they have done in, particularly, this area where we have really helped students.

In terms of short-term and long-term strategies for debt management, on this specific motion, we have continually urged the federal government to assume its proportional share of student loan debt and implement meaningful measures which will reduce debt to manageable levels, and we do not apologize for that. The member seems to think it is a shame we went and asked Ottawa to take the fiduciary responsibility here. In fact, Madam Speaker, the federal government responded, and they announced new improvements to the Canada Student Loans Program in the recent federal budget.

Let me describe how this will now work. We waited until we got the federal understandings and then we were harmonizing our efforts with theirs for a package that would be complementary for students. Effective in 1998, borrowers can earn more and still be eligible for interest relief. The interest relief period was previously expanded from 18 months to 30 months, which will assist students who are having difficulty repaying their Canada student loans.

Additionally, the repayment period will be extended if the student still has difficulty repaying the loan after using 30 months of interest relief. This repayment period can be extended from 10 to 15 years. This means, Madam Speaker, that a student's monthly payments will be reduced by approximately 25 percent to enable the student to manage repayment. This is good.

If after extending the repayment period the borrower still has difficulty repaying, interest relief will be extended from 30 to 54 weeks. After exhausting the above benefits, if the borrower still experiences repayment difficulty, effective this year, the federal government will reduce the Canada student loan principal in some instances to a maximum of $10,000 or 50 percent of the CSL, whichever is less.

Due to the 60 percent federal, 40 percent provincial split in cost-sharing the needs assessment, Manitoba will provide up to $6,667,000. The federal government is also pleased to provide new Canada study grants to students in financial need who have children or other dependents. The amount of up to $3,000 a year will assist students with dependents who often have the greatest need.

Madam Speaker, I have got to just correct a figure here. I had written these figures down and that figure I quoted earlier should be $6,667, so that it is an accurate recounting in Hansard. I have to read what I have written down in terms of the figures to make sure they are accurate.

In addition to those other measures, the federal government has announced the new Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, starting in the year 2000, to provide more than 100,000 students with an average of $3,000 per year. The federal government has also announced tax-related initiatives such as the tax relief for interest on student loans, tax relief for part-time students and tax-free registered retirement savings plan withdrawals for returning adult students, as well as, provision of grants for contributions towards registered education savings plans.

Although Manitoba is concerned about new bankruptcy amendments and the federal consideration to deny loans to students considered as credit risks, the positive changes announced in the budget are welcomed and address the concerns expressed by representatives at the national stakeholders' working session on Canada's Student Loan Reform. There is still more good news for students. Our biggest good news we would like to have given them would be that our federal transfer payments of $220 million have been restored. That good news did not come, but the federal government has addressed the question, and the member opposite is wrong to say that we should not have wasted our time lobbying as ministers because we did get these results that are helping students.

The growing concerns about student debt load and accessibility have been addressed by the Manitoba, as well as the federal, government. Manitoba is implementing both an Interest Relief Program and a Debt Reduction Program and $1.6 million is being directed towards these new programs. An additional $4 million, for a total of $5 million in scholarship money, has been directed towards scholarships and bursaries by the Manitoba government. The department is committed toward providing one dollar in matching funds for every two dollars raised by institutions, and continues to consult with Manitoba's public institutions and the respective student associations regarding the design of the program. This initiative with matching funds will raise $10 million for scholarships and bursaries in 1998-99.

The Manitoba Learning Tax Credit, which the member does not like--I do not know why because it is certainly well received--has been reprofiled to complement the above initiatives to ensure that the most needy students receive assistance. Manitoba continues to contribute $15 million towards the tax credit, providing a 7 percent refundable tax credit for tuition costs. Our Learning Tax Credit was brought in two years ago, hardly--what did the member say?--being brought in because we have recognized the electoral consequences, and I really wish that we would not be judged by the standards of the members opposite. Please do not judge us by your standards because our motivation--it seems everything we do right now, because we happen to be in 1998, the minute we hit 1998, everything we do, according to the members opposite, is because of--how did she phrase it again?--electoral consequences, a phrase that is uppermost in her mind, much more so than in ours.

The Learning Tax Credit has been here; this is the third year of the Learning Tax Credit. It has been of extreme benefit to students. They have praised it all over the place. Our scholarship program last year, we received praise all over the place for that as well. These are things that are not being done in the electoral year, which may or may not be an electoral year. In addition to those other things, we have pledged ourselves and we are working with the federal government, so the provincial and federal governments continue to work together toward a long-term strategy which will create a national harmonized student loan program for post-secondary students. This is based on a one-student, one-loan premise to reduce overlap and duplication. Harmonization will also create a consolidated loan package to help graduates arrange manageable repayments.

These new initiatives, except for the Millennium Scholarship, will be in place for this 1998-99 academic year, and design details are currently being developed and finalized. The member made much of the fact that the provincial design details are not yet finalized, as if somehow we had advance notice that we could begin working on these 10 years ago, when in fact she knew, or ought to have known if she is following education, that we had said clearly, along with the other provinces, that we would wait for the details of the federal budget which had indications it would have debt relief and so on for students, and as soon as we got the details of the federal budget, we would begin immediately to harmonize our own efforts with the federal government's, which is exactly what we are doing. But the federal budget, of course, did not come down until just recently, and our own budget immediately thereafter announced our intentions in terms of the types of initiatives we put in.

* (1730)

So, Madam Speaker, the time line is right on target, following through with our commitment to work in partnership with the federal government, and the member somehow thinks we can have the kind of remarkable memory that would enable us to see things in the future and be able to act on them ahead of time.

The combined enhancements of the federal and provincial governments address the majority of the concerns expressed by all stakeholders. The governments of Canada are responding to the needs that are identified. Manitoba has gone further in that the Learning Tax Credit provides yet an additional help as well.

So we are pleased to partner with the federal government in the implementation of new strategies for debt management, and since Manitoba itself has proactively addressed concerns of stakeholders regarding student debt and since these new initiatives have been announced in recent federal and provincial budgets, therefore we believe the motion should not stand; everything in it is being addressed or has been addressed.

The only thing that I regret is that the member either did not have the knowledge or did not have the courtesy to point out the many, many good initiatives that have taken place that are not mentioned in her motion, a deliberate ignoring that was ignored for political purposes only, I think, because the members opposite on the NDP benches are very aware of the electoral consequences of their having ignored this during their time and not having anything positive to say at this time.

So I regret that. I wish that we could hear some honest, courteous recognition of the good things that the members opposite know absolutely have happened in post-secondary education in terms of the money that has provided to help students and the debt repayment measures that are in place.

To only state one side of the equation is to mean they take their name opposition literally in that all that they can do is oppose and never, ever be positive even when things are self-evident in terms of positivity.

Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I, too, rise and am pleased that I can add a few comments to the debate on this resolution. The member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) is absolutely correct that we are experiencing this, seeing that we live in the rural area. I live in the southern part of the province and, certainly, as a family we have experienced this, but before I talk about my own family experiences, I would just like to talk about my experiences as they were, albeit a few years ago.

When I came into Winnipeg and, you know, I had to come to the big city for my education, certainly I experienced also some of the trauma of having to finance my own education. I think this is very specific to the resolution that has been placed regarding student debt loan.

I had to come to Winnipeg, which is approximately 130 kilometres, and certainly had to take up residence within the city and needed to fund my education. It was costly but, at that time, for my summer job, I had the opportunity, in fact, to get a job, and I was earning 65 cents an hour. I was working at one of the local warehouses, and true as all constituents in the Pembina area, they put in long hours. If you have enough months and enough hours in the day, then even on a meagre salary it is amazing how much money you can raise in order to pay your way through university.

I, too, am concerned about the debt load that students are incurring as they, in fact, do go to university, to colleges, and certainly it impacts those much more who come from the rural areas than it does those who live within the urban setting. But, Madam Speaker, I was also going to, in relation to this, talk about our own family. I have a son who graduated from university two years ago. Of course, that is a little more current than I was talking about my own experience, but certainly there are costs that he had. I am proud to say that he did not have to take out a student loan. He was able to find a job in the summertime which was adequate, which helped to fund him through university. My daughter is currently at university, and she is doing the same thing, but I have some grave concerns about some of the problems that some of our students are getting themselves into. I would like to talk about the whole part of the lenders and some of the concerns that they have.

Having been on one of the local boards, the credit union boards, for a number of years, it was interesting to observe how students in fact did use and did appropriate the funds that they got through the financial assistance that is available to students. I know of a number of students who in fact took out a student loan, and they bought hi-fi equipment, stereo equipment, which certainly is nice to have, but I would say that it is not absolutely necessary for them to have this kind of technology in order to go to university. Now, I would like to have seen them spend the money on buying a computer. On the other hand, too, I certainly do not believe, and I am not saying that students should not have some of these advantages and some of the technology that is out there, but what I am saying with that though is that it is very important that students use the money that they get, when they take it out in a student loan, that they use it for the purpose that it was intended.

With that, Madam Speaker, I am also saying that there are a number of students who in my opinion have not been consistent with that kind of thinking. That is a concern of mine, so as the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) indicates to me in listening to the debate that she is involved in here in debating her resolution, I sense that she is saying that we should just give more money to students. I disagree with that. I believe it is accountability. That they should have money, yes, that is correct. I believe that education is extremely important, that it is extremely important that they have the finances that they need in order to be able to go to university, to go to colleges, to be able to finance their educations, I certainly agree with that, but I believe also that there is that term that we need to use, which is the word of accountability, that they need to be accountable for the dollars that they get.

So that is a concern that I have. I know that this has been, and still is, a concern that some of the lending institutions have that are involved with appropriating these funds. So I think maybe this reverts to the home, reverts to the teachings that we have in our home that we teach responsibility.

So I cannot support this resolution the way it has been put out here. I do, on the other hand, want to put forth a number of items that I believe will help to show the member that certainly we are heading in the right direction. If all students were given all the money that they needed in order to go to school, if all of us were given all the money that we needed, wherever we need it, certainly we would be living in a perfect world. That does not happen to be the case. So we need to use the money that we have, that we receive, we need to use it appropriately and wisely.

* (1740)

There is no doubt that their concerns, the concerns of the students, the lenders, the educational institutions, the financial service representatives, there is no doubt that these have been legitimate concerns. Our government has been, I believe, very concerned about the impact of higher tuition costs on accessibility to a post-secondary education for students with limited finances. This is something, Madam Speaker, that we are continuing to address as we move on. Through the Manitoba Student Financial Assistance Program, the Province of Manitoba has provided needy students with the means to obtain a post-secondary education. Although the program is supplemental in nature, Manitoba has recognized the increasing need for debt management strategies which will enable students to complete their education with manageable debt loads upon graduation.

Madam Speaker, I believe it is important that we use the term of manageable debt loads and that we enable them to do that, but I also believe that there is a responsibility on the part of the students and, as I indicated previously, that the opportunity is there for students to get summer employment. I know that there are varying degrees of pay that are out there, but my suggestion, and it has always been that, to our children, to friends of ours, is that you get the best job that you can and then you make use of the talents that you have and you work hard, and whatever money you can glean through that, that you certainly apply that to your education.

Over the past few years, both the federal and the provincial governments have reviewed and changed the Canada Student Loans Program to provide valid needs assessment criteria and have recognized the special needs of students with disabilities, female doctoral students, part-time students and students with dependents. However, provincial expenditures have increased dramatically due to the federal government's requirement that student financial need be cost-shared on a 60 percent federal and 40 percent provincial basis. Under the current system, students receive both a federal Canada student loan and a provincial Manitoba student loan which must be repaid when a student has completed his or her program of study.

Madam Speaker, just to digress a little bit from that theme, I was informed just lately that one of the members opposite, in fact, has taken up to 30 years to repay his student loan. Now, it is something I heard, and certainly it could be debated, but--

An Honourable Member: You tarnish everyone now unless you say the name.

Mr. Dyck: Well, again, this is what I have heard and, you know, I stand to be corrected. However, I believe that there is that fair possibility. [interjection] Well, I do not think it tarnishes everyone, but I think that, again, it shows the flexibility that has been present in this system which was there many years ago which is something that we are trying to address today.

So, Madam Speaker, despite rising costs, the program is constantly changing to recognize the ever-changing needs of students in today's society. Increasingly, students and their families have raised their concerns about access to post-secondary education and unreasonable debt loads upon graduation. Now, this government has recognized their concerns and has taken steps in co-operation with the federal government to alleviate the burden faced by students.

The federal government, in response to Manitoba's urging to assume its share of student loan debt, has implemented a number of improvements to student financial assistance. Under the new expanded Interest Relief Program, income levels have been adjusted so that more students will be eligible for interest relief. After a student has received 30 months of interest relief, if a student is still not in a position to repay their loans, they may be eligible for an extension of the repayment period from 10 to 15 years. This would reduce their monthly payments by approximately 25 percent.

Now, obviously, Madam Speaker, as I just indicated, again, where I heard that someone had taken up to 30 years to repay their loan, now certainly we have put, I would say, more structure into it so that students know exactly what the requirements are. On the other hand, though, I would also suggest that we have been lenient, that we have taken the position that students need to be given the opportunity to get a job, and then within a certain period of time they would start their repayment.

In addition to the above assistance, if a student needs still more time to find employment or to be able to repay their loans, they will be able to apply for additional interest relief which has been extended from 30 to 54 weeks. Once a student has exhausted all of the above assistance, if they are still unable to repay their loans, the federal government will reduce the Canada student loan principal to a maximum of $10,000 or 50 percent of the Canada student loan, whichever is less. Manitoba will provide up to $6,667 based on a 60-40 cost-share of the assessed need.

So, Madam Speaker, I would certainly indicate to you that there is flexibility, and as I said at the outset that certainly we want to assist our students in getting their post-secondary education. In recognition that students with children have additional financial needs, the federal government will provide Canada student study grants of up to $3,000 to help them with their costs which must be addressed in order for them to successfully complete their studies. The grants will assist students who have financial need above the maximums allowed for Canada student loans and Manitoba student loans. I am sure that you have heard of the new Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. The federal government has proudly announced the new funds which will be available in the year 2000 and which will provide more than 100,000 students with an average of $3,000 per year.

In addition to the above initiatives, the federal government has also announced tax-related initiatives which will assist students and their families. These initiatives will provide tax relief for interest on student loans and tax relief for part-time students. To recognize the growing financial needs of adult students, the federal government will also allow tax free registered retirement savings plan withdrawals for returning adult students.

There is also a new provision of grants for contributions towards registered education savings plans. Madam Speaker, I would just like to stop there for a moment. I believe that is an excellent way of allowing students to gather money but also to put it aside, which is exempt from taxes. It is sort of like an RRSP, and I think this is great.

An Honourable Member: Twenty years from now those families will have it, but what will they do for next year?

Mr. Dyck: The honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) is talking about a time to come. I think that we always must be proactive in our thinking, and certainly we are doing that.

An Honourable Member: What does that do for next year?

Mr. Dyck: The member is wondering what really is taking place here. I just have the indication that I need to wind up fairly quickly, so I want to thank you very much for the opportunity to put these comments on the record. I must regretfully say that I cannot support this resolution.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I, too, just want to put a few words on the record with reference to this resolution because it is an important resolution. I listened to both the Minister of Education (Mrs. McIntosh) and the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck). It is somewhat different as a Liberal sitting inside the Chamber and being told of all these wonderful, new federal programs that are coming down. [interjection] Federal Liberal programs that are coming down. It seems that the government in Ottawa has given the motivation for this government to take more action on this particular issue. And if that is what it takes in order to get the government to stand up and make notice or take more action, that can be a positive thing.

What I want to comment on specifically is in the real world, what we are talking about is--I do not know if it was the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) or someone brought it up a week or so ago when they talked about how much a student has to work today compared to in 1980. It is a significant amount more for a student to be working in order to be able to get the same type of education that was being given a number of years ago. That has got to obviously draw a lot of concern.

* (1750)

Another very interesting point was the very first WHEREAS where it talks about when a quarter of the operating revenues of universities made up tuition in 1995 which is significantly up from the 1975 of one-sixth. Well, Madam Speaker, we are relying more and more on university and college students to finance their education, and those costs are in fact going up. I would be interested in hearing what the government is doing to try to look at some of those costs. I, too, attended university, and I can recall buying the Intro to Sociology textbook, volume or No. 6 or No. 7 or whatever it might have been. These are very expensive books. What I found is that it was used for one year, and then they went on to some other text the following year. Well, if you get a number of courses in which you are actually purchasing books on an annual basis and you are not able to resell them to students that are coming in, it adds to the cost.

If you take a look at what is the per capita cost of educating in the province of Manitoba, someone for post-secondary education, it is something that causes some concern. Are there areas in which what we could be doing to try to bring down or assist in maintaining some of those costs? There is a responsibility of government in terms of reviewing, and that is in essence what this is talking about. This resolution is having a comprehensive review of the issue of debt financing and what role the government might be able to play. The only thing that I would have liked to have seen as a part of this is that, at least, maybe in one of the WHEREASes, where we acknowledge that there is more to post-secondary training than our universities and our colleges.

For the individual that graduates from Grade 12 that enters the workforce, there is a need to ensure that some of these companies do have or can receive some sort of assistance, whether it is apprenticeship or direct training programs. Because we subsidize, as taxpayers, individuals that go to colleges and universities, I think there is a responsibility also to the individuals, or at least to provide where possible, individuals that want to be able to enter directly into the workforce but do need some skill upgrading on hand, and you have a private company that is prepared to provide that sort of training.

There are a couple of industries, for example, that come to mind whether it is our aerospace industry, whether it is our garment industry, these are industries, or even some of the high tech industries in which there can be and we should have more training taking place. I think there is a role at least in part, not wholly--you have to hold these corporations accountable, get them to invest more. I think compared to the United States, we get nowhere near close to the same sort of reinvestment in our employees as some of the large American corporations down south. So we need to hold them more accountable, but most importantly we do need to recognize that there is a role for governments in that area also.

The Workforce 2000 program, for example, is one that I would make reference to, but dealing specifically with the resolution that is before us, I do believe that the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) does have an excellent point when we talked about implementing some sort of a comprehensive strategy in order to assist our students. I think that we owe it to them, at the very least, and we would like to see a government taking more of a proactive approach in dealing with this very serious issue that is facing thousands of Manitobans. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to put a few words on the record in regard to Resolution 31 which has been proposed by the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen). This resolution, its intent, is certainly well qualified and, on that point, one could consider supporting this resolution. However, it concludes by asking for a comprehensive strategy towards student debt relief for both university and college students.

Madam Speaker, I believe that this comprehensive strategy is well on the way to coming into an existence. In fact, I would like to remind the honourable member opposite that Manitoba's seven post-secondary institutions and their respective student associations and unions have indeed been consulted to develop guidelines for programs that are currently coming into play. By working co-operatively, the government of Manitoba has acknowledged the needs of students and has undertaken a manner in which to address those particular needs. The new initiatives that are coming forward are an effort to meet dollar for dollar the programs which will, in fact, initiate more than $10 million in scholarships and bursaries over the next couple of years.

It is very important that the members opposite recognize that there is an ongoing change and evolution in the educational field and how that education is, in fact, financed. I, too, am a university graduate and understand full well the poverty which sometimes comes with that connotation of being known as a student. I, for one, attempted to garner loans to help finance my personal education, however, because of the loan criteria I was prevented from qualifying for any loans. I think the members opposite can recognize that there are certainly dollars available, but one must also recognize the loan criteria as to be one avenue to which discussions must be undertaken.

The family income, even though it may be substantial, one must also recognize the obligations that those families have and must also recognize the amount of monies that the family may have to devote towards their children's education. That is equally as important as dollars available in the loan and bursary areas.

Madam Speaker, the government of Manitoba has, indeed, been working co-operatively with other provinces and the federal government to address issues raised by students, the lenders, the educational institution and other representatives regarding the need for changes to the student financial assistance. Manitoba representatives have held discussions with national stakeholders working session on Canada Student Loan reforms with the Intergovernment Consultative Committee on Student Financial Assistance and with federal representatives and student groups regarding the need for change and possible alternatives to the present level of assistance.

Almost everyone agrees the changes are needed to address the accessibility and the need to address the rising tuition costs, the higher debt loads and current defaults on student loans. I have personal experience with not only my own level of education but that of close friends, who had very talented and gifted young women who attended university, but because of the family income did not qualify for student loans and currently have had to remortgage their home, putting them back, perhaps, 20 years in their financial situation, one that they did not, now approaching retirement age, expect.

So, Madam Speaker, it is paramount that we as a government recognize and attempt to address the need for a criterion and level of funding that is needed in this particular--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Faurschou) will have 10 minutes remaining.

The hour being 6 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Wednesday).