MR. CHAIRMAN: Good morning and I would like to call the committee to order. This morning we are doing estimates on Education.
The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I want to start by looking at university and college funding. Not so long ago, the Canadian Association of University Teachers started a national campaign to examine the crisis in university funding. They began that campaign here in Halifax with the Halifax hearings. Federal and provincial governments across this country have cut funding for colleges and universities dramatically. Provincial expenditures for post-secondary education in Nova Scotia have fallen on average by 14.4 per cent since 1992-93 and provincial funding for university operating grants has fallen an average of 25.1 per cent in the same period of time.
At the same time, enrolment is expected to increase by 10 per cent to 15 per cent over the next decade and we all know what is happening with respect to tuition fees. They are going through the roof and a growing number of deserving students, especially those from modest and lower income families are having more and more difficulty getting into post-secondary education and they are leaving with the largest debt loads in the country. I think the Maritime Council on Higher Education has estimated that Nova Scotian students will leave with an average debt load approximating $40,000. This is definitely unacceptable.
Last night I was questioning the minister with respect to the student loan program and the fact that Nova Scotia is the only province in the country without a system of loan debt reduction in terms of a bursary program or loan remission.
But there are other very serious problems in our university system and this government has failed dismally to address the problems. I would like to speak specifically about the problem of infrastructure in the universities and capital investment or the lack thereof by this government in capital investment.
I want to start first by asking the minister whether or not she agrees with the statement that Nova Scotia's future is bound closely to the future of the universities in the new knowledge economy.
[9:30 a.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Education.
HON. JANE PURVES: Mr. Chairman, with one caveat, yes, I would agree with that. I would say that the whole post-secondary system is bound closely to Nova Scotia's future in IT and that whole sector. I would not exclude the colleges from that statement, but yes, definitely, the universities and the whole post-secondary system are crucial in many ways to our economic future.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I think therefore if that is the case, then renewing and maintaining the existing facilities would be critical for making Nova Scotia competitive as a centre of excellence in research and education.
University capital budgets have shrunk in Nova Scotia more so than in any other province in the country, largely due to underfunding. While governments across Canada are beginning now to put more money in their provincial budgets to upgrade university campuses, sadly, this is not the case in Nova Scotia.
In fact, I would like to table some documents, for example, from Saint Mary's University where the deferred maintenance is estimated to be at least looking at these calculations, in the vicinity of $25 million. A group of university administrators have been looking at this very serious problem in Nova Scotia for some time now and they estimate that there are at least $380 million needed to address capital needs. The cost of covering outstanding maintenance and repairs was $120 million and the Province of Nova Scotia has turned its back on the universities and these needs.
I think the Speech from the Throne last year flagged the notion that government in this province was getting out of the business of providing funding for capital investment in the universities and certainly this budget indicates that the Hamm Government is not prepared to invest in the absolutely critical infrastructure of the universities which is crumbling in many cases around the universities. They are leaving the universities in this province out on a limb, having to go hat in hand to the private sector and the evidence is
clear that the private sector is prepared to do their share, but they generally want to see matching revenues from government. Those revenues are not here.
I want to ask the minister, how does she expect universities in Nova Scotia to maintain their competitive advantage, the excellence that is required for research and education, when the buildings in which they teach, students learn, are not able to be upgraded, not able to be maintained, not able to be replaced? How is that possible, Madam Minister, and why has your government turned its back on Nova Scotian universities - one of our strongest assets?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there are a number of aspects to that question and I would like to address a few of them. One is the connection, not entirely direct or correct, between the university's ability to attract researchers and do research and physical infrastructure. There is some connection, but in fact, one of the most pressing requests of the universities this year was for matching research dollars so they could access federal government - CFI or Canada Foundation for Innovation grants.
This ability is going to be helped by our commitment of $15 million to a fund which the universities and the colleges will have access to, in order to access up to $100 million in federal funds for research. This was a priority for all the universities, particularly Dalhousie, as it is the biggest research university we have, so that is far from an abandonment of universities in that aspect.
In terms of direct capital grants, indeed we have stopped, as of now, giving direct capital grants to the universities with the exception of one last outstanding commitment to St. F.X. of $2.3 million which we promised and committed to at the end of this year.
The universities are aware of this. They have been aware for some time that we were going to do this and we asked them to come forth with a plan that would not necessarily involve direct capital grants, but perhaps another way for the provincial government to help them with their infrastructure needs, particularly in terms of deferred maintenance. The universities have less difficulty attracting private funding and/or federal funding for new buildings. People like buildings named after them, it is easier to attract private and federal money for new buildings, less so for refurbishing old ones.
I believe the universities have come forward with a long-term plan. I have not yet had a chance to study it, my officials have not had a chance to study it, but there may be a way we can help with either deferred maintenance money to be divided up each year or perhaps help with paying interest on loans or something to that effect.
So, yes, this year we have not given any capital grants, we have not hidden that. It is true other provinces, most particularly Ontario, in the last while, have invested a lot of money in university infrastructure. As it happens, other provinces have a lot more money to do so.
We are not yet in a position to do that as a government while we have a deficit and a debt to the extent we do, but we are strongly committed to universities and have responded to their priority request for research money and operating funds.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I think that while it is true, it is very important to provide some money for research so that universities here in Nova Scotia are able to take advantage of the federal government's initiatives with respect to research in the universities because most of those federal programs require matching contributions from the provincial government.
I fully support research and a strong research agenda in the universities, but research is not the only thing that universities are all about. Universities are about education; they are about developing our young people and preparing them for what is in front of them; they are about the future for our province and for our country. I would like to think that you need some balance in terms of universities and our approach to university in that education and the core of the university is in fact teaching and learning in the classroom and in the laboratories; research is certainly something that supports the teaching and learning activities in a university.
An infrastructure program and support for the infrastructure - the buildings, the laboratories - is so important. So much of the infrastructure in universities in this province is really out of date and quite a few of the older buildings - I was at Saint Mary's last week in an older building that had been refurbished and it was beautiful, a very nice job had been done.
I think it is critical to invest in the capital infrastructure in these universities and for this government not to have responded in this budget to the $302 million or so that is urgently required for recapitalization, I think, is a great shame and frankly a bit of a disgrace. I know what those facilities look like, I know what many of the classroom conditions are like. It is very difficult to teach in that environment, it is very difficult to learn in that environment. This should have been a priority, I feel, at this time for this government.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I would like to thank the honourable member for Halifax Needham for her questions. I would like to thank the NDP caucus for their questions and now in turn it is the Liberals' time for questioning.
The honourable Leader of the Liberal Party.
MR. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I would like to continue where I left off yesterday. Yesterday I was talking about the new school that is being planned for Clare. I was asking the minister when we left off about where students will be attending school come September that are following English programs at Clare District High School. I would like to ask the minister, when will a final decision be made in terms of where the students will
be attending in September and when will this decision be made public so that parents, students, staff and everyone concerned will know?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, we have been in discussions with the Tri-County District School Board and we are looking to know this by April 30th.
MR. GAUDET: I want to thank the minister for her answer. Another concern that has been expressed to me by a few bus drivers working for the Tri-County District School Board and a few with the French school board - conseil scolaire acadien provincial - they are asking me who is going to be transporting these students. I don't know if that has been looked at, if a decision has been reached, who will be transporting these students. Could the minister indicate whether or not a decision has been reached or if discussions are underway with both school boards in terms of who is going to be responsible for transporting these students?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, both school boards do have buses but we will not be in a position to say who will be transporting them precisely until a decision has been made about where the students are going. Once that is decided they will map out the bus routes.
MR. GAUDET: I want to move on to, again on Page 8.11, under Capital Grants. We were talking about bus purchases yesterday in the Supplementary Detail. Again, I am looking at the Emergency Capital Construction. I see that there is no listing on that budget line. What I am interested in is the funding that was allocated for Emergency Capital Construction. Is this the funding that is being used for renovations for school projects; if so, where is this funding located in your budget this year?
MISS PURVES: Back on Page 8.10 at the bottom of the page under School Capital - Amortization, we have the amortized costs for buildings and buses since it is only a portion that would be assigned each year as opposed to the total capital investment. Under the accounting method a portion of the costs of schools and buses are assigned to the department each year to cover the capital.
MR. GAUDET: I am not clear if the amount that is recorded here under School Capital - Amortization for School, do we have the funding included for the new schools that are coming on line? At the same time, do we have the money in that budget line that is spent for school renovation projects around the province?
MISS PURVES: The total budget for schools and buses is included in Transportation and Public Works' main estimates. It is a capital cost but our share, the amortized cost this year, is included in our budget under School Capital - Amortization. That does include the portions of the costs of the new buildings under construction and the buses for this year. Because of the change in accounting methods we do not show the total capital costs in our budget because they do not come on the books that way. They come on in an amortized way over a number of years.
MR. GAUDET: I understand that the funding that is being spent for school buses and for new schools is recorded in the Department of Education's budget. The minister is indicating that the money that is basically being used for repairs, renovations, emergency capital funding is budgeted under the Department of Transportation and Public Works' budget. Is that the understanding? The money that is allocated for repairs, renovations and emergency capital funding is budgeted within the Department of Transportation and Public Works' budget? (Interruption) Thank you. Could the minister indicate to us how much money has been budgeted for repairs and renovations?
MISS PURVES: I actually have a sheet here that I can table that would make this clearer and I will do that. I will say that for alterations, additions, renovations and repairs to various schools is $15 million. We have budgeted $4 million for repairs to Robb Joists, for that situation in the schools. Actually, to answer his question on bulk purchases of school buses, for this year it is $4.58 million. I would like to table this.
MR. GAUDET: As I understand it $15 million is being budgeted this year for renovations. Is that correct that $15 million has been budgeted for renovations, roughly?
MISS PURVES: Yes.
MR. GAUDET: Could the minister provide us with a list of the work that the department intends to carry out in the upcoming year?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I can't do it entirely right now. I can't provide a complete list because we have some new work planned that has not yet been approved by Cabinet, but I can certainly provide that list when it has been and I can provide what we know of so far.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister explain to us the process on how some of these projects actually get to be added to this list? Again, I am sure that the minister certainly recognizes this, every day there's another request that comes forward from a school board around the province, so I'm sure that it is a relatively extensive list. I am just wondering if there's a process in place that allows one project - whether it is Central Kings, West Kings or even Joseph-Dugas in Church Point - how does one project get to be on this list?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, last year we asked all the boards to go over their list of new school wishes and alterations, renovations that they wanted done and submit a list of priority projects to the department. They did that by the end of September, I believe, and then these lists went to a committee called the School Capital Construction Committee that had officials on it from the School Boards Association, each school board, Department of Education representatives, a Department of Finance representative and, of course, the Department of Transportation and Public Works.
They took all these priority lists and looked at what was asked. They went back to the boards, discussed a bit, and they took the list down to what they thought were the most crucial projects, looking at the whole provincial picture as opposed to just each board, and they submitted that list to the department. We costed it along with the previous list that we were working on that was already announced, and that is the plan and list that has yet to go to Cabinet but will be going. Whatever is approved will go back, then we'll go back out to the boards and tell them what we're looking at and then go from there, and that should be done this spring.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, maybe the minister could indicate the next time she's up if this is an annual process that the department basically looks at very closely with the lists that are being submitted by the school boards for the upcoming fiscal year in terms of what project will be added to the list.
I want to talk about a situation that has been happening right in my community in Church Point. Just prior to the March Break the Joseph-Dugas Elementary School was faced with what has been a problem for some time, the air quality. I know that lots of work was carried out before the school actually reopened this past Monday. I am being told that the job costs somewhere around $100,000. I am sure that the school board did not submit the project last year. This was an emergency situation that came up. I am curious in finding out is this funding coming out of the school board's budget, or is this funding coming out of the funding that has been set aside for renovation projects, or is this funding coming out of a special emergency account?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, no, this project did not come out of the school board budget. It comes out of our budget. Emergency repairs like that have to be dealt with as they arise and it will come out of - it was about $100,000 - our alternations and renovations budget.
MR. GAUDET: So the minister is saying there is only one account for renovations, alterations, there's no special budget within the department for emergencies as they come up. Is that correct?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there is no specific fund as the honourable member for Clare asked. It comes out of the renovations and alterations fund and the capital fund, and to date when these situations arise it has not been a problem to get that kind of work done. For instance, last year - I am sure he is aware of the issue - we had all of the cleaning that had to be done at Central Kings and that was done on an emergency basis and paid for by us, not by the board.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, if I am coming back to the money that has been budgeted for renovations or repairs, when a list is drawn up and if emergency situations do come up - and they always do - I am just curious, projects that were approved or being
considered to be carried out in a given year, if some projects are basically dropped off because of the emergency projects that do come up from time to time. Could the minister indicate if that's the situation or the process that the department basically runs under?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this has not happened, it didn't happen last year or the year before and I can't predict what will happen this year, but so far we have been able to carry out these emergency renovations with the money we have had budgeted.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, school boards across Nova Scotia have told the department that $27 million is needed to bring existing schools up to present-day standards, there's no provision in the budget for this. Will the minister revisit, I guess, the issue or concern that was brought up with a view to maybe not providing the $27 million? Certainly $27 million would be welcome news to school boards, but is the minister ready to at least acknowledge that there is a need to provide school boards with some level of funding, maybe again on a priority list, in order to allow school boards to meet certain standards, I am sure, under the Building Code?
MISS PURVES: Certainly we acknowledge the problem. Sometimes, as the member knows, these issues end up being taken care of through emergency situations that have to be dealt with through the alterations and renovations budget, but the answer is, as I have said before, we recognize the problem but there were other issues we had to recognize as well. As has happened in the past, we have had to put our priorities elsewhere. We certainly did ask for money to address this problem but we were unsuccessful in being able to provide that this year.
MR. GAUDET: Before I move on to another area, I think we recognize that school boards have been putting off different maintenance projects in order to try to continue to invest as many dollars as possible in the classroom. There's no doubt that situations where maintenance should have been carried out are catching up and have been catching up for some time now. Every year it seems that school boards need a lot more money in terms of renovations, repairs, general repairs, while at the same time recognizing this has been ongoing.
[10:00 a.m.]
Is the department considering providing the school boards - I don't know if there's money allocated under the infrastructure program. I know that in previous years some funding was made available to school boards; some funding, but probably not enough. This is not a problem that is unique to just one school board. This is technically happening around the province when school boards and officials are faced with providing more money in the classroom or fixing windows or doors or roofs or pipes or whatever it may be, that is being deferred. You try to provide with the resources needed inside the classrooms.
My question would be - I am sure the minister and her staff are aware of the fact - is there some consideration being given by government to recognize that eventually there is going to be a big problem, a bigger problem if we just keep putting it off and putting it off? I am just wondering, is government - I am sure that they have all the numbers, they have the information, they have the facts before them - considering to try to provide them with maybe a bonus, a bonus round, or shot-in-the-arm funding to try to address some of these urgent problems that are happening?
We talked about one that happened in my community several weeks ago. We could certainly go around the province and bring a relatively extensive list to the minister. I am just curious, is the minister or her government considering providing some additional help to school boards in order to try to make a small dent in a growing problem that has been happening over many years?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the member for Clare is right. We have a list; we have documentation for every school in the province. Of course, not every school requires the amount of maintenance as some of the older ones. It is a problem in other infrastructure as well, as he has said. It is an issue in the health care system, and with housing and other areas. We have the documentation; we talk about it. The fact of the matter is that at this point in time we don't have the money to put towards this problem.
There is another aspect, it is not as major, but one of the school board chairs recently remarked to me that she felt their board was penalized for taking care of its schools. Some boards have done a better job with using money for deferred maintenance, alterations and renovations than other boards have. It is still all a matter of choices over time. That being said, it is a big issue that we haven't got the money for this year.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I recognize the funding is probably not available in this year's budget, but I would certainly encourage the minister and her staff - I am sure they are aware - to at least give some consideration, down the road, in the future, because school boards certainly need a break, and need some special assistance in order to try to meet this growing problem they are faced with daily.
In the Budget Speech, there was a reference made to the infrastructure program, $195 million over five or six years. Could the minister indicate to us - I am sure she has probably been talking to her colleague, the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations - if there is going to be any funding allocated, maybe not in the first round but in future rounds, for school boards to help meet this growing demand? Could the minister indicate if there is any funding earmarked under the $195 million for the infrastructure program to be used or that the school boards will actually benefit from?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I have inquired about this, and I did last year too, when I believe Marg Forbes of the School Boards Association was talking about in previous times infrastructure money was made available for schools. Certainly, it is my understanding that if that was the case, that is not the case this time, that federal infrastructure money is for municipal projects, particularly green projects, and highways. Of course, there is a huge capital deficit in those areas as well. I will ask again but to the best of my knowledge, from past enquiries, that money doesn't apply to schools.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, the minister raises a concern. I remember when we were in government, under the last infrastructure program, especially the remaining funds in that account, I know the former President of the Nova Scotia School Boards Association, Marg Forbes, certainly lobbied on behalf of her group for additional funds to help them out. I know, at that time, after many of the green projects, sewer, water, even community projects - and universities benefited from the former infrastructure program - there were some funds left over. I can't remember the exact number. We are not talking about big dollars, maybe several million that in the end went to the school boards. I certainly would encourage the minister to talk to her colleague, to try to lobby as much as possible for the school boards. I am sure they certainly would appreciate any helping hand along the way.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to move on to Page 8.6 in the Supplementary Detail. Under Public Schools, the expenditure for Administration shows a relatively substantial increase. We are seeing the estimate for 2000-01, we were spending $284,000; the actual expenditure for the last year was $420,000; then I am looking at the estimate for the upcoming year, it has grown to $551,000. We are actually spending more in public school administration. Could the minister explain what accounts for this increase?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the biggest increase there comes from the appointment of a Senior Executive Director for Public Schools. We reorganized the department and his office was transferred. Down at the bottom line you see Regional Education Services, there is a fair decrease there. Well, the biggest portion of the new Administration budget has actually moved from one line to another because the person in question, Mike Sweeney, was formerly a Regional Education Officer. That is roughly $300,000. There are several other expenses in there. That is the biggest one.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, the minister indicated that part of that increase is to pay the salary for a senior executive director. Could the minister indicate to the committee who that new executive director is, and in terms of what his or her responsibilities are with the school boards?
MISS PURVES: That person is Mike Sweeney. His secretary and program costs are costs associated with running that office; travel, mileage, phone and so on came out of the Regional Education Officer's budget on the bottom line there and was moved up.
MR. GAUDET: Is the minister indicating that school boards report directly to Mr. Sweeney, that anytime school boards have problems, before they have access to her office or to the deputy's office, they have to go through Mr. Sweeney's office? So, any business that is being carried out with the school boards around the province, has to go through Mr. Sweeney's office? Is that the understanding?
MISS PURVES: Theoretically, I suppose so, but all the school boards know who to go to in their department for their particular issues. Usually, if it is for facilities, they will go to Charles Clattenburg or Paul MacLellan, somebody in facilities. They know who to go to for special education issues, it would still be Ann Power. We have reorganized the department into three major areas all with some offshoots and we have a new Senior Executive Director for Public Schools, so the structure is not as flat as it was.
There are not 7 or 8 or 11 executive directors with direct reports to the deputy. We have someone that I can go to or the public can go to or the deputy can go to who is responsible for everything to do with public schools. We have the post-secondary, headed by Susan Clark; we have our finance under Mr. Youden who is here; and we would also have a direct report to the deputy for Acadian and French language services, Margelaine Holding. She is in Mike's section, but she still has direct access to the deputy. In point of fact, as I am sure the former minister is aware, people go directly to the deputy all the time, no matter what the formal structure. Yes, it was reorganized in that fashion.
MR. GAUDET: Again, on the same page, Page 8.6 under Public Schools, looking at the Regional Education Services, could the minister indicate to us what this funding is for? Is the funding used to pay for our Regional Education Officers?
MISS PURVES: Yes, it is. It is used to pay for the REOs and whatever staff. Yes, it is.
MR. GAUDET: Could the minister indicate to us how many Regional Education Officers we have in the province?
MISS PURVES: At this moment, we are down to two and a half Regional Education Officers: Jim Burton in the northern part of the province, Nancy Mosher who is back doing Halifax-Annapolis and Dave White is now doing Chignecto part-time.
MR. GAUDET: Is it part of the restructuring within the department to do away with these Regional Education Officers? Now that Mr. Mike Sweeney has left the metro area and basically has assumed a new position within the department, is it the department's position to do away with these Regional Education Officers?
MISS PURVES: No, no it is not. They perform a very useful liaison function. They are people on the ground that the school boards can go to for help and we can go to to find out information about meetings and issues in whatever area of the province. Because of how we have reorganized the former Southwest Regional School Board, with the CEO now reporting directly to the department, we haven't found it necessary to have a Regional Education Officer there. Although, we did find that we definitely needed one in the southwest for liaising with the CSAP. Now that former REO Guy LeBlanc has actually been hired by the CSAP, at least for the time being we are not replacing that position. We find that the relationship is beginning to improve considerably.
MR. GAUDET: In pursuing the minister's last comments, Guy LeBlanc, who was the former Regional Education Officer for the western part of the province, the Valley and the Southwest Regional School Board, the minister indicated it is not her intention to replace Mr. LeBlanc's position immediately. Could the minister indicate to us when this position will be filled and at the same time could she indicate also whether or not it is her government's intention to appoint someone or to have the job posted, that if anyone is interested, they can apply for this position, or again if they are going to continue to appoint some of their friends in these positions?
MISS PURVES: As I said, for the time being we are not filling that position, partly because of trying to take care of the pennies as much as possible. But, yes, I can commit to when we decide to fill that position, we will post it. We did second Mr. LeBlanc to that position, but in point of fact, when it had been previously advertised, he had applied, so he was on a list that we had. I would like to clarify for the House that Mr. LeBlanc's appointment to the CSAP was done by that school board, not by the Department of Education.
MR. GAUDET: Maybe on that last point - and the minister indicated that Mr. Guy LeBlanc, who is now the superintendent of the conseil scolaire acadien provincial, was hired by the school board - I am just wondering, does the Department of Education have a role to play in hiring superintendents?
MISS PURVES: Yes, under the Education Act, the Department of Education has a voice in any committee to hire any superintendent, but the department does not have a veto. So, in fact, we can advise, but we cannot appoint.
MR. GAUDET: I don't know if there is a conflict here. Technically, we have elected school boards that are responsible to hire their own CEO or superintendent. At the same time we have the Department of Education advising school boards around the province in terms of who they should be looking at hiring. Maybe the minister could clarify for the committee, if there is a conflict or if there is no conflict.
MISS PURVES: I can't answer whether there is a conflict. Certainly, the department has an interest. This revised Education Act was brought in by the Liberal Government in the mid-1990's and that is a provision in the Education Act brought in by that government and we are simply complying with provisions of the Act to have a person sitting on a panel and discussing the qualifications of various people who apply for superintendent positions.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, again, on that same page, I am looking at Learning Resources and Technology. Last year, the actual spending on that budget line was $8.5 million. I am looking at the estimates for the upcoming year and it is down to $6.3 million. I would say, and the minister would probably agree, that in this day and age, in order to be successful, people must be conversant with technology. My question would be, why is the department decreasing this expenditure on technology by over $2 million?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the decrease there is because of the expiry of the IEI agreement. It expires next year and, in point of fact, all the schools are now connected to the Internet. Most of the equipment is or will be in the schools and it is just winding down.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, so the minister is indicating that all schools have been connected. This was the IEI agreement that was in place with the federal government. So technically we are now at the point where this agreement is expiring. So is the minister saying that all the work has been carried out, all the schools have been connected, all the schools have been provided with the computers that were announced earlier, several years ago?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, no, I am not saying that. But what I am saying is that the agreement that we are now operating under is winding down and that we are working on IEI 2. But in terms of that particular agreement, it is winding down. Our payments are less this year because they were a bit front-end loaded. But I am not trying to say that every piece of equipment or software needed in the school is there. That is not the case, but what we are obligated to under that agreement, that is winding down and we are working on the next one.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I would like to move to the estimates, Page 8.11, Acadian and French Language Services. Under the Acadian and French Language Services, I note that there is a total recovery of the money spent. Does this mean that the province does not spend one penny on French education in Nova Scotia?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this section, Acadian and French Language Services applies to a division in the department whose Executive Director is Margelaine Holding and this applies to the people and the operations of her department only. It is not all French education. Yes, the staff in that department are paid for through federal recoveries.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, so the minister is indicating that the staff in the French Acadian section within the department is cost-neutral for the province, that the staff is fully funded by the federal government. Is that my understanding?
MISS PURVES: Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is correct.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, again, on Page 8.11 under the budget line, Salaries and Benefits. I am looking at the estimates for 2000-01. We are looking at an expenditure of $822,000. The actual spending last year was $481,000. I am looking at the estimates for this year - $752,000. So the estimates from last year to this year, we are looking at $70,000 less. Could the minister indicate why there is a decrease in the estimate funding?
MISS PURVES: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, could I clarify if the member was working from the Supplement or the estimates?
MR. GAUDET: For clarification, I am looking at the estimate on Page 8.11 under the budget item Salaries and Benefits. What I am looking at is the estimates for 2000-01. We have an entry for $822,000 and I am looking at the estimates for this coming year. It is down to $752,000. So there is a decrease in funding here for $70,000 for salaries and benefits. Could the minister indicate why there is such a decrease?
MISS PURVES: The increase in the estimate for next year is to reflect the total cost recovery of the $220,000.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I want to go back to the Supplementary Detail for Acadian and French Language Services, Page 8.8. There is a budget line entitled School Governance. This year, we are estimating the budget expense will be $842,000. I am looking at last year, the estimate was $151,000 and the actual spending last year was $891,000. Could the minister indicate to us what this funding is used for?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, what we have done this year is to make the funding easier to understand, the School Governance line applies to French first language programs. The French Curriculum Development line refers to French immersion and French second language programs. In previous times, it wasn't clear what went where, so we tried to make it clearer. I think the member can see that some of these lines have gone up and down to reflect that.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister explain to us how many provincial dollars are actually going into French education in the province? We are talking about federal funding coming in. My question is, simply, could the minister indicate to us how many provincial dollars are going to support French education in the province?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, if you include all French education, including core French, there is $63.7 million in provincial funding and $5.8 million in federal funding going into education, classes, special projects, et cetera, excluding capital.
[10:30 a.m.]
MR. GAUDET: I just want to be sure and clarify that. There is a little bit of music in the background here. Did the minister indicate there is currently $63.7 million going into French education, core and French as a second language?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, in that money I am actually including the University of St. Anne's and Collége de l'Acadie as well, but yes.
MR. GAUDET: With the core French funding, along with funding for Université Sainte-Anne and the Collége de l'Acadie, did I understand as well that the funding that is being provided for French as a second language in the province is also included in that number? Did the minister nod her head?
MISS PURVES: Yes, included in the $63.7 million, that is included there as well. We estimate the funding for core French at about $33 million, so if you subtract that, it is about $30.7 million of provincial funding going into the CSAP, special OLEP programs in the Collége de l'Acadie and the Université Sainte-Anne.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, $63.7 million from provincial budgets going into the province to fund French education. Did I understand correctly that the province is receiving $5.8 million from the federal government to support the staff within her department and to provide funding for French education in the province, so $5.8 million is coming in from the federal government for French education in Nova Scotia?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, what we show in the estimates is actually $4.5 million in federal recoveries. We are about to sign some new agreements, and we anticipate the agreements, this year, to total $5.8 million. That is what we are hoping.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, the minister indicated they are in the process of signing a new agreement with the federal government. Once the agreement is signed, I am just wondering if the minister will agree to table or provide us with a copy of the agreement, after the agreement has been signed by the federal government. I don't want to jeopardize her negotiations. Will the minister undertake to provide us with a copy of the agreement, once it has been finalized?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, yes, I will table the agreement. The agreement will be public, and I would be quite pleased to table it as soon as we have it signed.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I am looking, again, at the Supplementary Detail, Page 8.9, Public Education Funding. The next section, we are talking about Other Grants, Page 8.9. French Language Grants are listed here, the estimate for 2001-02, $2.5 million. Could the minister indicate to us what this funding is used for?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I will find out and table that information.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister for her commitment. I want to move on to universities. In the Supplementary Detail, Page 9.2. I am looking at the Grants to Universities, the first item is Operating Grants to Universities, we see it has been increased by roughly $6 million. I think everyone probably recognizes that is not nearly enough of an increase. Further down I am looking at Targeted Funding of $2.7 million spent last year, and this year it is down to $1.2 million. Could the minister indicate to us what this Targeted Funding is used for, and why there was a decrease by $1.5 million?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, my presumption here is that targeted projects are being completed, but I will check with our people at Higher Education, find out the details and bring them back to this House.
MR. GAUDET: We will come back to Targeted Funding later on. I want to go back to Operating Grants to Universities. The estimates are showing that universities are going to be provided with an additional $6 million. I am wondering if the minister will provide us with a breakdown on how much additional funding universities around the province will receive.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I do have a list here with the breakdown for each university. Would the member accept the tabling of that list, or would he like me to read it out?
MR. GAUDET: That would be fine. Mr. Chairman, again, under the same budget item, Grants to Universities, I am looking at Special Payments. Last year, under the estimate, there was $3.2 million budgeted, the actual spending was the same. Again, this year, we are seeing a slight increase to $3.3 million. Could the minister indicate to the committee what this funding is used for?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, Special Payments include the rent for the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, in their Historic Properties location. It includes $1 million to Dalhousie in lieu of the former TUNS rent, and also includes several scholarships, including the Anthony Johnstone Memorial Scholarship.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, still on that same page, under Capital Grants we see last year the actual cost to Grants to Universities, the government spent $7.3 million. We are seeing, in the upcoming year, that this funding is being cut by this government. Could the minister please explain why this funding is being cut to universities?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there were outstanding capital commitments made to some of the universities in previous years and we have lived up to those, but we cut Capital Grants to Universities because we have a money problem and that is the only answer to that question. In the future we are going to look at ways we can help the universities, as I have said to the member for Halifax Needham, to try to find some other ways to help them, particularly with their deferred maintenance issues, but direct capital grants, at least with this government, are likely to be a thing of the past.
MR. GAUDET: So, Mr. Chairman, if I understand, this funding has been cut this year. Is it a new government policy to no longer provide capital grants to universities to help them with the infrastructure on their campuses or is this basically a one-time deal that, unfortunately, in this year's budget the funding is not available and the minister basically is looking at restoring this funding in future budgets? Is that the reading that I am getting?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, we are looking at a different way of providing funding to universities for some of their capital needs. Obviously, if we were flush with money, the situation would be different, but we are looking at ways that might involve helping them pay interest payments on loans, or a long-term plan for some deferred maintenance funding, some other way where the province can really help where they don't have any alternative. They do have some alternatives with federal funding and private funding for new buildings, but with their older buildings they have very little alternative and that is where, at least at the present time and in the next couple of years, we believe we could probably be of the most use to the universities and we would just like them to help us come up with a plan whereby we can do that in an affordable way.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could you indicate to me how much time is left?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I am sorry, your time is up. I appreciate the Liberal Leader paying attention.
The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Thank you to the member for Clare and notifying me of the time that I have. Madam Minister, I plan to share my time with a number of members of the NDP caucus. I have a number of concerns, as usual, because of a previous career, if you can call what we do now a career.
I suppose I should begin with the issue which I raised last year and I want to go back to it, if I could please. It comes out of a line item that comes out of the Supplement to the Public Accounts. I direct your attention in fact to Page 58. I have looked through the coffee comparisons, if I can call it that, or the so-called free lunch from one department to another. I will table this because of the reference to other sections, but the Business and Consumer Services Department, as of Page 20, from Treats-Bakery/Cafe has a bill of $5,216.54 for the year. Economic Development for one reason or another, referred to on Page 42, has a bill from the Halifax Club for one reason or another of $5,415.23 - a good lunch if you can afford it. The Health Department, Page 82, has a bill from Rudy's totalling $8,180.67. Housing and Municipal Affairs with their good taste went to the Summit Cafe, or had catering done from the Summit Cafe, to the total of $6,404.89, Justice, Page 112 of the document I referred to earlier, has Nestle Foodservice for a total bill of $9,577.93.
I am coming to the Education Department and if you are following me through this, I see on Page 58, RCR Catering Ltd. has a total of $6,257.62. It sounds quite reasonable. However, if you go up higher on that page, you will notice that Oliver's Coffee has a total this year of $37,955.50 and that is a moment of interest to me because I can tell you that young teachers out there looking for jobs, or a new teacher's assistant in the system that I worked for could go for $17,000. So I would like some clarification on the fact how out of step it seems that the coffee bill, the free lunch, or the catering service, in comparison to other departments, Oliver's Coffee has got what we would say in the business a land-office business going for them at these rates. Could you clarify those numbers for me?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, it certainly seems like a lot of coffee. Oliver's Coffee is a restaurant in the Trade Mart Building and a huge amount of the professional development that we do, the meetings with school board chairs that we have, the meetings that happen over lunch usually are catered by the restaurant in that building and though it is a large amount, it is actually much cheaper than having people in and taking them out to hotels and other places and over a year the bill ends up being roughly the same. These are usually sandwiches and coffee and quite a few of them - I would venture to say the vast majority - are eaten by teachers and people who are on committees doing work for the Department of Education.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I thank you for the explanation. I know that coffee makes the teacher think better, I guess, however, I really want to question this. I know that people can say this is a nickel and dime approach and I know that your Leader, the Premier, has pointed out that every nickel counts, and I have also looked at the Tourism budget on this particular line item and I know the importance of having input and having meetings and having consultation with people coming into your department.
The first bill from RCR Catering, that particular total is quite in line with the other departments that I have mentioned, but I truly must ask you, on behalf of an education system, in particular a number of schools in my constituency that are pinching every penny,
not pinching every nickel, I would ask that that be reviewed and that in future a $37,000 bill accumulated over that length of time, in the view of this past educator, is unacceptable. I would like you to give some kind of commitment that you will review the facts that the $37,955.50 figure is, as you said, a lot of coffee.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there is certainly a way to avoid an expense like this showing up in the Public Accounts and that would be to make sure that everyone went out for lunch, took the time off, and put the individual lunch tabs on their expenses. It wouldn't show up in the Public Accounts, but it would be spending a lot more money out of the public purse. That being said, I will look at the bill and I will go over everything that lunch was ordered for and see if that can be changed, but certainly, there is a way to hide this kind of expense but there isn't necessarily a way to get rid of it.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I appreciate your candour. I am not asking you to hide anything. The concern I have is when we look at expense accounts and we look at people who are coming in to meet with you or various other people, it seems to me that that shouldn't be on the public tab of this province. I would ask that your staff, in future, or people who are going through this process, I don't expect them to brown bag it, necessarily, I appreciate the fact that the Halifax Club, although we looked at Economic Development earlier, might not be the destination, but it would be my opinion that this should be out of their own pockets as opposed to individual expense accounts. That is my opinion. That comes from me as a teacher, and it comes from me as a parent, because I know, as far as I am concerned, that is an expense that is hard to justify, hidden or not hidden.
Let's continue with expenses. I am interested in and would like to talk about, if I could, the conference. Congratulations on hosting the conference last November. From all reports and the people I spoke to - I am talking about the 14th Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers from November 26th to November 30th - and the literature that came out at that time and the importance of having people in our province from across the world, in fact, not just across the country, it was obviously very well received. At what cost for this conference we hosted did the Education Department have to step up to meet any expectations on expenditures?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, that item is actually on Page 8.6 of the Supplementary Detail, $136,500. I would also like to point out that the original estimate for that was around $500,000. We worked very hard to get that down. A great deal of the money was paid for by registration and the federal government also chipped in, as this was an international affair. The cost to the province, net, was $136,500.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the specifics. I saw the total. I appreciate you promoting part of beautiful Timberlea-Prospect, because, of course, as a tourist destination I see that there was the opportunity to go to Peggy's Cove. I just hope they managed the roads. I had to get that in, Mr. Minister of Transportation and Public Works.
Were any of these costs, of the original amount you had just mentioned, used to offset any of the tour packages outside of the actual conference itself? Or was that strictly maintained by each and every person?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I will endeavour to find that out, specifically. My presumption is that the tours, particularly for some of the spouses, would have come out of general funds. I will come back with a better breakdown for the member. I think it might have been kids from the Timberlea-Prospect school who provided art work to all of the delegates, as well.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you for the specifics on those - when they arrive. I listened intently to your opening comments. I am particularly gratified that a code of conduct, with some common-sense approach to this earlier - if you are a school principal, administrator or vice-principal - zero tolerance implication. If you have been following the press, members will know there were incidents in parts of the municipality where I was a school teacher, where children - young people, whatever we call them these days - were punished for such things as throwing snow balls.
The code of conduct and the implementation is a concern that has been brought to my attention. I would like to know how much your department has targeted for funds to assist in the implementation of this eventual code of conduct? Bringing the words off the paper and making sure that the implementation of the code of conduct is understood and fair across this province, making sure that teachers and administrators are aware of exactly what the implications are of the code of conduct, I say to you, Madam Minister, is going to cost some money. I would ask, how much have you or your staff allocated in the way of support for the implementation of the code of conduct?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the code of conduct, this year, for implementation, we have put aside $100,000, and that is almost exclusively professional development for teachers and administrators. Obviously, that will start in the school year, from September to March. That was the complete ask for this year in terms of helping principals and teachers understand and begin to implement the code of conduct. In further years there will be more costs, obviously, but for the coming year we have every reason to believe that amount will cover the cost.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I want to refer, if I can, to an excellent front-page article by an outstanding young journalist at the University of Kings College. Her name is of some consequence in the home of Carolyn Estabrooks, because this is her outstanding daughter Trisha. This young woman did a story as part of her journalism degree on the mega-school, the size of schools and the resulting problems, according to this journalist. The summation Trisha Estabrooks comes to in this article is: Bigger not always better, say students. I would ask the minister, what does she see, in her opinion, as the best size for a high school in the HRM?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I didn't realize the honourable member's daughter was entering such an honourable profession as journalism. Maybe she will end up in politics.
I think the size we look for in high schools is around 1,100. Bigger isn't always better, that is absolutely true, but once you get to high school, with the number of credits required and the number of specialized courses it is very difficult to provide the curriculum without a certain amount of critical mass. You can go a bit above or a bit below, depending on what you are offering, depending upon the physical configuration of the school, but I would concur with the journalist's opinion that mega-schools say of more than 1,500 are probably not the best for students.
[11:00 a.m.]
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I concur completely. I would like to turn to an issue of concern to many parents. It refers to the fact that many teenagers today have been described as "couch potatoes". The finger is always pointed at schools. After all, we are the great catch-all on any kind of social problem, no matter what it is, the teachers will step in and there will be courses and lessons and particular handouts on certain topics from anything from AIDS to sexual activity to physical education. I am, with the past that I have, particularly concerned about a Dalhousie study - I am not concerned about the study, I am concerned about the results - that according to the Dalhousie University study that was referred to in a Daily News article - and, again, if it is necessary, I will table this also, but I am sure the minister's staff has probably seen it - that teenagers just do not get enough physical activity.
I am not interested in hearing about PAL, physical active lifestyles. I know the minister and I have had this conversation on the record and off the record. You don't have the facilities and PAL is not, in my view, any way towards the solving of this problem. I am interested, and I think many people are, and I am sure that the Minister of Health is interested, because, eventually, as we well know, the cost comes at the other end; that is, of course, the fact that teenagers are in such poor shape and, as adults, they continue.
Is it in the plans of the Department of Education, is it in the Department of Education's crystal ball to make physical education a compulsory course in the future?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, physical education is compulsory to Grade 9, but not after that. That is when we get into PAL. It has not been in our crystal ball, but I take the member's point very well and will look into that possibility.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, just a few more questions before I wrap up and share my time. As you well know, in your department, there are so many members of this caucus who would like to have the opportunity to speak to you and to listen to you during these budget decisions.
I want to talk about honours courses. Madam Minister, I, of course, was a classroom teacher for many great years and always had the opportunity to teach some great kids, whether it was at Sir John A. Macdonald High School or Sackville High. I can tell you that one of the greatest years I ever had was the split-shift at Sackville High and Millwood High where halfway through the day when buses were going and kids were in every other direction and the challenges of being a school teacher were at their optimum, I was given the opportunity, to teach what we call during the common period in that day, a Grade 11 honours history course. That Grade 11 honours history course, I guess these days would be a bootleg course, if that is the appropriate expression. I don't know if I should use that language - bootleg. Anyway, it is a course that certainly is illegal and it is not offered anymore.
I can tell you that in that course, and Madam Minister, I am not being snide with this comment, I had 48 students - so I know earlier in your career there was a number thrown around - but it was no problem having 48 European history students - Great Personalities Make History, that was the course. We attracted students from both the Millwood High shift and the Sackville High shift. They got home on their own, whether they were on the afternoon shift, or whether they got there earlier on the morning shift. These young people made my day. In the middle of the challenges of being the disciplinarian and taking care of the problems in a split-shift high school, I taught Grade 11 enriched honours history. Some of those young men and women are prominent in this business community throughout the province. Some of them are prominent in other roles. I was the fortunate one.
What I am saying to you is, and I think it is a concern of many parents and teachers that there is, without a doubt, a watering down of the system in some courses and what you end up doing - and you don't end up having 48 in a class because of this - you end up having a class of 35. You teach the kids in the middle and you, hopefully, have a teacher's assistant in there helping you with the kids who, perhaps, are faced with some challenges, and that you have adjusted material for, particularly in reading level or other types of homework expectations. The kids at the opposite end of the spectrum, if I can say that, they just do their own thing, and you hope that you at least have a good enough class that day with either a motivational enough lesson or piece of material they could read.
I recall, particularly, you could think of this, and I got really conned in by the fact that when Adolf Hitler's diaries were published, I thought that was a wonderful gem. When it eventually came out about three weeks later they were all, as you well recall - not the diaries, but I can tell you that that piece of literature was absolutely consumed by those students and, then again, the history teacher was laughed at for about the following three years because of having it. That document we used through that three week period was consumed by those honour students. I come to this with a real concern because I am aware of the fact that if I understand this correctly, honours-enriched classes in high schools across this province are no longer acceptable and they will be, if not already, eventually terminated. Could you clarify that for me please, and sorry for the long preamble.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, well, what the member for Timberlea-Prospect says is, to some extent, true, although we are not terminating such courses per se, there is an issue with some Grade 10 courses. That is another matter of economics. That being said, we are actively pursuing a way to introduce advanced studies back into the high school curriculum. I expect to have some specifics to announce this year in time for next year, I hope. It is something that a lot of parents, fewer teachers, but a lot of parents talk about as something missing from the system.
I was talking to a high school student from QEH a couple of weeks ago. She was actually a student journalist interviewing me for the newspaper and she was taking honours courses, but they were probably, perhaps what you would call bootleg courses anyway. They were offered at lunchtime. There were quite a few kids taking them. I asked for her comments on the new math exams, APEF exams, and she was saying, well, people found it too easy.
So there is a real appetite for enriched courses for some kids. It is not something the system has not only not become better at, but we've probably become worse at. We do have advanced courses that are either locally developed or through the department that exist, but it is a patchwork across the province. You can't count on something like that in every school. It certainly is an issue and it is definitely one we recognize.
MR. ESTABROOKS: This is my last question. I will be sharing the next part of our time with my good friend, the member for Halifax Fairview. I want to direct your attention to Page 59 of the Supplement to the Public Accounts. I know that my good friend, the member for Cape Breton Nova, if he happens to be in his hospital bed and is watching this is going to enjoy the fact that I noticed that the correspondence school from Saskatchewan was allocated $7,116 - that is a good dose of socialism, I assume - through the correspondence program in this province. I know our friend, the member for Cape Breton Nova, will probably enjoy a chuckle if he is tuned in, and to that member, we are thinking of you, Paul.
Perhaps you could explain this to us. You have a correspondence program in your department. Are you telling me that we have to go to Saskatchewan for some expertise when it comes to correspondence schools? What is that particular item for there? If I may, when you are forthcoming with your answer, I would like to thank you for your time during this brief discussion.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, we do have a correspondence section in the department. Its net expenditures are actually about $298,000, but this particular item, the Saskatchewan Correspondence School, consists of expenditures for materials relating to several high school courses. (Interruptions) That, yes. They are actually Housing 12, Food and Nutrition 12, and German 12. These happen to be courses where it is cheaper to buy the
materials elsewhere than to develop them locally because there is not a huge number students taking these courses.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Chairman, it won't surprise the minister, I am sure, if I say that I would like to take a few minutes of time to talk about Halifax West High School. There are few issues that are more important, of more immediate concern in my constituency than that one. As everybody knows, the school was closed down last year, the students are currently doing a split-shift at J.L. Ilsley High School. I am in the unique position, I think, of having a constituency, part of which sends its children to J.L. Ilsley High School and part of which sends its children to Halifax West High School. A very large number of families in my constituency are affected by what is going on right now and what is going to happen in the future.
A new school is being built on the mainland commons site just off Lacewood Drive, and that is a good thing. I will be the first to say that the school has to be done right. It is better to do it right than to rush towards a particular date, because this school is going to be there for 40, 50 years, who knows how long, and it will be a true jewel for the community, for the entire community, not only my constituency but in the other neighbourhoods whose children will go to that new school, so it has to be done right.
With that context, where I say that I will be the first to agree that it is important for the new school to be done right, I want to ask the minister, what is the date on which the new school is expected to be open to students? Not the target date, which is the phrase that has been used, but in all reality and truth when can we expect students to enter that new school?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate the member for Halifax Fairview's concern. At this point, we have written to the school board, the Department of Transportation and Public Works has written the school board asking for specifics on their program specifications and so on. We know what the target date is; we are also experienced in knowing that target dates are often not met. I can't give him an answer. I honestly, at this point, cannot give him an answer as to what is realistically going to be the opening date of that school. I would like to be able to do so but I would be pulling a date out of a hat were I to do that. I agree with him that using common sense and knowing the amount of community involvement in these new schools, that adds to how time-consuming it is; there is the issue of the library, there is the issue of the health clinic they are looking at to have in the school. People are very interested in what is there, and having it done right is very important. I will get back to him soon with what I think is a realistic date, but right now I don't believe the target date either.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the honesty of that answer. I think it goes a long way to starting the discussion that has to happen on the other issue, which is the impact of that date. The impact of that date, which covers the entire mainland south region and beyond, not just in the catchment area for Halifax West High School but also everybody going to J.L. Ilsley High School, because both communities are quite severely affected by the split-shifting that is currently going on.
The point I would like to try to make with the minister this morning is that the transition to the new school is going to take just as much thought and just as much effort in some ways as the new school itself, which is going on what you might call the Greenfield site; there was nothing there before but forest. I shouldn't say there was nothing there, there was forest there. To a certain extent, it seems like the issues for building a new school are relatively straightforward on the Greenfield site, but it is the transition issues that are currently catching the attention of people in my community and certainly in the community of my colleague, the member for Halifax Atlantic.
My next question for the minister is, what steps is the department prepared to take to help to ease the transition to a new school, which it appears may very well not open by September 2002? What steps is the department prepared to take to make that transition a little easier for everyone?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I am presuming that the member is referring largely to where the kids are in the meantime. The department itself will obviously have people seconded to the project, talking about the programs and so on for the new school. The issue of where the kids go in the meantime is in the jurisdiction of the school board, they decide the catchment areas.
I know that last year when they were discussing the split-shifting at J.L. Ilsley High School they had at least one public meeting where the issue was discussed. I am assuming they are going to have at least one to discuss other options. There are some other options besides the split-shifting - I know that has been hard, particularly on the J.L. Ilsley High School kids, nonetheless it has been a little hard on everybody - an option that was brought up before, which was rejected, was sending roughly half the kids to St. Patrick's High School and/or Queen Elizabeth High School and leaving some at J. L. Ilsley High School. Another option that has been mentioned would be moving some of the kids from St. Patrick's High School over to Queen Elizabeth High School, and moving all the kids from the Halifax West High School into St. Patrick's High School.
I don't know what other combinations of moves the school board has to offer, but those are among them. None of them is the end of the world but, obviously, it would be better to keep the school population together if possible. It may not be possible if the situation at J.L. Ilsley is really becoming intolerable. I know it is not convenient, but I am not sure what else we can do except look at combinations of kids going to various schools or
leaving them split-shifting at one. The school board is going to have to come up with those options and it is going to have to discuss them publicly with parents and students of all the schools involved, and it can get quite complicated.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre on an introduction.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Chairman, in the west gallery today, we have members of the Nova Scotia Government Employees Union, Occupational Health and Safety Committee. I would like to name them: Leona Hickey, Helen MacLeod, Larry Stewart, Bryan Foy, Darrell Lundrigan, David Fairfax and staff person, Ian Johnson. I would ask them to rise and receive the warm greeting of the House.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Welcome to our guests in the gallery. I trust that the honourable member for Cape Breton Centre did correctly enunciate the names.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to encourage the Department of Education to consider other options, because clearly the biggest one is, where, physically, are they going to be, but as I have mentioned before there is the question of leaving legacies for the J.L. Ilsley High School; permanent improvements to the school that could help to ease the transition for them. There are also a variety of health effects and academic effects that the split-shifting is having on students in both J.L. Ilsley High School and Halifax West High School. I think there are ways of dealing constructively with those who might involve the allocation of some additional resources. I just think it is something the department should consider to ease this transition. As I said, I think the transition to the new school is just as difficult and will take just as much thought as actually building the new school itself.
I want to take just one minute to talk about another related issue, that is what is going to happen with the existing site of the Halifax West High School? I cannot stress enough, both to this minister and to the government, how important this site is to the Fairview community. It is the last major public institution in that part of Halifax. Business owners on Dutch Village Road and people living around the existing school site are both very hopeful and excited about the possibilities of what could be done with that site and, at the same time, they are very fearful of what could happen with that site
My question to the minister is, has that property been transferred yet to the municipality?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, no, it has not yet been turned over to the municipality. The school board is obliged to clean it out, and when that is done to let us know, and we are obliged, at that point, to turn it over to the municipality. It should be as soon as possible, but I don't have a date. I can certainly undertake to talk to someone at the school board to get a good estimate on when that date would be.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Chairman, will the province consider imposing conditions on that transfer, so that the community is consulted about what to do with that site and so that the hopes of that community can be realized, rather than their fears? Will the province consider imposing conditions on that transfer?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I am not sure that we can even do that. The municipality, obviously, will be getting that site. My suggestion would be that the residents of the area strongly communicate their wishes to their local member and to city council. I will look into whether or not we can impose conditions. Certainly, it is not part of our regular process for turning properties back to the municipalities to do so.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Chairman, not part of the regular process. I can't think of a better reason for doing it this time, because it is not normally part of the process and this time, I would suggest, it should be. All I can ask is for what the minister has already said, that she will look into the possibility that conditions can be imposed in order to realize the hopes of the community. Although the community will be speaking out loudly and clearly, and I will be helping them to do that, there is nothing quite like giving those conditions the force of law. That is what I am asking the Department of Education to consider. With that thought, I would like to now share my time with my colleague, the member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, I would like to pursue the topic of split-shifting at J.L. Ilsley High School. I just want to probe a little deeper in terms of the minister's commitment and her department's commitment to the solution of what to do with the Halifax West High School students and how that impacts on other schools and other students. I am hopeful that the minister does not see this as simply being the school board's problem or that it is the school board that needs to come up with a solution. The Department of Education does have a role to play in ensuring that the quality of education received by the students, both at J.L. Ilsley High School and at Halifax West High School, is not compromised unduly.
I think most of us are aware of the fact that there needs to be some accommodations, there needs to be some recognition that there is a problem, and there needs to be accommodation on all sides in order to reach a final conclusion to this problem. I think it is important that the minister and her department agree that they do have a role to play in ensuring that the strategies followed, the tactics implemented, are ones that don't unduly compromise the future of the children involved in receiving an education at both J.L. Ilsley High School and at Halifax West High School.
I want to ask the minister if she would comment that her office, her department is, in fact, involved in and committed to participating in finding an interim solution - by interim, I mean until the Halifax West High School is built - to properly educating the students at
Halifax West High School in a way that doesn't unduly influence or adversely affect the students at any of the other high schools?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member for Halifax Atlantic is correct, we do have an interest, even though certain things aren't within our jurisdiction. The buzzwords, the educational outcomes, certainly are in our interest. We have to analyze decisions made by school boards to see how they would affect these outcomes. We have had experience with split-shifting in other schools, but usually not for longer than a year. I don't think it takes a brain surgeon to figure out that numerous years of split-shifting, where you are actually getting less instructional time in the day, is not good for students, particularly the ones who have to be there really early in the morning. Well, what I can commit to is whatever solution that the board comes up with, we will analyze to try to make sure that those outcomes are still met.
[11:30 a.m.]
As I say, I am not quite sure what they are going to come up with, but I do know there is going to be inconvenience for a lot of people and I am sorry about the inconvenience but, again, the member is right, it is what the kids are learning in school, how long they are spending in school, and whether or not that time is as productive as possible certainly is of interest to the department and that is the most important issue. We will be looking quite closely at whatever solutions are suggested.
The other thing, of course, is that sometimes these solutions do involve spending extra money the board doesn't have and we do help there. There have been extra busing costs associated with the split-shifting and we have paid those for the board to help them out in that way, but the real issue the member is getting at is the quality of education for the kids and, obviously, we are interested in that. If we think it is going to be compromised, we would have to try to help facilitate some other solution.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the clear commitment of the minister because it is as much the process of reaching a solution as it is the solution and that involves the parents and the students. I am particularly referring to the ones at J.L. Ilsley High School. Let me just talk about them. The member for Halifax Fairview has talked I think quite appropriately about the Halifax West High School students, but nothing that I say is meant to reflect badly or in any way understate the concerns and the issues around the Halifax West students and parents.
Let me talk about the J.L. Ilsley parents, students and staff. They have gone through a process of examining the effects of split-shifting and the school advisory committee has done a lot of work and I think the minister will recognize that and has seen the fruits of much of that work and the reports and the presentations that have been done. They are very
concerned about participating in the solution. They have done a survey. They have lived the results of the split-shifting and they are very concerned about what is done next.
So they have made a presentation to the school board. They have not really gotten much response on that and I think, quite understandably, they want some assurance that their concerns are going to be considered, not just, yes, your concerns are going to be considered, but they would like, I think it is fair to say, to meet with the minister and hear from her. I think if the school advisory committee representatives were able to come and make an informal presentation to the minister and hear from her what was just communicated to me, I think that would go some distance in underlining the commitment that may have been made publicly because it is fair to say that there is a fair bit of skepticism within the education sector of how decisions are made. The parents in this instance and some of the students, I think, quite frankly, don't feel that they are being listened to or that they are being given the time.
They have asked her office for a meeting, and I would like to ask the minister if she would commit to meeting with these people. We are not talking about the minister saying that, you know, whatever they say is going to be done, it is just simply these people want to be heard. They want their contribution to this split-shifting and to find a solution, they want it to be recognized by somebody agreeing that they have been accommodating, that it has been difficult, and that a decision for September of the year 2001 won't be made without considering, listening to and responding to their particular issues. So I guess I would ask the minister if she and her staff would commit to meeting with the school advisory committee at J.L. Ilsley High School?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, certainly I am open to meeting with the school advisory committee. I will commit to do that. A member of the school board may wish to be present, if that was okay. I don't like to be seen as trying to micro-manage school board affairs. On the other hand, I am interested in the whole issue of split-shifting because I doubt very much this is going to be the last time it happens in Nova Scotia. I would be very pleased to meet with them.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate what the minister has said, that it is not her role to micro-manage the education system, but what she has said to me in this committee today is she recognizes her responsibility under the whole definition of quality of education, ensuring the quality of education, and I don't think that the school advisory committee would have a problem with the school board representative being there, or whatever, however it happens. They just want to talk to you and to hear from you that you and your staff recognize what they have had to go through and that the future of their children is being considered when it comes to the decision that is made in September. I would just say, on my own behalf, I will let them speak for themselves, I appreciate what the minister has said. I will certainly convey to them the commitment you have made to me today and I hope that that meeting will go forward and that process will be a fruitful one.
Mr. Chairman, I have nothing further to add. I would like to perhaps talk a bit about what has happened with the school closure process in Spryfield, but I know that would be considered micro-managing, I think, although I have in my day in the last 10 years been on my feet and railed at Ministers of Education for lack of funding and so on and so forth. But this is clearly a school board issue, the decision to close these schools in Spryfield and in Dartmouth, and I won't waste my breath or your patience by thumping my desk on that particular issue. I have spoken to the school board members directly and I think they have heard that very clearly. Anyway, thank you to the minister and her staff for that commitment.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Did you wish to respond, Madam Minister? No.
The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Madam Minister, I have one issue that I did not have an opportunity to bring up and that is the matter of inclusion and, of course, the cost factor. At the present time, in my opinion and in the opinion of many educators, inclusion is already failing - sorry for the pass/fail analogy - due to the lack of necessary resources. So, I would ask you, can the minister explain whether there are other resources? Certainly, this can't be good for education, when we look at the importance of the principle of inclusion.
MISS PURVES: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I understand that is the opinion of many in the system. It is a very real issue. There is no question that inclusion without the necessary resources is not likely to be successful. That being said, I do not believe our inclusion policy is failing everyone. It is probably failing some. There are probably not enough resources, but the question is also, not just amount but, what the resources are. That is one of the reasons that I have asked people in the department and communities and parents to look at this again. I have asked them to be as specific as they possibly can, about what areas we should look at first in trying to make this policy better.
It is one of the biggest issues in education, certainly in this country. The Canadian Education Ministers have had reports on it; the Atlantic Canadian Ministers have had reports on it; there have been recent reports developed in Alberta, the Northwest Territories, and I think, perhaps, another province, asking for an assessment of the inclusion policies of the 1990's, and what a go-forward might be. I appreciate people saying, more money, more money. We have committed some more money, but we also need to try to put it in the right places. I think all the people involved would agree with that. I am not sure we get an F in our inclusion policies, maybe a C, and I think we can probably do a lot better.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has expired for the NDP at this particular point.
The honourable member for Cape Breton West.
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, to follow along a similar line of questioning, to one of my colleagues, I notice that in the Supplement to the Public Accounts, there have been some rather significant expenditures on various hotels and motels across the Province of Nova Scotia, to the tune - my initial check - of somewhere in excess of $184,000, which, at first glance, if you were to break it down and say, well, a lot of different seminars and conferences and so on, but when you stand back and think about it, $184,000 is a lot of money for hotel bills, particularly for individuals travelling around the province. That doesn't include, I would suspect, travel expenses, meals and various miscellaneous costs.
Would the minister be kind enough to apprise the members of the committee as to why we are spending such large amounts? Within that supplementary section, it is broken down to 10 different hotels and motels from across the province.
MISS PURVES: Obviously, in that year's Public Accounts, there may be some hotel bills that aren't related to Education per se, because for part of that time it was the Department of Education and Culture, under the previous government, until we took office. But, next year is sure to show quite a few hotel bills and meal expenses, and there are reasons for that. The bulk of them, actually, being marking sessions, when we bring teachers in from around the province to mark exams. This happens a couple of times a year.
We also have conferences, we are committed to a certain amount of professional development for teachers. That involves, oftentimes, booking conference space in hotels or staying over in hotels, and meals, food. We also have, from time to time, consultants doing work for us. For example, last year, although it is not included in this year's Public Accounts, we had several people from B.C. and Ontario doing the post-Shapiro review of teacher education changes because of the Shapiro Report. We pay their airfare and we pay their expenses when they are here.
The result is a fair number of hotel bills and meal expenses. That is just the reality. We are dealing with tens of thousands of teachers and a big department. I know that to ordinary Nova Scotians, it seems ludicrous but we have to get the exams marked, we have to have conferences, and we have to provide professional development. The bills add up.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. With the approbation of the Committee on Supply, would the honourable member for Cape Breton West permit an introduction by the honourable member for Colchester North?
The honourable member for Colchester North, on an introduction.
MR. WILLIAM LANGILLE: Mr. Chairman, in the gallery today, we have two members from the constituency of the beautiful Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley, outside of Truro, Cy and Irene Langille. I would ask that they receive the warm welcome of this House. (Applause)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Indeed, welcome to the Langilles, and welcome to all our guests in the gallery.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the minister's comments on that, but perhaps, given the fact that money is quite a big issue with this government, I would hope and encourage the minister to take advantage of a lot of the various facilities that come within the purview of the Department of Education already, the various schools around the province. We could be using those various conference rooms, auditoriums, gymnasiums and libraries for some of these activities, rather than spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on this type of thing. It probably wouldn't resolve all the issues, but I am sure any attempt to reduce some expenditures, particularly those you can see rather significant expenditures in and around the capital city here, where we have considerable facilities made available either through Access Nova Scotia or some of the other various government departments.
Given the fact that the province, just this year, commenced a new program within the school boards, requiring the school boards to now test their own water - at one time that was the responsibility of the provincial Department of Health, then subsequently the Department of Environment - now the school boards are responsible for doing the water testing and providing for proper water supplies at their own expense, I understand.
With regard to the cost of water testing in the various school boards across the province, I understand that will consume upwards of $0.25 million in total from all the various school boards. I have taken it upon myself to write to the various school boards and ask each one of the school boards approximately how much the cost of this additional service would be to their budgetary item and on average it worked out to approximately $40,000. Not all responded, it might be a little more for some and a little less for others, so I just did an extrapolation and it looked like an additional $250,000 that has to come out of their budget somewhere else, whether it be the classroom, or whatever. Has the Department of Education and/or the Department of Environment and Labour and/or the Department of Transportation and Public Works made provision for additional funding for the school boards so it doesn't come out of the classroom?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, yes, we have put $1 million in this year's budget specifically for testing of water, some occupational health and safety issues, and also fire inspection. These are some of the issues, particularly occupational health and safety, that have been added to the duties in schools over the last decade and they do eat up resources. Not all schools, of course, have to test their own water. If they are with a municipal water supply, that is the responsibility of the municipality, but in the cases where the water supply
is specific to the school, they are going to be responsible for it and that will take some training and it will also take some money in terms of getting the tests done. So that is one of the issues the boards raised and we believe $1 million should be able to cover these. I am certain that if it doesn't cover them, we will be hearing about it, but we have made provision.
MR. MACKINNON: Two more questions, Mr. Chairman, one is with regard to the size of the classroom. Obviously, according to the fire marshal's regulations, there are very strict guidelines in terms of how many students and teachers are permissible in a particular teaching setting at one particular time. In other words, there is an allotment; I believe, if my memory serves me correctly, it works out to approximately 20 square feet per individual in the classroom. Although I haven't been able to find it documented anywhere, I believe there is always a rule of thumb; if you were dealing with elementary, that would be increased to 30 square feet per student. Is the minister aware of classrooms in the province that exceed that; how many; and what provision is in place to deal with such a violation of the fire marshal code?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, obviously I don't have that kind of information in front of me right now for estimates debate, but the classrooms that we build for the new schools are well in line with that number. The class sizes, in spite of much publicity, are actually not as huge as some might think. I do have numbers on class sizes that I can table and provide but, yes, I am aware that a certain amount of space has to go to each student and I have not been informed of any particular cases where we are in violation of this, but I suspect that it is possible.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, perhaps if the minister would be kind enough to give an undertaking to the committee that she would seek that information from all the school boards across the province so as to be able to deal with the situation. I mean, if there have been violations, a long-term practice and there are different methodologies to deal with it, like two classrooms, you have two doors to a classroom, you know, the number of windows and so on, I am not sure of all the criteria, but I believe that it is a very serious issue and it is something that arose as a result of what transpired in Halifax West and a number of other schools.
Certainly with the minister's suggestion, the possibility of 50 students per class, I don't think that should have been taken so literally by so many people and etched in stone because I know the spectre of what she inferred and really what was taken was perhaps two different things. If she would give me an undertaking on that there, I would certainly appreciate if she could secure that information from the respective school boards. Is that a possibility?
MISS PURVES: Yes, Mr. Chairman, certainly that is a possibility and I will get my staff to look into that.
MR. MACKINNON: One final question, Mr. Chairman, is with regard to the teachers' salaries. Recently, you know, with regard to the increments of their salary increases and so on, I understand that recently the province appealed the arbitrator's decision to award teachers these incremental increases. What is the status of this particular issue? Are there dollars budgeted within the minister's budget for this fiscal year; should the department be required to pay this out; and are there any other particular details that she could perhaps offer?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there are cheques being prepared right now for those teachers whose increments are not in dispute. There are some still in dispute and the paperwork is taking a great deal more time than anybody had anticipated because of the numbers of applications. So, as I say, the ones where it is clear the increments are not in doubt, those cheques are being prepared. There are a number of lists and it is taking much longer than expected but, yes, there was money put aside and there is money put aside for payment of those increments.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify that, perhaps if the minister would be kind enough to indicate to the committee how many cases are ready for the cheques to be issued and how many are still unresolved. I mean, what are the percentages; what are the numbers; and what are the dollar figures attached to the resolved and the unresolved issues?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I don't have that information here, but we can get it and we will table it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, it is with pleasure that I rise today to ask a few questions to the minister in regard to the estimates for the Department of Education. I want to begin, first, by complimenting the minister on her opening remarks. The minister did stand and clearly indicated she did not intend to take a full hour. She did not do so and I can say I personally noticed her flipping through some of her notes and skimming through them as she did give us a good description of some of the main issues facing her department. One can only hope that when the Minister of Environment and Labour grows up, he might learn from the example set by the Minister of Education in respecting the Opposition and respecting the proud traditions of this House.
With those complimentary remarks to begin with, Madam Minister, it has been one year since your last budget. Remember what it was like last year, it wasn't a pleasant experience to say the least. You have had approximately 12 months now to look back and to see those decisions that were made, some of them that were later retracted and I am curious, in your own personal opinion, would it be fair to say that your budget of last year was a mistake?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I would ask the member for Richmond, would he allow the member for Dartmouth South time for an introduction?
MR. SAMSON: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth South on an introduction.
MR. TIMOTHY OLIVE: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member for Richmond. I would like to introduce, in the east gallery, Ramjibon and Bandana Ghose from Halifax, and welcome them to the Legislature. I would ask the House to give them a warm welcome. (Applause)
[12:00 noon]
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, in answer to the question from the member for Richmond, I would say that there were aspects to the budget last year that were unworkable as they stood. That being said, they were worked out by May 5th. He is quite right, it was not a fun time. The process for budgeting this year has been much easier, partly because we are not in the middle of a government-wide program review. There has been a great deal more time for consultation, and that has taken place. Yes, there were parts of the budget that turned out to be unworkable, but not the whole budget.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, we all know that the government had an operating deficit again last year. It has an operating deficit projected again this year. I am curious if the minister could explain to me, the parents and students out there, knowing that her government was going to have a deficit last year, knowing that your government is having a deficit again this year, on what basis do you justify the budget that you presented last year and that you have presented this year, knowing that at the end of the day this government is still bringing a deficit to the Province of Nova Scotia?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, well, this government has been steadily reducing the deficit in order to achieve a balanced budget. I think that we are proud of that; in fact, I know we are proud of the fact that we are reducing the deficit to reach a time when we are no longer spending hard-earned taxpayers' money on that deficit. In order to do that, we have had to give all departments and all areas of government services less than what they feel they need or less than what they want. It is a very careful balancing act. It is one that previous governments have tried to achieve also, in Nova Scotia. It is not just this government that tried to do something about the deficit.
Because, in Education, in Health and in other areas, we are not able to give our outside boards and agencies the money that they want, that is how, every year, more money gets turned into what is called a cut. Even though it is more money, it is not what people believe they need. That is what we are doing. It is a balancing act in order to try to balance
the budget. We are giving school boards more money; we are giving health boards more money, but not as much as they would like, in order, in the end, to achieve fiscal stability in Nova Scotia.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister recognizes - at least I would hope she would - that if we are going to achieve economic success in this province, one of the foundations of doing that is a well-funded education system, and providing Nova Scotians an opportunity to get a top-quality education, to then be able to go forward and to be productive members of Nova Scotian society and, therefore, to hope to see that we are not in the situation we are in now.
Last year, your government spent $261 million more than it had, but it spent that. I am curious how you see that as balancing. I think we have made our position quite clear here, as far as our caucus is concerned, this year your government had a choice. Your government could have eliminated that deficit, had it wanted to. It chose not to do so, and we take issue with that. You are going to spend $261 million you didn't have to start off with. How does the minister herself, knowing that, still justify not putting the larger investment in education by cutting last year and then again this year, still not making those critical investments that our education system needs? How does she justify that in her own way to Nova Scotians knowing you are still spending money you don't have, yet you are refusing to make the investments our system so direly needs here in this province? How does the minister justify that?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I do feel that some of these questions should be directed at the Minister of Finance, which I am not. We are moving, as I said, towards a balanced budget. If the government had chosen to balance the budget this year, it would have caused some problems that none of us wished to cause the government and all Nova Scotians. The economy did very well last year, so this year we chose to reinvest some of that money, as well as moving towards a balanced budget, meeting the targets that the Minister of Finance set out.
We are putting money in all aspects of the education system, except for deferred maintenance, as had been discussed a lot, earlier, in order to keep up the quality of education and provide some reinvestment in the post-secondary sector, which tends to result more quickly in some wealth creation. That is precisely what we are trying to do. We intend to balance the budget, and we intend to make modest investments where we feel they are needed. That is what we are doing.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, do you agree that your government could have balanced the books this year, had it chosen to do so?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I am not in the position to actually answer that question, since the overall books of the province are not my job. However, I am very pleased that some increases were possible in the portfolio that I hold; I am very pleased.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, I am curious, there have been some small investments made in early childhood education. I am wondering when the minister will go, and I know the minister often tours schools around this province. I think in her earlier answer she did indicate they could have balanced the budget but it would have brought some cuts she indicated they didn't want to face, so the government's spine kind of gave in and they decided they didn't want to balance the books this year.
I am curious, when you are speaking to those people participating in the Active Young Readers program and in early education, when you are telling them how proud you are that your government has made some investments in early education, what are you going to tell them about the fact that while you have made these investments, you have also added $91 million to the total debt of this province, something which these very children are the ones who are going to suffer for down the road, and that you have continued to add on this debt? How are you going to explain that to these children, when you are visiting these schools and explaining to them that you had a choice: you chose not to balance the books but chose to add $91 million on the debt of this province? How will you explain that?
MISS PURVES: It is pretty easy because when I am going to visit schools and participating in PD day or whatever and talking to kids about Active Young Readers, I am not talking about the deficit.
MR. SAMSON: Obviously, the minister doesn't want to answer the question, but that is the question that is going to come up to you, minister, whether you like it or not. Your government had a choice. It chose not to balance the books this year, so here is the other question. Why $91 million? That is what I want to know from the minister. Why this year can you sit there, your colleague, the Minister of Finance, says we are going to overspend $91 million, but that is it. Knowing that you have no money for loan remission, you have no money for school capital construction, you are not giving any money to universities for capital construction either - and we have already stated our position quite clearly - Nova Scotians are now wondering, what is the message here?
You said you wouldn't put any more money on the debt, now you have put $91 million. I wonder, how does the minister justify that specific figure and why does she stand by that figure and not have made the necessary investments that were required in her department knowing her government was overspending money that it didn't have to start off with? How does the minister justify that?
MISS PURVES: If this were Question Period, I would refer that question to the Minister of Finance, but it is not. All I can say is, we were given budgets for our departments, we went and worked them out, we debated them in Cabinet and we got what we got. I can only repeat that I am very pleased the government chose to put $29 million more into education overall.
MR. SAMSON: But you are sitting at the Cabinet Table, you are a member of Cabinet, I would even go so far as to term you a senior member of Cabinet. I am not sure if you are on Priorities and Planning, but I believe you are if I am not mistaken. I would say that you do carry quite a bit of clout, if I might use that term, at the Cabinet Table. Clearly the Minister of Finance does have some level of authority, but clearly he is simply one individual in a Cabinet of 10 members now and growing bit by bit. (Interruption) It is almost like that Chia Pet, you put some little paste on it, and slowly but surely it continues to grow. Anyway, a little off track here.
I guess that is the question, minister. You are the Minister of Education. You are responsible for these children. You know what happened last year; you know what you were faced with last year. Your government said, we are trying to balance the books, here is the figure. This year, all of a sudden, you had an amount of revenue which was not expected, not anticipated. You had an opportunity that you could have said, we are eliminating the deficit this year, but I am going to live within our means because at least we have eliminated the deficit. We have not burdened our children any further by adding to the debt. That wasn't taking place and, in fact, the Minister of Finance made it quite clear from day one he had absolutely no intention of balancing the books, that was the last thing on his mind because he was on what he calls his great four year plan, regardless of what was going to happen.
So, you knew your Minister of Finance was overspending $91 million that Nova Scotians didn't have, these students did not have, our children did not have. What representations did you make saying, if we are going to be spending money we haven't got, I have certain priorities in education which must be addressed immediately if we are going to stick to our line of investing in children and being serious about it? What representations did you make to the minister based on that fact - you are overspending as it is; you are spending money we don't have; our education system must become a top priority - what representations did the minister make in that regard?
MISS PURVES: After all our deliberations, the Cabinet agreed with the Finance Minister, we agree with his plan; we will meet the targets we said we would meet and that is all there is to it. The member was asking me, did I press to increase the deficit to go more above target. I asked for money for Education, I asked for more than what we got, but I was pleased in the end that we were able to get what we got and I am very pleased that our government is going to be on target with its deficit reduction plan.
MR. SAMSON: One can only hope on behalf of Nova Scotians that you are correct. I still state that you did have a choice and you chose not to do so and I hope you will keep in mind, when you are speaking to children and talking about your government's wonderful investments, the extra $91 million that you added on the debt that they will be burdened with and that you remember when speaking of what a great investment you have made, that you also balance it out by telling them of the burden that you have put on their shoulders.
You say your government is on target with its plan. Minister, is your department on target with its overall plan from when you first got elected July 27, 1999? Do you feel that your department is on target with the objectives that were set out in your government's blue book and in what you felt were the objectives of your department when you took that portfolio?
MISS PURVES: Yes, we are on target. Some of the promises that we made regarding education are long-term, but we are on target towards achieving them. There are going to be a number of things we are doing this year, as I said earlier, that will help towards those targets. But, yes, we are accomplishing a number of things we said we would do and I feel that we are on target. It is not all a matter of money, some of it is a matter of trying to change direction a bit and I think we are beginning to accomplish that. So, yes, overall, I feel we are on target.
MR. SAMSON: Let's go through some of your targets, minister, and maybe get a better assessment for Nova Scotians as to where you are. Page 15 of the Tory blue book, Strong Leadership . . . . a clear course, under Education, it points out that teachers and students are faced with overcrowded classrooms. What have you done to alleviate the issue of overcrowded classrooms in this province?
MISS PURVES: We are continuing with the policy of the previous government, albeit not as lavishly, to build new schools. In those schools, the classroom size is bigger. Actually I want to be reasonably honest here, we are in a situation of declining population, but the fact is that not all credit to us, but the pupil/teacher ratio is lower than it was five years ago and that is good. That is one of the long-term projects that probably every province and every state would like to have is to make sure the classrooms are not overcrowded. I think we are managing that issue.
MR. SAMSON: Other than following through on the Liberal plan to build new schools, what else have you done to address overcrowded classrooms? Clearly you have not budgeted a cent to build new schools this year, so what else are you doing to address overcrowded classrooms in this province other than following the Liberal plan?
MISS PURVES: The member is incorrect about not budgeting money for new schools. We have budgeted money for new schools this year and we are going to be coming up with another capital construction plan, and an alteration and renovation plan.
MR. SAMSON: So we are going to get into word games. Madam Minister, other than - the deputy minister looks confused, but that is all right, we will try to take care of that confusion for him and teach him how we do things here in this province. Maybe he will go back, we are not sure. (Interruption)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.
MR. SAMSON: Madam Minister, other than the schools that were announced by the previous Liberal Government, have you announced for the construction plans of any new schools other than those that were on the list when you assumed the portfolio of Education?
MISS PURVES: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have.
MR. SAMSON: Which ones?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, aside from feeling that it is important to honour sensible obligations, yes, to date, we have announced new schools that were not committed by the previous government. That includes the new Halifax West High School and it includes the major renovation to Graham Creighton Junior High School. We have acquired a new school for francophone students in Truro and the Whycocomagh school was not committed by the previous government.
MR. SAMSON: These four schools you have just listed, will those be constructed this year?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the work on Graham Creighton Junior High School is being done now. The work on the school in Whycocomagh is being done now. The construction of the mainland north school has not started yet, but initial preparation is ongoing and, obviously, the school in Truro is being used.
MR. SAMSON: How much is in your budget, Madam Minister, for these four new schools? How much have you budgeted in the budget before us right now?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the capital list for schools with the attached costs was tabled earlier. I am sure the member can get a copy of that, but our overall budget for this year for schools and buses is contained in the Department of Transportation and Public Works' budget. It is some $90 million, and the amortization costs are included in the Department of Education's budget for this year.
MR. SAMSON: Other than your commitments to the schools announced by the previous Liberal Administration, and these four schools that you have listed here, do you have any funds in this budget that will allow you to construct any other new schools in this fiscal year and, if you do, what is that amount of money?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, most of the money allotted for capital in this year's budget goes to continuing the projects we have already announced, including the four-plus alterations and renovations for the coming year.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, I am going to try to make this as easy as I can for the minister. Do you have any money in this year's budget to build any schools other than the four you have listed today and the ones you are already committed to from the Liberal Government? Do you have any funds to construct schools in this budget, new schools, I should point out, not renovations, new schools other than the ones you have listed? Is there funding in there and, if there is, what is that total?
MISS PURVES: No, Mr. Chairman, there is money in there for the schools that we have announced. There is renovation money and we will not be announcing, pending some emergency that has not been brought to light yet, for other new schools. We are spending a lot of money as a province on new schools, as it is right now. No, there is money there for the ones we promised and some alterations and renovations. So the answer is no.
MR. SAMSON: I am glad we finally got that answer because before it was, well, you know, there is money and there might be money. It is quite clear now, parents and students throughout this province should not expect any announcements for the construction of new schools from this minister or this government for this fiscal year. I think that is true. The minister nods, so I am assuming that is correct.
Madam Minister, we all know, unfortunately, throughout this province there have been problems with mould, there have been air quality problems. We remember the problem at the Elmsdale school. Clearly, it couldn't have been predicted. The misfortune was, I believe, an oil leak that had caused the problems with that institution. What funding do you have available if this situation arises to address these problems immediately and where is that funding found in your budget?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this was well covered by a previous question. The money for emergency repairs or emergency renovations is in the budget for alterations and renovations. We carry the amortized costs, but the actual budget is over in the Department of Transportation and Public Works, and when an emergency situation arises we deal with it as is necessary and we find the money within that budget.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I wonder with the approbation of the honourable member for Richmond if I could render a decision on a point of order that was raised on April 3rd going into Supply, as it involved the honourable member for Richmond? (Interruption) If the honourable member wishes that it be done later, we can do it later.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, I look forward to that ruling but I would prefer it wasn't done during estimates so that we can continue to use this time to examine the books of the province.
Madam Minister, you may be aware or you may not be aware, as a result of the construction of the new Richmond Academy, the community of St. Peter's now has their P to 8 students divided between two schools. They have, I believe, P to 4 in the old elementary school and they have Grade 4 to Grade 8 in the high school. That community and the Strait Regional School Board have been able to point out numerous deficiencies with both of those schools to the point that neither of those schools is appropriate for the students who are in there; neither one is appropriate to be used as a P to 8 institution.
My understanding from speaking with the principal at that institution and speaking with some of the community parents and teachers, they indicated to me that the Strait Regional School Board has indicated to your department that the construction of a new P to 8 school for the community of St. Peter's in Richmond County is the Strait Regional School Board's number one priority for capital construction of new schools.
I am curious, Madam Minister - I am going home tonight, I am going to Richmond County - based on the fact that you have indicated that you have absolutely no funding for any new schools in your budget, can you tell me what I should tell the parents, students and teachers of the community of St. Peter's and the Strait Regional School Board as to when or should they even have any hopes of getting a new P to 8 school for their children and for that community?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, we are building new schools this year. We are not going to be building, barring some extraordinary emergency, schools other than what we have announced. The schools put forward by the Strait Regional School Board are being considered for a new capital construction list, along with schools put forward by the other school boards, but none of those schools have been budgeted for in this year's budget.
[12:30 p.m.]
MR. SAMSON: When, is the golden question here, should they even expect that your government, since coming to office in 1999, on its own, has only announced four schools other than the ones previously committed to by the Liberal Government, in two years, you are responsible for four new schools other than what was announced on the Liberal plan, when should these communities and communities throughout this entire province expect that they will see the construction of the new schools that their community needs?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the previous government left us with a list but didn't leave us with the money. Nonetheless, we believe that the previous government had developed a good list of schools that were necessary, and we are continuing their commitment as well as some of our own. This government will commit to building new schools as quickly as it can afford them and not before. There are many communities across Nova Scotia that are enjoying new schools, and there will be more, but the program has to be affordable and the school building program has to be balanced against the many other capital needs in this province, including, as I am sure the member is aware, particularly, roads.
MR. SAMSON: It is always comforting, as a rural member, to hear the Minister of Education from Halifax Citadel be sympathetic towards roads in this province. I certainly hope she brings that message loud and clear, if not on behalf of her constituents at least on behalf of members on this side of the House and her own backbench and even you, Mr. Chairman, who is very concerned about roads in this province.
Madam Minister, I don't intend to get into a debate with you on the merits of P3, the good or the bad. A quick little history lesson, I guess, and maybe you will disagree with my version of this - the Government of Nova Scotia, prior to the Liberal Government, during the Liberal Government, recognized there were over 400 schools. I believe there still are 400 schools in this province. The need for new schools, for repairs to schools is way beyond the capabilities of your department or the Province of Nova Scotia.
I think the minister agrees with that statement. I think every Nova Scotian who understands this would agree. The traditional means of financing schools and of budgeting for new school construction was not keeping up with the demand, wasn't even close, not even within a country mile. I think everyone recognizes that. The Liberal Government of the day recognized that. The question is, are we going to sit back, continue to do the traditional funding, which clearly only allows us to do three, four, five, maybe, new schools per year - that is being generous I believe - or are we going to put some system in place that allows us to build schools at a faster pace while trying to keep in mind the costs and everything, but build them at a faster pace that allows us to try to keep up with that trend of a need for new schools?
With 400 schools, building three to four schools per year, Madam Minister, I am sure you will agree, is insufficient. Therefore, that is why I am so concerned and I think Nova Scotians are concerned about your government's statement, we don't like P3, so our answer is go back to the traditional method of financing. Madam Minister, it didn't work. We weren't building enough schools. Our students were staying in schools that were not environmentally safe, that were not sufficient for the growth of those communities, it wasn't working. Now, whether you like P3 or you don't, that is a different thing. But at least it was an attempt to address the situation.
I think you understand the problem that exists, I don't think you need to have me lecturing you on that problem. You are not building any new schools this year other than what you have announced, you haven't even budgeted for it, I understand that, many Nova Scotians may not, but that is the reality. What is your government's plan to address the need for new schools in this province? Clearly building them three or four a year is insufficient to address the need, and I would say it is irresponsible. Madam Minister, your government didn't like P3, what is your answer? Do you have a plan, or is your answer just to sit back and continue with the old ways, which has proven beyond a doubt to have been ineffective? What is your new plan?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this year our government is in the process of constructing seven schools. In one sense we have gone back to the traditional way of building schools, but in another sense we have the advantages that were available to the previous government, of P3. Because the accounting methods have changed we don't have to book the entire cost of a new school in one year. The situation exists that we are able to continue building schools while carrying the amortized cost every year of the new schools, plus, of course, carrying the cost of the school leases.
Mr. Chairman, leases are just another way of borrowing, too. I don't think there is a clearer way of stating that. It is not as if we are not paying for the P3 schools. We are paying for those on top of the ones we are building. We are paying about $30 million a year in lease payments for those schools. It is not as if they are not costing, all these building projects cost. There was no clear advantage, from the point of view of the books, to staying with the P3 process, with all due credit to the wonderful schools the builders put up and the speed at which they put them up.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, fine. The minister clearly has not answered my question. She has given her explanation as to why they didn't like P3 or why they don't feel it is the way to go. Your government has been telling Nova Scotians, in the budget and in everything else, we have a plan. We have a plan; we are within our plan; $261 million deficit last year was a plan; $91 million this year, although we could have eliminated it, it is part of the plan. Nova Scotians, Madam Minister, want to know clearly, what is your plan today and your government's plan to build the needed new schools in the Province of Nova Scotia? What is your plan? Will the minister table it here in the House today so all members of this House and all Nova Scotians can clearly see what her government's plan is for new school construction for the next 5 to 10 years, let's say?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this government has announced publicly on a number of occasions its plan for fulfilling Liberal commitments plus adding some of our own. As I have said during estimates and I have said in the House, we do have another capital plan that takes us several years further out. This plan has not yet been approved by Cabinet. I will table it in the House when it has been approved and gone over and when it is available for the public to see.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, I assumed that we had all the numbers that were going to be spent by this government this year in front of us. I am left to ask, with your capital plan that you are talking about, Madam Minister, could you please indicate to us how much money is involved and where is this money going to come from?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, in his previous question, the member was asking about our plan for 5 and 10 years out. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my reply to the last question. We have that plan. The money that is being spent this year is shown in the estimates for this department and in the budget for the Department of Transportation and Public Works. The money for future years will be shown in future years' estimates. What I am trying to reassure the member about is that we do have a plan beyond this year. The plan has not had final approval, therefore, I am not ready to table it as yet.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, the answer clearly is, there is no plan. Really, the minister has had two years in this department, two years to try to develop a capital construction plan, two years to say, okay, we are accepting the responsibilities from the Liberal Government, the good responsibilities, as pointed out by the minister. She has added four schools in that time, yet there is still absolutely no plan in place to address new school construction in this province. When will the minister make this plan available? I think for her to stand and say, well, Cabinet hasn't approved it. Well, my God, Cabinet might not look at it for six months or a year, which would be of no surprise to me. That is clearly unacceptable. Second, who has the minister consulted with, this government that is so great on consultation, as to what form her new capital construction plan will take?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Liberals have about a minute and a half left.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, as I explained to the member for Clare, the consultation process has been clear. All of the school boards submitted a capital list of their priorities to the department in September. This list was gone over and revisited and re-prioritized by the school capital construction committee, which included school board representation, Department of Finance, Department of Transportation and Public Works and Department of Education officials. A list was developed to take us further down the road; the more long-term plan the member was talking about. This is costed and listed. It has not yet received Cabinet approval. I am not yet ready to make it public, but there was a clear consultation process with everyone involved.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The member for Richmond has 50 seconds left.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, as part of that consultation and as part of this plan, is this government looking at an alternate means of financing new school construction other than its term, or going back to historical means? Are you looking at means which will allow you to build more than simply three to four new schools per year?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Education has 25 seconds left.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, schools have to be paid for. No matter how you want to look at it, they have to be paid for and those costs have to be taken into account and we are doing that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister and staff for an opportunity to ask some questions of her department. It will certainly be of no surprise that one of my first comments will be around the Elmsdale District School. I certainly don't intend to beat up on the minister on that issue. I know since my questions in Question Period there has been some contact with the board and it looks as though there will be some discussion, some consultation between the board and the staff of her department around the technology appropriation for Elmsdale.
I do want to say to the minister that I understand where she is coming from as far as trying to be prudent and trying to make the best of taxpayers' dollars when it comes to the new schools and the technology, but I also want to make the case to her that that particular building certainly has taken a hit on the design standards. So there should be some savings already incurred to the province because of the changes in the design and I don't think we actually will have a gain in milking every possible avenue. Using the board's expertise and I think, actually, this may be an area where the department may have fallen down, was really going into this process and not consulting with the boards in the first place to try to make the best use of technology dollars.
I think the board is appreciative of an opportunity to try to fit the school with the most appropriate technology. I want to say to the minister that I recently went to a parent-teacher visitation at the Enfield Elementary School for my daughter who is in Grade 4. I had quite a discussion with her teacher. I think as much as the teacher was so impressed with the technology and the way she was able to use that in her classroom, I want to say that she was really looking forward to the future because what she realized is that she spent a fair bit of time in teaching the use of the technology in her class. She knows that the students who are in Grade 3 this year are also having that same time spent with them. She is expecting them to come into her classroom next year in Grade 4 and being fairly well versed in the use of that technology. She is really hoping to make great gains with them, even more so than she was able to with my daughter's class.
She said, you know, I think we will be maybe four or five years, really, before we can evaluate the value that the technology has had on the learning environment for these children. I think that is a key point, that to try to second guess the benefits of the technology before you ever put it into the classroom is a pretty long bow to draw. I think this is technology that is not just unique to schools in my corridor area, but this is technology all across North
America. So I would say to be responsible is an appropriate thing and I can only applaud the minister for wanting to do that. But I do want to say that we are in the year 2001. We certainly hope the technology and the dollars we spend now are dollars that are the cheapest dollars to spend, that doing this while the buildings are new or first being built is the appropriate way to go. Then I think there is more of a question about how much we want to refit buildings and that will depend on their age and the longevity of the building, et cetera.
I guess what I want to say is that I want to thank the minister for allowing the board to kind of move forward with the department. I think this will turn out to be a good result. I also want to say that the board also has two other schools. I know the minister has made the comments, well, there are six other schools and the minister doesn't want to get caught in a trap - the minister is probably saying, am I going to get a word in edgewise here in this process - I know the minister doesn't want to get caught in a trap of doing something for Elmsdale District School if other schools will be saying, well, you did this there, why won't you do it for us?
So I want to suggest to the minister, involve consultation of the other boards. The Chignecto-Central Regional School Board is obviously going to be involved with the East Pictou and South Colchester High Schools. So I would say that this is probably the best opportunity to involve the boards for schools that are coming down the pipe in 2003-04 and 2004-05 to let them have a say and consult with them for the dollars that you would like to spend and see whether or not you can make the best use of them. I will allow you a word at this point.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the member's comments. Something I can add to the comments, perhaps, is that with the new schools there is money that can be used with the discretion of the board and/or the school but sometimes it involves borrowing against future needs. This can sometimes be problematic. The situation with the particular LCD technology - and I know the member is aware of this - is that it will still be there. It will still be available. It is the amount we are talking about, at least, so far, it is one of the most underutilized pieces of equipment that we have supplied to most of the schools. There is nothing to prevent more of these projectors from being added at a later date because all the rooms will be wired for them.
In the case of the particular seven schools we are talking about, including Elmsdale District School, the total saving by having them for every two classes instead of every class and having them portable is about $0.5 million. I know that individually it seems it is just cheap, but it isn't when you look at what you can do with $0.5 million somewhere else. I know the member appreciates that and he is trying to do the best for his school and I am sure something can be worked out. I do appreciate his comments.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, for sure, I can agree that there are lots of places for $0.5 million. I want to make the comment to the minister that when you make enquiries to how much use some of this equipment gets, I think in conversation with the deputy minister and I think you, as well, made the comment about some LCD projectors; I think they were still in the boxes somewhere in one school. I want to say that if last year in the Enfield Elementary School, prior to this new building, if someone had showed up with some LCD projectors and no training and all the other concerns around the wiring in the building, et cetera, they probably would have sat in the boxes as well. For technology, that is seen as the appropriate technology but not something that has been used every day by the teachers, they do need some time to adapt their teaching to the technology.
I think the fact that in some cases they haven't, doesn't mean that the technology is inappropriate, it just means the strategies and the time spent on in-servicing and making the appropriate use of it has not been done. I don't think we should keep questioning the technology. I think we should be questioning the avenues that are available to allow teachers the training and the time to get used to making the best use of that technology. I think you will find over time in these new schools that something that appears to not have a lot of use in other places is going to be used a lot. That is what teachers now are telling me and this is in their first year of using that.
I have been told, certainly not the case with the LCD projectors but with the SMART Boards, that they were something that teachers haven't made a lot of use of. But they do see the LCD projector as an integral part now to what they are doing. Actually, a colleague of mine who is in his third year at the Riverside Education Centre is saying that it has taken three years for him to really make the most appropriate use of the technology and he is just finding that the changes it has made in his teaching are almost immeasurable for what he has been able to do for his students. I think to make those types of decisions prior to putting the technology in is not the appropriate way to go.
What I also want to mention to the minister is the concern I have around the other schools in my constituency. Areas like Maitland, Noel, Kennetcook, where the population has been at best, stable; not growing as much as in the corridor area. Two or three years ago the board was looking at closing a couple of those schools. They decided against it, I am glad to say, but the impact of that on those communities would have been significant because it would have caused people who were thinking of moving there to rethink that move when the school was closed.
I just want to put the bug in the ear of the minister that there are schools in rural Nova Scotia that over time are going to need some allocation of education dollars to ensure that those students get appropriate technology. I would like to know if the minister does have a plan around rural schools that are not going to get the technology based on new school construction and how her department works with the boards on those issues.
MISS PURVES: As the Opposition Leader knows, the boards do consult with us, they do ask us for help with renovations and so on. We have been able to hook up all the schools to the Internet. There is some technology in all the schools but, of course, the issue is that the more new schools get built or the more major renovations are done, the more the differences between the new schools and the older schools become apparent. There is an added issue when it comes to some of the smaller schools in rural areas because the minute it becomes more sensible to build a really expensive new school to consolidate school population, you get into the issue of closing small rural schools. At some point it becomes an either/or situation.
I know that when it comes to Question Period time, the object is, it has to be partisan and what are you doing; but the issue we are talking about is not a partisan issue. It is a real issue we are facing not just in Nova Scotia but we are facing it in Nova Scotia and many of us are, should I say, prejudiced, in favour of the value of small schools and don't want to close them because it is in smaller schools where kids learn to be somebody. It almost doesn't matter whether they have any technology or not. You have good teachers, you get a chance to be on a sports team, you get a chance to do after-hours, you are part of a community. If the new school you are going to, depending on your age, is way bigger than what you are used to one questions the value in social terms of the new school and balancing that against the needs of the curriculum and the needs to have technology is technically the job of the school board, but it is actually the job of everybody in the system. It is a hard balancing act.
Some of the smaller schools you can wire up and, although they don't look as fancy as the other schools, you can actually access the technology and perhaps take advantage of some distance-learning opportunities whereby you can get courses without having to supply a teacher on-site or a teacher who is an expert in that area on-site. There are developments in that field that are going to be of benefit to small rural schools, but if I had a wish that would help out our small rural schools and our other schools, it would be for about one million immigrants to come to Nova Scotia and start filling up those schools.
Meanwhile it is an issue and I appreciate the member's comments, and all I can say is we do care about those issues as well.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: I want to thank the minister. I found her answer interesting because she touched on some things that if I had said them myself I don't know if I could have said them better. Probably the fact that this is going to go on record will come back to bite me at some point.
I do want to say that I am pleased to hear the minister talk about those concerns around the development of students, that's hard to put a dollar figure on, for sure. I agree and I do know from teaching in a school that had 1,100 students that the difficulty in being able to put a name on a face and what that meant, actually, in managerial terms for the staff and
so on, was significant. Having a smaller student body and a staff that knows every student is worth dollars, I do have to say. I do understand the predicament around aging buildings and the appropriate technology. I will take the minister at her word, I am not going to argue with her, these are things I can see she has considered.
I will say that when I was a teacher an awful lot of decisions were made, lots of decisions were made without any consultation of the staff; very top-down. I used to think that for the business we were in, of education, there was very little reliance on the educated staff. We spent our money to get degrees to teach and nobody seemed to want to talk to us when it came to making these decisions. I found so many of them were made not on the basis of education, but on a basis of dollars to be spent which I always thought seemed to weigh more heavily. I suppose if you have lots of money, that is not a problem.
[1:00 p.m.]
Anyway, I do recognize the minister's concern and I think she articulated it well. I probably will remind her in Question Period at some point, but I want to mention those schools. The numbers are stable and the communities seem to be holding their own in that regard. I don't think the board is overly concerned about looking at closing them, but I guess even if the numbers are a little low, I see other values that the province will save money by keeping them open, I guess is what I am trying to say.
One other point I will raise before I leave the topic of technology is around - and I have to say for the record I am assuming that this came from my own school board. Yes, I guess it is, because it says CCRSB; I finally picked out something that would identify it. The advantages it has here to ceiling-mounted LCD projectors: improper shutdown of portable units causes very expensive bulbs to burn out quickly, I think bulbs are around $600; extra security is required to avoid theft with portable units; higher maintenance is required for portable units due to bumping and damage during movement from one classroom to another; scheduling the use of a shared portable projector becomes an obstacle to integration; cards, cabling, extension cords, adapters, et cetera, cause unnecessary clutter and hazards in the classroom; effective integration of technology when resources are not readily available is difficult to achieve. I will table this since I am reading from it.
For wiring infrastructure: wiring infrastructure should be put in place during the time of construction of mounted LCD projectors; the cost of doing the wiring after construction increases significantly; the estimated cost of wiring infrastructure during construction is around $500 per unit and after construction it is $1,000 per unit. So I will leave those numbers with the minister and I will table that for the committee.
The last item I want to mention to the minister is my concern around unskilled labour in the province. A friend of mine, someone in the construction industry, conveyed to me that if you were to go on almost any job site and look at the skilled labourers, it is difficult to find anybody under 40 years of age.
If the economy of this province is going to take off and if we assume with that there will be some construction boom with it, the number of skilled labourers that we are going to need is not going to be there. I heard on the radio actually, today, if you are planning on building a house, you may be able to buy the land and whatever, but you won't be able to find anybody who is capable of building it in a rush.
One point I will make to the minister, I have made it to other people and some agreed and some didn't, but I think a system more closely related to the old vocational system that allowed students who were not going to take the academic line, students who were always on the edge of dropping out, students who didn't feel comfortable in the school system but were more prone to hands-on and these were individuals who at an early level - Grade 8, Grade 9 - could continue the academic side of their program, but could also take a trade or a skill. That seems to be more difficult now under the present community college system.
I would like the minister to maybe think about taking a look at that because I think in the first year that community colleges opened, I remembered some students who had been in vocational training and they came back to the high school situation. They were there about three months and then they were gone. They couldn't get into community colleges and they couldn't get any skills either. So I just wonder if this has come across the minister's desk and if she has had any discussion around this issue.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this is a huge national issue and it is a big issue in Nova Scotia and for many of the same reasons as the Leader of the Opposition outlined. We do have a couple of things in place on the issue of trying to get a handle on what workers we are actually going to need and in what sectors. We have an interdepartmental committee with people, including Education and Economic Development, that is going to be reporting by the end of May on a broad variety of needs. That inventory is very important in terms of trying to plan for the trades we know we are going to need and that we are not relying just on anecdotal evidence: oh, we are going to need 10,000 welders and it turns out we don't because that is no good. We are paying close attention to that.
So far, in terms of the offshore, the Petroleum Directorate has been pretty good in working with the players there, to train the kinds of people they need, but the construction industry, aside from the offshore, is absolutely huge. It includes new schools which are going to be going up at the same time as you are building pipelines and perhaps other things in Nova Scotia.
What the community college has started to do in the last couple of years - and I believe they have completed agreements with all school boards now - one that I am most familiar with is one in the South Shore, a school board, where they are beginning pilot projects with some of the junior high kids, to start doing some of their shop, as it were, at the college. Instead of re-equipping the schools and having two sets available, they can take college prep courses if they are interested in that at the college and they are working with the boards to try to do that at that level and get some of these kids before they drop out.
I don't quarrel with encouraging academic achievement in the school system, but it shouldn't be at the expense of people who are talented in other areas and that is what has been happening. All the boards recognize it now. Whether we can reverse it in time for the next couple of years not to be a problem, I doubt that very much, but we are definitely aware of it. Ray Ivany is aware of it and all the boards are aware of it and quite a bit is actually being done to try to get this back into junior high in a different way.
MR. MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, I will thank the minister for her answer. I am glad to hear that this is something that the department is thinking about. I would agree with the minister that it is probably unlikely that, you know, very quickly you will stem the tide, but certainly if there is some movement in that direction, I think it would be advantageous because I could see labourers, skilled people, coming from New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, wherever, to take these jobs that Nova Scotians should have.
My last concern is more specific to correspondence to you around roof leaks at Hants East Rural High School. I requested whether or not you had been aware, or if the board had contacted the department, and anyway your response to me - and I don't have a copy of my letter from you - was that the board had not. The assistant superintendent of operations I think got a copy of your response and he had written me. The letter was on my desk last night and when I got to my office, that it was part of a number of items. I think it was 10 on the list for things that they had presented to the department. I just want to flag that for the minister that the board is concerned about that and has sent something to the department.
With that, I will relinquish my time anyway and thank the minister and staff for their indulgence. I appreciate the time and the effort. I am probably not going to let you go at this point, I will keep pursuing you on some of these issues, but thanks very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Chairman, there is only really one question I want to talk to the minister about. It is about a P3 school that was built in my community. It is called Greenfield Elementary. Now this school, while it was a much-needed school, was built with not much foresight because it was built on basically a dead-end, small side street which provides very precarious access during school hours. It has caused a great deal of concern for the local volunteer fire department because of access regarding emergencies. It has upset
local residents because of the traffic congestion it has caused on this small entrance. It has also caused other residents on another street where DOT had blocked off part of that street and made it a one-way and made it virtually inaccessible for the local residents, albeit only two households. So when this school opened in September 2000, there was much talk that there would be some rerouting of traffic.
I guess my one and only question to the Minister of Education - and I hope she doesn't say, ask this of the Minister of Transportation and Public Works when he gets up - are there plans in the works for construction of access to that school and could she tell me, if there are, what stage are they at?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this is an issue that has been ongoing for the last year or so. The member opposite is quite right. The school was needed, but certain things were not taken into consideration when the school was built. The Department of Transportation and Public Works has looked at some alternatives suggested for that road. At least one of them is technically not feasible. They are still looking at acquiring property and I am told that if that can't be done, they may have to consider some expropriation in order to alleviate that situation. It is not an ideal situation - it is not even a good situation - and it is one of the results of building schools too quickly.
I have been criticized for not building them quickly enough, but the procedure of building all these schools so quickly without taking into consideration these off-site costs has not only led to great extra expense for the province, but it has also led to the delaying of school openings and other problems. We have a road problem with an Antigonish school as well; we had a water main problem down in Mahone Bay. None of these things were put into the lease or were considered as necessary when the schools were being put up.
So I apologize to the member, but this situation is not easy to rectify, but we are looking at it. But it does point to one very good reason to try to take all these things into consideration, whether it is sidewalks, roads, parking or where the water main is located. These are not negligible things and some of these situations could have been avoided with less speed. We are still working on it and it has not been forgotten about.
MR. CORBETT: I am just making a statement. Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the minister, I thank her and I guess I will probably go on notice as saying now I am going to go after the Minister of Transportation; when the Minister of Transportation comes up, I will be after him about it. It is, with all frivolity aside, Madam Minister, a serious situation. I have noticed that there have been other complaints about the construction of those schools in around there, whether it is even using the same style of windows in second storey schools that are multiple storey. What they are saying is that these types of windows tend to open out and they are close to floor level and some of these are used in P to 6 schools and it may present a danger for some of the students, in particular the one that was built in the Whitney Pier area.
This was not so much brought to me by constituents, but by tradespeople who worked on those schools and thought that that may be a problem. At some time you may want to flag that and have your people look into it. I appreciate the minister's answer and I will pursue it further, probably with the Minister of Transportation. Now I would like to relinquish the floor to the member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I think we have nine minutes remaining?
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have roughly nine minutes.
MR. DEVEAUX: I appreciate the member for Cape Breton Centre and the member for Hants East relinquishing some of their time to allow me to ask a few questions. I know with only nine minutes, I am not going to get a lot in now, so I will talk about a couple of key issues. I was listening with interest, particularly when I was in the Chair, to your discussion with the member for Richmond. Unfortunately, I didn't hear the whole thing about future school construction. Maybe you know where I am going to go with this - a high school for Eastern Passage.
So I will lay the groundwork, as I have done in the past. It is the largest community in Nova Scotia, with 11,000 people, without its own high school. It makes up almost 50 per cent and in the next few years, it will make up over 50 per cent of the population of Cole Harbour District High School. The only school, my understanding from the school board and the Department of Education's own analysis, that will be overcrowded in the next 10 years. So the people of Eastern Passage are interested in knowing whether or not there will be a school built there. The minister may say it is not approved and, therefore, I am not going to give you a final answer. I'll nibble around the edges in the few minutes we have.
The Halifax Regional School Board provided a report last September that provided, I believe it was called, essential and necessary or something like that. I am trying to clarify. Maybe the minister and her staff can just put on the record their understanding of what was recommended around Cole Harbour District High School and the potential for a high school in Eastern Passage. What did the school board recommend when they filed their report?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I actually don't remember all the recommendations on that list. I remember the top two recommendations, or among the top two or three, were Halifax West and St. Pat's and QEH. There was a bit of an issue there, at least on the first list that they gave us, that it was too long. There were too many for it to be reasonable. I mean, we would have had to build schools nowhere else in Nova Scotia. But I will go back and get that list and I will provide it to the member and we will see where that potential school fits on that list.
MR. DEVEAUX: I have a clear recollection of where it was on the list. It was at the top of the B-list. There was an A-list of about 10. I think that is essential or emergency. Then there was a list B, which was necessary or vital or some other adjective. The member for Halifax Needham may have it there. I am trying to gather from the minister her interpretation of what the school board recommended with regard to Cole Harbour High. There were two, I think, essential options: one was an expansion of Cole Harbour High to address overcrowding, or there was also the option of building a high school in Eastern Passage.
Quite frankly, I read the document. I wasn't clear where the school board was coming from. So I was hoping to get an interpretation from your department - and I see the deputy minister laughing, maybe he had the same interpretation - maybe you could provide us with some understanding, if you can, as to what your understanding was with regard to the recommendation.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I am going to have to get back to the member opposite with an interpretation of that, perhaps Monday.
MR. DEVEAUX: So, I guess that leads to another question, which is, now I know the member for Timberlea-Prospect specifically asked what you saw as the average size of a high school, and I think you said 1,100, I believe, a little earlier today. I am trying to get a sense from you as to what you would see as a minimum size for a high school in the Halifax area.
MISS PURVES: We actually have some high schools that have 100 or fewer students, but I bow to expertise I don't have. I don't see how, in the long term, something is viable if you had probably fewer than 500 in terms of the kind of expertise that kids need at that age in all the different kinds of courses they take. I suppose if you had even better development of distance ed, you could go with fewer students, but the trouble with some of the distance ed courses is that it involves a kind of independent learning that a lot of kids are capable of but not all the kids in the school are. I can't see that you would be aiming for something less than 500, or even 700 if you were starting from scratch.
MR. DEVEAUX: With regard to that, I think it is important to reflect on the fact, and this is no disrespect to the Minister of Community Services, but in his riding, recently, there was a school built that is Grades 9 to 12, and I think only has 800 students - Lockview - and in it they have created almost an overcapacity in that area. We can argue until we are blue in the face as to whether there is politics involved in that, I wouldn't want to suggest that. The fact is that it has now set a precedent that in the core area of metro you have a high school, Grades 9 to 12 with maybe only several hundred students. I think I just put that out to you that now that sets a precedent that other areas, including my own area, are saying, how can you do it there and not somewhere else?
Again, I am nibbling around the edges because I believe the minister is not going to tell me what is on the list because it hasn't been approved. Let me ask this, with regard to the list of capital expenditures in the metro area for the next 5 to 10 years, does your proposed list go beyond the A-list that the school board submitted, which was the emergency, or do you see it going beyond that, potentially, into some of the B or even C part of the list?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the School Capital Construction Committee, I don't think went by just A or B, because it didn't give every board everything they wanted. They are trying to look at where possible consolidations might take place, or where things might be revisited in each board. It wasn't that they just took the A-list and forgot about the B-list. I don't think that is true at all, I know it is not true.
MR. DEVEAUX: I have just under two minutes, I believe, is that right?
MR. CHAIRMAN: A little bit more than two, actually it is 1:27 p.m.
MR. DEVEAUX: Bonus time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: A bonus for you, sir.
MR. DEVEAUX: I will just finish off this little part with some discussion around that. I will start with a question, I guess, and see if I have a little more time after that. The criteria for this 10 year plan - I think that is what it was, 10 years or 5 to 10 years - or up to 2010, is the criteria sort of forward-looking? I can see that in certain areas, like suburban Halifax-Dartmouth 10 years from now there are going to be major changes in population, and that is going to result in the need for new schools, and 10 years from now there are going to be population decreases in parts of Nova Scotia? Any time you are planning 10 years ahead it is difficult, but can the minister confirm that this is something that there is some sense of looking at future needs, in trying to make final determinations?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, yes, the team made every effort to look beyond just immediate needs, as to future growth projections. Those projections aren't always right, but they are right more often than not. We did look at available residential land and so on and so forth, and what might be needed in the future.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, well, again, just to finish up today's session, I think it is vital that when you are going through this list, and hopefully we can have some more discussion around this in the next several months, this is something that is going to be seriously considered, that the people of Eastern Passage have clearly made it known, again, they are the largest community in Nova Scotia without a school. They are busing, literally, over 500 students out of their community. If this was any other community, outside of metro, it wouldn't be happening. We would be building a high school, for the 400 or 500.
I understand, in metro, you want bigger high schools, you have the population density to allow for that, but I guess I would just put to you that it seems shocking that a high school based in another community is made up of a majority of students from a place where they have to bus them 20 minutes away. That shouldn't be. I would hope that as part of that plan, that your department is considering this, and maybe when we finish this session, we can have a quiet chat and you can explain to me exactly where things are going. On the record, I understand where you are coming from. I thank you for your time today. I may have some more questions for you on Monday.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Today's time for consideration of the estimates has expired.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I move that you do now leave the Chair and that the committee reports considerable progress and begs leave to sit again on a future day.
[1:27 p.m. The committee rose.]
