MR. CHAIRMAN: The estimates for the Department of Education.
Just going by the minutes from yesterday, I believe we were with the NDP caucus, the honourable member for Cape Breton Centre. I will do the math here, I will take a little time and advise him a little bit later just how many minutes you would have left here.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Chairman, we will just give the minister a few minutes for staff. I'm just looking for the high sign there. Yesterday, when we were in debate on Supply, I was asking a few questions around some of the perceived staffing problems at the University College of Cape Breton. We were at that point.
I had asked the minister about the perceived problems around that institution as told to me by some of the instructors. Again, I guess I will reiterate what I said to the minister yesterday, that I note there's the idea of micromanaging, but this is not a problem of micromanaging. It's a matter of when you have serious allegations out there that the administration is growing by 100 per cent, that there are layoffs of trade instructors and, indeed, a pull-back from programs. We see some programs are actually funded externally and they're still being cut out.
What is your reaction when you hear about those things? You've obviously heard about them, Mr. Minister, what is your reaction, and your department's reaction to those statements around that facility?
283
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Education.
HON. JANE PURVES: Mr. Chairman, yes, I have heard the allegations. Of course, you never like to hear about too much administration anywhere. People say it about many aspects of government, including school boards. Sometimes it's true and sometimes it's not. Universities are governed by a board of governors, and on the board of governors there are faculty members, there are student representatives, and they are the people charged with administering the affairs of the university. It is my feeling and the department's feeling that with any allegations, such as too much administration or overstaffing or any kinds of allegations like that, it is up to the board of governors to investigate, if they need to, those allegations. It's not up to the government to do that. We don't have that role in any of the universities here in Nova Scotia.
MR. CORBETT: Through you, Mr. Chairman, the province appoints members to that board, as it does to universities across the province, what is the role then of the appointments through the province? If they're not responsible to you, Madam Minister, why bother appointing anybody and allow the appointments to be done merely by the facility itself, instead of you appointing anybody.
[Mr. William Dooks in Chair.]
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the appointments by the government to university boards of governors are intended - the member opposite is correct - to help reflect the point of view of government on the university and the system of universities in the province. Again, in that capacity, they would be part of the people who would look at a problem if a problem were brought forward.
Certainly not since I have come to office have I ever regarded government appointments to university boards of governors as puppets whom you use to just tell them, do this, do that. They are thinking human beings, and they're on the boards to, philosophically, represent the government, but they are also there to work as part of a team on the board of governors. If the board of governors as a whole wants to look at anything, it obviously can.
MR. CORBETT: Mr. Chairman, I don't think the minister came within a mile of answering the question. What I'm saying is, I don't believe in the fact that every time they go to a board meeting that they go with a note from the minister in hand. What I'm saying, and I'm agreeing with her somewhat, I suppose, when she says when there are legitimate problems around that table that the board tries to resolve them. One way that the board tries to resolve, I think, is to go back to the ministry which is responsible, which is obviously this minister's. So she doesn't see that there's a reporting back to her department by the people she appoints. Is that accurate, Madam Minister?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, no, the boards of governors do not report in any way to the Department of Education. It may be that the member opposite is advocating mandate letters to government appointees or something like that, but aside from that, it's not something that we have initiated at this stage. The boards of governors do not approach the province, or haven't in the last two and a half years, with problems other than the president might ask for more funding. In fact, quite often that does happen. Aside from that, on their internal governance issues, no, it's not something that we get into, and we have not been asked for help in that regard, with the exception of the Acadia bill, where they wanted changes to their board of governors.
MR. CORBETT: I guess I'm lost in the fact of why bother having appointments there at all then. Another topic we discussed very briefly yesterday was students loans and some of the real problems around them. One area around student loans last year that this government certainly looked at pursuing and one that would be extremely injurious, I think, to UCCB and its students there. in particular, but indeed across the province, is de-designation. I would like the minister to tell me where their thoughts are today and in the future regarding de-designation of certain institutions.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, before I answer that question, I'm just tabling the student assistance application form. It has all the details on it that the member requested yesterday. We are looking at a new designation policy. We actually have a designation policy now, but it's very much out of date. We're looking at a document that would be brought forward to Cabinet within the next three to four months. I realize that some students, particularly, are dead set against our having such a policy, but times have changed, and we need such a policy. We need to reflect the changed conditions of how we lend money. The province is 100 per cent responsible now for student loan losses.
MR. CORBETT: I appreciate what the minister just said about the province being on the hook for loan losses. The reality of such a proposal again affects areas that may have high rates of default. I think the minister has to agree that when you take default under advisement, you realize that it is not so much people skipping out on their debt but it is the reality of where they live, it is the reality of the job market. Don't you feel that if you pursue this further, Mr. Minister, that you are further endangering a post-secondary education, as opposed to helping it, and the only thing you are really doing is trying to help the bottom line of the province, on the backs of students in post-secondary institutions?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, obviously that is not the case. What we are looking at, in terms of the new designation policy, one of the things, for example, right now a student is determined to be in default of a student loan if he hasn't started paying within 90 days. Although this has not been approved yet, what we are looking at is extending that period to a year. So that changes considerably the default rates of the various institutions in Nova Scotia, of the students attending various institutions in Nova Scotia, if that were to be the case.
I do understand the point of the member's question, but because we are in a situation where we are now 100 percent responsible for paying defaulted student loans, we have to try to protect both the students who need the loans and the taxpayers who pay for them. There are other risks of not acting, to do something about our out-dated designation policy. A small example would be, if we didn't have one, there would be a good case that other provinces might not give loans to students who want to attend institutions here. This is something that is a national issue and most of it has come about because of the banks getting out of the student loan business. So we are pretty well half pregnant on this, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CORBETT: I just want to change gears a bit here. I am not going to dwell on the escapades at the Strait Regional School Board, which are numerous. When there was the audit done around the Strait Regional School Board, did that, in turn, affect audits at other boards? Just to say, well, if we have a problem in one board, we should do that. If, indeed, that triggered audits of other boards, was there anything out of line, per se, that you saw that kind of triggered you going to that board and saying, what is this all about?
MISS PURVES: Well, I think the member realizes there were some issues in another school board that were dealt with by the board and there was an audit there, the Grant Thornton report, but I believe that was commissioned by the board itself, was it not? That was commissioned by the board itself. There are recommendations we have taken from the forensic audit that are part of the reasons we have put certain measures in the Financial Measures (2002) Bill, to try to tighten up accountability controls in all the school boards. There has been nothing in other school boards to lead us to believe that a forensic audit would be necessary in any other school board. It was a very strange situation in the Strait and we have seen nothing yet, even looking at the forensic audit and going back over what happened and how could we have figured it out. We haven't seen anything to lead us to believe such a situation is occurring in any other school board.
MR. CORBETT: I guess out of that comes the Public Accounts document, at Page 78 it deals with the Cape Breton-Victoria Regional School Board.
[2:45 p.m.]
Anyway, in that document, ending March 31, 2000, there is a line regarding legal fees, Madam Minister. In there, there was budgeted $100,000 for legal fees. In the actual it shows $164,000. In auditing the books or in seeing that, wouldn't that send a flag up to say why are legal fees almost three-quarters over budget? Was there something unusual at that board that may have caused that to spike like that, Madam Minister?
MISS PURVES: It is unclear to me what document is being referred to so I have not been able to find the information.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I will give that back to the member for some clarification.
MR. CORBETT: It is Volume 2, Public Accounts, Agencies and Funds.
Anyway, I guess what I am saying, and it is not necessary to really have the document, I can pass the page over, just so the members can see it. What I am saying is, wouldn't a number almost three-quarters higher than what was proposed in actual costs, wouldn't that have - could you explain to me - did you ask the board if that was anything unusual that would have caused a cost overrun such as that?
MISS PURVES: This can happen with legal bills. We can certainly find out for the member what those expenses are for but it could have been contract negotiations, it could have been grievances, it could have been any number of those things. We will certainly find out from the Cape Breton-Victoria board what those legal expenses were for.
MR. CORBETT: Well, you know, and I appreciate the minister's undertaking because I realize one of the largest problems coming out of investigations into other school boards is the actual, where dollars should be going into the classroom that are not going into the classroom. So you can hear my direction, Madam Minister, that it is not being - I am not accusing anybody - it is just the fact that it is such a large number and we are trying to heighten our sensitivity around dollars that should go in the classroom. If the minister would take that undertaking, I certainly appreciate it and her direction.
Just in closing, before I turn the floor over to my colleague, Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the minister, and she may not be able to provide me with the direction today but I would again appreciate an undertaking on the department's behalf. Earlier this year there was a problem with flooding at Greenfield Elementary School in River Ryan. It is a P3 school, and you may be aware of it. On the surface it appeared that the sprinkler system malfunctioned and the music room flooded, causing the closure of the school for some four or five days, I am not exactly sure of the length.
On that, I would like to know from the minister, who is ultimately responsible for those repairs? Is it the board? Is it the department? Is it the P3 owner? Just probably two questions in one here, Madam Minister, and one which is similar, but different, as they say. The land acquisition around that school, as it relates to the access road, has that been resolved and has that work been completed and paid for? I'm talking about, more appropriately, was there any land that had to be purchased, is the paving done, and are the sidewalks done? Then at the end of that, Mr. Chairman, I will be turning it over to my colleague, the member for Halifax Needham.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, on the first part of the question about the sprinkler system and the repairs, the P3 partner is responsible for all that. They're responsible for maintaining the buildings. So that's theirs, and on the question of that other problem, I will get back to the member on the latest update on that. I know that has been an ongoing issue.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Needham with 27 minutes in turn.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Madam Minister, I want to talk to you about the process of school reviews. As you know only too well, there have been schools here in the Halifax Regional Municipality reviewed. Two of these schools, I believe, are in the constituency that you represent and one school - well, actually, all of the schools that were reviewed were in many of our constituencies, I guess is the proper way to look at this - the feeder schools to Queen Elizabeth High School and St. Patrick's High School. But the three schools that were ultimately on the chopping block - St. Mary's School, Joseph Howe School and École Beaufort - are in your constituency and my constituency, Joseph Howe School in my case. There are a couple of things that I want to say and I want to ask.
Both St. Mary's and Joseph Howe Schools are schools that I know a fair amount about for various reasons. I see these schools as being probably the cream of the crop, in some ways. At the public meeting on Joseph Howe School in my riding I had a chance to talk to the board about that school. I told them that three out of the four inner-city schools in HRM, in the board, are actually inside my constituency and Joseph Howe School - I like all of the schools in my constituency, but there's something special about Joseph Howe School. Joseph Howe School is the school where you feel a great deal of hope when you leave. Joseph Howe School is the school that George Elliott Clarke and Wayne Adams graduated from. I can go through community leaders, people in police departments, in the legal profession, in literature, art, commerce, social work, and education, and I can find people who went there in their youth as adults now in leadership roles in the community.
Joseph Howe School is a wonderful school. People in our community know this. We understand this, yet that school has been reviewed three times in the past seven years. Each time this occurs the focus of the community and the parents, in particular, at that school is diverted toward trying to demonstrate the worth of that school in that community, and the time that they would like to spend in meeting the needs - and there are many needs of the children and the staff in that school as a learning environment - they lose those opportunities because they're always fighting just to convince the powers that be that their school is worthy of continuing in the community.
I could say a lot of things about St. Mary's School as well. I know it less well, although quite a few people who live in my constituency have children who go to that school. It strikes me as having some features that are similar to Joseph Howe School, certainly in terms of the way it embraces cultural diversity and other forms of diversity in our society. One of the things that struck me at the public meeting was the absence of the class divisions that you see. There was quite a broad spectrum of income groups that have their kids going to that school, yet everybody seemed very comfortable with each other and those distinctions weren't barriers to people getting along.
So I guess my question is what, if anything - and St. Mary's School is in the very same situation as Joseph Howe School; it has been reviewed three times in seven years, and you certainly hear the parents expressing their frustration about this. So I want to know what, if anything, you're prepared to do to regulate, limit, or prohibit this kind of review occurring, on such a regular basis for the same school? We all understand that the school review process it's there. It's in the Education Act. The boards need to be cognizant of their responsibilities and they do need to follow enrolment patterns and work within their budgets and all of this kind of stuff, limited as those budgets are, but I really think it's unfair to these schools to be placed in this situation. I would hope that there will be something you will be prepared to do to make sure that, you know, in another year's time those schools aren't being reviewed again, or in two years time.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate what the member for Halifax Needham is saying about her schools. I think that's the difficulty. Obviously, the parents at École Beaufort feel that they're also the cream of the crop, and a lot of people do feel that way about their local schools for whatever reason; it's usually a different reason in every case. This school closure process is a job of the school board. It is conceivably one that could go somewhere else, to some kind of a URB of schools or whatever, but there might be even less local input than there is right now.
I think also, given that right now it is a job the school board has, it's problematic to say, this is your job, but do it my way and here are the changes I would like. But on the other hand, I do understand what she's saying about three times in seven years or whether even three times in eight years - that's a lot - because the whole community, the teachers, the parents and the kids get upset because the parents and teachers are upset. It's a lot to put people through.
I am sure that there are school board members who will pay attention to what the member has said and think about the next time the same schools get reviewed. They do know what it does to the community. On the other hand, I'm not prepared at this point to say this is your job, and then take away their job.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the minister. I think the point is very well taken about local input into these processes. I think that's absolutely critical and I would never suggest that that be taken away from a process where there would be a lot of local input. I think that is really important, but I think that there need to be very good objective criteria, which include the educational attainment and performance of the school overall, and it seems to me that this aspect of school reviews is extremely weak. It's extraordinarily weak.
[3:00 p.m.]
I spent some time looking at the data that the school board was working with in this regard. I noticed that - I can't remember if it was in Question Period the other day or if it was here during Estimates, but I did notice that - the minister made a statement that she had had her staff review the criteria in the Education Act. I'm wondering if you would share with us any written analysis that came out of that review, especially as it pertains to what your department considers the strengths and weaknesses of the criteria and what, if any, improvements might be made.
It seems to me that we need to have a public debate about this and I think that, to some extent, the group - is it PAGE? - that is interested in public education - certainly there has been on their list some debate and discussion and exchange, and we need to open that up and get people involved in problem solving together, I think. It is clear that this is an area of a lot of emotion and passion when people's local schools are affected, but we have now, I think, communities that have a lot of experience in the process that we could invite to the table to talk about what they see to be the relative strengths and weaknesses of this process.
I think we could probably generate as a community a lot of very good ideas to have a process that would work better. The need for objective criteria has to be a feature with respect to educational performance and attainment so that we're not just looking at square footage and utilization of physical space. It's the success of the space being used that also needs to be looked at; it seems to me that that's critical. When I look at Joseph Howe School, that's an argument that I think is just very clear to me.
MISS PURVES: There are a number of good points in what the member has said. On the issue of the educational attainment of the schools, we actually don't have any objective criteria on these things, although we will have more as we get into more testing. What she says is right; why would you want to shut down a school that produced the country's Rhodes Scholars, for example, or whatever criteria you use. There is a potential downside to that, of course. You don't want to go - if all the kids in a brand new school were doing really badly, I don't think anyone would argue that it should be shut down. But she is right, it should be a factor taken into consideration, and I suppose we would if we could. Right now that's not possible. Also, the criteria may need to be improved, and I could certainly commit to taking into consideration any ideas that any group or her Party or anyone thinks should be included in any changes to the Education Act regarding school closures. We would definitely take a look at that. The system is okay but I don't think it or any other system is perfect, and we would be very happy to take a look at that.
On the other questions of reviewing whether the school board had proceeded correctly, last year when the issue was Dartmouth, not Halifax, we did have one of our lawyers look at the school review process to see if it had been followed because there were parents over there who felt exactly the same thing. He said they had been followed. If that
is written, I will provide it to the member. As it turns out, the parents sued and the court found that because a school board member had not attended certain meetings, that member was ineligible to vote; therefore, it overturned the school closure, so we had not considered that. Now, we had our director of public schools, Mike Sweeney, in the case of the Halifax school closures, go over the Act several times to see that procedures had been followed and he said they had. I am also sure that the board, because of what happened last year, was especially careful in anything they did to make sure they were following procedure. That doesn't mean that people are happy with the procedure or anything else, but we were assured by Mr. Sweeney that according to what's laid out in the Education Act, they had followed correct procedure.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I would like to ask the minister about the Africentric Learning Institute. I know that the BLAC report back in the early 90s had a series of recommendations. One of those recommendations was in fact the establishment of such a learning institute. I know that CACE has worked very hard to flesh out a business plan and broad terms of reference for an Africentric Learning Institute and the implementation of such an institute over a period of time. I think it's fair to say that there is concern that the resources required to make this recommendation from the BLAC report a reality have not been forthcoming in this budget.
I'm wondering if the minister can tell us why it is that such an important recommendation from the BLAC report has not been implemented and when we can expect to see some very forceful action in this respect? This is a community that's been very patient and really needs a strong public policies response from this government to enable Black learners in this province to achieve the potential that exists in that community.
MISS PURVES: As the member knows, we have been, through the department, providing $100,000 a year for the study phase for the ALI, and that funding is continuing. I am sure she is also aware that at this stage they do actually have a physical presence out at Mount Saint Vincent University, where they are renting space.
Mr. Chairman, this is an important initiative, but again, in education as in other departments faced with very human demands and needs, we certainly believe in continuing to proceed with this. This year we were simply unable to commit bigger amounts of money to the project. The reason is very simple: post-secondary institutions, aside from wages at the community college, did not receive increases. The money that we did have, most of it had to go - well, all of it, relatively speaking - to the Primary to Grade 12 system. There are other monies dedicated to Black learners in our budget. We simply couldn't commit the capital, especially when the federal share of any such capital is unclear. I mean the member opposite, everyone in this House, knows the capital demands on the government for school construction, deferred maintenance, university deferred maintenance and we were simply unable to take money from that area and put it into another, even though it is a very worthy project.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I know that there are many needs in this province but I want to say that the Black community in this province have waited far too long. It is high time that they found a government that understands just how long they have waited, just how patient they have been and how deeply they have been affected in a negative way by not having their needs recognized in a meaningful way. I would hope that in the very near future that that community will find the response in a government that they deserve, that will not continue to put them off until some future time. This has been the story of their lives in this province, unfortunately.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister in the brief time I have left, a question with respect to student aid and social assistance policy. The Minister may recall that some time ago I wrote her a letter, and I also wrote the Minister of Community Services, expressing the concerns I had on behalf of many of my constituents who were being caught in some kind of a policy vacuum or dispute of some kind between her department and the Department of Community Services. The outcome of that being that people who were accepted into university programs were actually unable to go into those programs because they had inadequate financial support to do so. One department was essentially pretty well saying it was the responsibility of the other department.
Now I know that this particular problem isn't something that people just in my constituency experience. Saint Mary's University held a very good lunchtime series on issues of importance to students and they dedicated a whole workshop on why the doors to universities have been closed now for people in this province who are poor, especially people who are single parents. The student support workers at the universities talked about all of the people they have coming to see them with serious financial problems.
A member of the minister's Department of Community Services attended that workshop and actually made a comment that it wasn't Community Services that was the problem, it was the Department of Education that was the problem. I sort of chuckled at that, I thought if somebody from Education had been there, they would have said, it is not the Department of Education that is the problem, it is the Department of Community Services.
I tend to think it is the problem of both of the departments. It is the problem of getting the departments together and harmonizing what is in the best interest of getting people a university education. I think that being poor and on social assistance, if you have the intellectual capacity to go to university, then being poor and on social assistance should not be the criteria that determines whether or not you get a university degree. That is my own view. I think that research will demonstrate that people who actually do get an opportunity to have a university education go on to be very important contributors, in both an economic sense and in other ways as well in the community. Anyway, I think it is a short-sighted policy.
Now the Minister of Community Services did write back to me - and I think maybe the Minister of Education might have as well, I just don't recall at the moment seeing it -telling me that this policy was being reviewed, that there was going to be an active program of review between the departments. So I want to ask the minister, has that review occurred? Where does it stand at the moment? When can we look forward to some resolution of the conflict that seems to exist between the Department of Community Services and the Department of Education with respect to people on social assistance and their ability to go to university?
[3:15 p.m.]
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I will take that up with my colleague, the Minister of Community Services. As I recall, the issue is one as simple as this, that there is a maximum amount a student can get for a student loan, that in many circumstances it is not enough for people to live on and that at one point Community Services used to allow people to stay on family benefits while they were attending university, the person would get the loan as accessed through student aid, but then the policy changed so that the student, although they could still get the student loan, did actually not have enough to live on. That is my recollection of the situation but I will talk to my colleague to determine the end result of that review because I know there were discussions.
Mr. Chairman, if I might just have a moment to address the African-Nova Scotian issue. While it is true that we have not proceeded this year with the Africentric Learning Institute, which was one of the issues in the BLAC report, I do want to make clear that we do fund African Canadian education in Nova Scotia to the tune of about $2.6 million a year. I would also like to point out that to the best of my knowledge, we are the only Education Department in the country that has an African Canadian Services Division, that we do have the very important council, the Council on African Canadian Education, and that we are the only province in Canada with school board members of colour representing the Black population. So it is absolutely not true that we have done nothing for our Black population of Nova Scotia, many of whom date back, as we all know, to the settling of Nova Scotia by the Loyalists.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for the information, Madam Minister.
I would like to recognize now the Liberal caucus, that would be the honourable Leader in the House of the Liberal Party. The time being 3:18 p.m., one hour, to 4:18 p.m.
MR. WAYNE GAUDET: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to return to where I left off yesterday, talking about capital funding for new schools and capital funding for renovations. Yesterday the Minister indicated that we have a school capital committee. This committee is made up of department staff and staff from the Department of Transportation and Public Works, representatives from the different school boards, a representative from,
I think she indicated, the Nova Scotia School Board Association and there may have been others sitting on that committee, which technically reviews the requests for new schools, coming from the different school boards.
I understand it is the responsibility of this committee to make recommendations to the minister as to what new schools will be built. I am just wondering if it is possible, I guess, for the minister to provide us with a copy of the school capital committee's recommendation to government?
MISS PURVES: Those recommendations have not yet been taken to Cabinet but, when they have been dealt with by Cabinet, I could certainly make the whole list available. There is quite a binder full of stuff, but we could do that as well, depending on what the member opposite wants.
MR. GAUDET: Maybe I wasn't clear, I will try again. This school capital committee looks at the recommendations that have been submitted by the different school boards from around the province requesting new schools. I understand that Cabinet certainly has to approve any new schools that do get built, but I'm just wondering if the minister is willing to table a copy of this committee's recommendation to government? It's either yes or no.
MISS PURVES: At this time I'm not willing to provide that list before it has been presented to my colleagues.
AN HON. MEMBER: Nice try, Wayne.
MR. GAUDET: We tried. Let's go a little deeper here.
Yesterday the minister indicated in committee that the request for new schools for Windsor and for Truro were on the second list. Somehow those two new schools that are to be built got bumped up, to be announced by Cabinet. I'm just wondering, could the minister explain how these decisions to build these new schools were made? They certainly were not recommended by the school capital committee, because obviously they were on the second list, as the minister indicated. I'm wondering, could the minister explain to the committee how these two new schools got bumped up, to be at the forefront of the first list?
MISS PURVES: Certainly I'm willing to provide the list of the 33 new schools that the boards requested last year at this time. The list that he talks about, since it has not been considered by Cabinet, I am not willing to release at this time.
MR. GAUDET: It's obvious that the Minister of Health, the MLA for Truro and the Minister of Transportation and Public Works, the MLA for Hants West, that they obviously had something to say about moving these two new schools up the priority list. This is politics. Cabinet has the final word. Obviously the minister does not want to table a copy of
that list from this capital school committee. My final question to the minister is, would the minister confirm that Cabinet did move these two new schools up the priority list?
MISS PURVES: The recommendations that were approved by Cabinet for the Windsor school and the Truro school are obviously publicly available. The rest of the list, since it's going to be considered with potential additions because of the review that's again taking place this year, I cannot provide at this time, but I'm certainly willing to provide it after it has been considered by Cabinet.
MR. GAUDET: I'm certainly looking forward to getting that information, but it's obvious what's taking place here. If you want a new school built in this province, you've got to make sure that you're a member of this Cabinet or else that school request will certainly not be moving on that priority list.
AN HON. MEMBER: We're out of luck.
MR. GAUDET: We're out of luck, that's right.
I want to go to renovations. It's obvious that we're not going to find out today how those two new schools were moved from that second list to the first list. Could the minister indicate how much money has been set aside for renovations to schools this year?
MISS PURVES: This year $13 million has been set aside for renovations: $10 million in capital renovations and $3 million in operating renovations.
MR. GAUDET: I understand there's $13 million set aside, but I did not get the last comment from the minister.
MISS PURVES: It's $10 million in capital renovations and $3 million in operating renovations, for a total of $13 million.
MR. GAUDET: Could the minister indicate to us where this funding is located in her budget please?
MISS PURVES: The $10 million for the capital renovations is contained within the budget for the Department of Transportation and Public Works and $3 million is contained in our budget - it goes with Facilities, which is under the Corporate Services section.
MR. GAUDET: Has the department identified these major renovations that will be carried out in this fiscal year? If so, could the minister provide us with a list of those projects?
MISS PURVES: We have identified those renovations. We have not yet double-checked with the boards to make sure they are still their priorities, but we have identified $10 million worth of capital renovations that need to be done on a number of schools. Of course, that $10 million includes the amortization, so it's actually repairs and renovations on quite a number of schools.
MR. GAUDET: I want to return again to French education in the province. Yesterday we learned that the province received $5.2 million from the federal government to fund French education in this province. My question to the minister is, under the federal funding agreement, is the province asked to put in any provincial dollars in order to receive these federal dollars?
MISS PURVES: I'm not sure of the exact point, but if the member meant do we have to match dollar for dollar for specific purposes, we do not have to do that, but obviously we have to, and do, put a lot of provincial money into French education, both as a first language and second language in Nova Scotia. But specific dollar-for-dollar amounts, like 70/30, on things is not necessarily required.
MR. GAUDET: Again I'm just looking for a clarification. So currently the province of Nova Scotia receives $5.2 million in federal funding in order to support French education in Nova Scotia - that's correct? The minister is nodding that's correct. So my question was under that federal/provincial agreement, in order for us to receive $5.2 million in federal funding, is the Province of Nova Scotia asked to put any provincial dollars in order to access those federal dollars?
[3:30 p.m.]
MISS PURVES: In terms of the grants, the OLEP grants from Heritage Canada for French programs, we are not asked for matching dollars per se, the way they do for example university research grants. However, we put $25 million in provincial money alone into the Acadian School Board, which far outweighs any federal contribution. The federal contributions help and we need them, but there is far, far more provincial money going into Acadian education than there is federal money.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, are these agreements basically negotiated year after year or has this agreement been negotiated for a number of years?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, these agreements are now five-year agreements.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I want to go to the regional educational officers. Maybe the minister could first of all explain to me, or to us in this committee, exactly what the responsibilities of these regional educational officers are?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the position of the regional education officer was set up after amalgamation. The position used to be called school inspectors I believe. They are employees of the department who operate in several regions of the province and they're responsible for a school board, or two school boards perhaps, and they attend meetings. They try to iron out difficulties. They're meant to be the liaison between the department and the school boards.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister indicate to us how many regional education officers the department has across the province?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, right now, we have three regional education officers: Jim Burton up in Cape Breton, he has been responsible for the Cape Breton-Victoria Regional School Board and the Strait Regional School Board; Nancy Mosher is based in Halifax I believe, she's responsible for liaising with the Halifax Regional School Board and the Annapolis Valley Regional School Board; and we have David White in Truro and he's the liaison with the Chignecto-Central Regional School Board. We have our own liaison now in the CEO of the central core of the school board. We do not have a regional education officer, per se, in the southwest, and we do not have one with the Acadian School Board at the present time.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I guess the minister practically read where I was going. Guy LeBlanc, the former Tory Cabinet Minister from Clare, was the regional education officer responsible for the Conseil scolaire acadien provincial and he was also responsible for the Southwest Regional School Board, technically the Tri-County District Board, along with the South Shore District School Board. Since Mr. LeBlanc has now left his job and moved on to superintendent of the French Acadian School Board, there has been a vacancy. The minister indicates that they have a liaison officer with the Southwest Regional School Board, but prior to Mr. LeBlanc's appointment, Leroy Legere, another former Tory Cabinet Minister who is currently CEO of the Southwest Regional School Board was appointed by this Tory Minister of Education. My question to the minister is, is it the intention of the department or of this government to appoint someone to replace the former regional education officer, Mr. LeBlanc?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, at this time the position is vacant and we see no need to fill the position; that's not to say it wouldn't be filled at some future date. We have a different form of liaison actually with the Acadian School Board that existed formerly in this very regular meeting of Acadian partners that we have over at the Department of Education. We haven't had any issues of liaison or communication with that board, so at this time we do not see the need to fill that position.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, it seems to me there's a double standard in this province. There are a number of school boards that have regional education officers to support them, but then unfortunately the CSAP, Conseil scolaire acadien provincial, and the
Southwest Regional School Board don't have a regional education officer. So, according to the minister there is no need to have one appointed at this time. At the same time there is a need for other school boards to have one, so I'm just wondering, again, if its just something that the Minister of Education feels because of, obviously, who occupies certain positions in the Southwest region that the department doesn't need to appoint someone?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, before I reply to that I would like to say that I hope the member opposite is not questioning the educational credentials of either Mr. LeBlanc or Mr. Legere. Mr. Legere was assistant superintendent of schools before he was moved to his present position, and Mr. LeBlanc has done many things and he was principal of Digby High School - they're both very qualified educators. The fact is at this time we do not see a need to fill that position. If the Acadian School Board asked us to fill that position because they thought it was necessary, then we would proceed to do it.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, it's kind of interesting. I think maybe we have to just go back and remember how Mr. Leroy Legere was appointed. That job was never advertised, it was a political appointment from day one, and for the minister to stand up in this House, in this Committee, to indicate that Mr. Leroy Legere does not have the credentials to occupy the job, that was never raised on the floor of this Committee.
Mr. Chairman, I want to move to universities. (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The honourable member for Clare has the floor.
MR. GAUDET: I must have hit a nerve there.
Mr. Chairman, I'm sure the minister is aware that Ontario, this year, is in the process of phasing out their Grade 13 program in their public education system. I'm sure Nova Scotia will be faced with an influx of students from Ontario this coming Fall. Chances are that we will have some Grade 12 students from Ontario, along with some Grade13 students from Ontario who will be coming to Nova Scotia to pursue their post-secondary education. My question to the minister is, will the government commit to increase the amount of money paid to universities per student in expectation of more out-of-province students coming to Nova Scotia?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, it is an interesting proposition considering some of the questions I got from the honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage yesterday about protecting Nova Scotia students. I think the universities are expecting extra students this year because of the so-called double cohort in Ontario. This is something the universities are looking forward to because the students coming to study at their university, the more students who come to study, the better off they are. The taxpayers of Nova Scotia also help educate these students to a considerable degree, but no we are not considering giving the universities extra money to cope with this influx.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, the department is not considering providing additional funding to universities to meet this request, or probably a reality that may certainly happen here in the Fall, so I'm just wondering if the minister could indicate if universities are getting ready to meet this large number of out-of-province students who may actually come to Nova Scotia to pursue their post-secondary education?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, to be clear, the universities have not requested extra funding specifically to do with this double cohort coming from Ontario. I know that they are looking forward to and hoping to get some of these students, in fact they have been recruiting some of these students, and really the issue for this government is to try to make sure that there are sufficient seats for qualified Nova Scotia students.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, again I want to continue on universities. Going through the Estimates Book on Page 9.2, under Capital Grants. Looking at the Estimates book we see that the capital funding to universities was cut last year in 2001-02, and then looking at the estimate for this fiscal year we see the capital funding has again been cut. Could the minister indicate if it's a new policy of government to no longer provide capital grants to universities?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I do recall getting this question last year so it's not that new, but it is not a policy to not do so, it is a reality. Earlier I got a question from the member for Halifax Needham about funding the Africentric Learning Institute. I get questions every day about funding new schools and new school construction, and we are spending a lot of money on new school construction. We simply do not have the money to provide capital to universities. Universities have other options: They can work with private institutions; they can get people to build buildings; and they have an alumni they can raise money from. The public school system has none of those options and that has to be our priority.
MR. GAUDET: I'm just wondering if the minister will agree with me that by not providing any capital grants to universities this year, isn't this government forcing universities to look at the possibility of increasing tuition fees in order to raise some money for the universities to help them with the loss from this government? Is the minister prepared to agree with me that that could certainly be a reality?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, our first year in power, I'm sure the member recalls there was a Voluntary Planning Fiscal Task Force and it talked quite a bit about the importance of post-secondary education for Nova Scotia's future. We agreed with that then and we agree with it now, at the time however many people in the school boards felt that the department had paid far too much attention to post-secondary education and was neglecting Primary to Grade 12.
[3:45 p.m.]
It's a very fine balance, as the member opposite knows as he was minister for a time. There are very great needs in the public school system, there are needs in the universities, in the college, and there are needs for adult education and for skills development. At this time, since we provided increased operating funding to the universities for the past two years, and we had scarce dollars this year, we applied those dollars to where we had to apply those dollars in terms of wage increases for NSTU members at both the college and in the Primary to Grade 12 system. This is not saying our universities are not important, or that post-secondary education is not important; again it's a key to human and economic development in this province, but with scarce dollars they had to go to Primary to Grade 12 first.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, looking at the Estimates Book, Page 9.1, we see that the level of funding to universities being provided this year pretty well has remained stable - there has been a zero funding increase. Does the minister agree with the fact that if universities are not provided with an increase this year, universities are probably faced with doing two things: either increase tuition fees, or increase class sizes in order to meet this government's target this year?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, we are giving the universities in excess of $200 million. We would like to be giving them a lot more. We are not able to this year, and yes, universities are going to be raising tuition very likely, the degree I do not know. I do know that in previous years, in this government and other governments, that whether it was that university funding was actually cut, as it was quite drastically in the mid-1990s, or whether increases are given, universities have still had to raise tuition. The tuition increases across the country in the 1990s have been very hard for students to bear. It is a problem here and it is a problem across the country, I admit it, but we are keeping the funding stable. We are not cutting and we will try to do more in years to come.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I want to move to the community colleges. Going over to the Supplementary Detail, Page 8.11, under the Community College Grants, the third budget line item, Recoveries - Community College Grants, we see there's a recovery - last year there was a recovery of $8 million. This year we anticipate that recovery to be slightly under. I guess there are two questions. One, are these recoveries the tuition fees that students pay to attend community colleges, and my second part to that, why does the minister expect these recoveries to be less in this fiscal year?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the recoveries listed there are recoveries from HRDC for the EI recipients who are trained at the community college under an HRDC program and the number of students varies from year to year. It's not that there's any cut, it's just looking at the number of students who are expected under that program, that is the amount of funding that HRDC would provide.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Lunenburg West.
My final question to the minister is, on that very same page I'm looking at the last budget item, Total-Net Program Expenses is at $928 million for community colleges. Could the minister indicate to us what this budget line represents, please?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, on the second last line, $68,394, that is the community colleges Collège de l'Acadie and the NSCC. The $928 million is actually the total budget, the total Education vote, because that's at the end of the last page of the estimates.
MR. GAUDET: Thank you for that clarification.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Lunenburg West with 28 minutes left in the Liberal caucus turn.
MR. DONALD DOWNE: I, too, would like to go to the issue of the community colleges. We've seen the Nova Scotia Community College do an outstanding job over the last number of years making the transition from general programs to a post-secondary level of education. The leadership of Ray Ivany and senior staff has done a brilliant job of moving the agenda forward and being very proactive as a college. The funding allocation this year is up $4 million. Can you explain specifically what areas that $4 million will be used for within the community college, and is there any indication that any capital items would be allocated for the Lunenburg campus of the Nova Scotia Community College system?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, actually comparing estimate to estimate, the increase is $5.6 million. The bulk of that is for anticipated wage settlements and that is pretty well it. We are not looking at capital in this budget, although we have provided a $1 million grant to the college to do a study on the potential of their hub campus. You heard about the plans for their hub campus; think of metro as the wheel with spokes. They're looking at a long-range capital plan that would involve improvements to several of the campuses around the province, but any capital expenditures would be in the budget for Transportation and Public Works, not the Education budget.
MR. DOWNE: Minister, $5.6 million, as you say, is basically salary adjustment. Can you tell me what percentage of increase you are anticipating to come up with the $5.6 million figure for the negotiated - I can either ask you how many staff and do the division over here or simply ask what are you projecting for a settlement for the college?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, it's pretty well the same answer as in public schools. We have provided for a settlement of 2 per cent because we know it won't be less than that, but again, as with the teachers in the public schools, they're still in negotiation. So, you know, whatever the settlement is, we find it within government.
MR. DOWNE: Mr. Chairman, in the event that the settlement is higher than 2 per cent, the Minister of Education has indicated that they will find the money one way or the other. Obviously it would come out of the Department of Education's budget, and in the event that the negotiations are such that the 2 per cent is now 3 per cent, is that going to be coming directly out of the Department of Education's budget?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, and again, that is hypothetical. We would have to look across government should such a contingency occur, and I wouldn't say either that it would or it wouldn't affect the Education budget.
MR. DOWNE: If the negotiations were an acceptance of a 1 per cent increase, would the minister continue to keep the additional 1 per cent that's allocated in salary adjustments?
MISS PURVES: That's a good type of hypothetical question. If such a thing occurred, of course we would put the money into education.
MR. DOWNE: . . . follow the logic. If it was 1 per cent, they could keep the additional 1 per cent; that if it's 2 per cent, that it's probably going to end up coming out of your budget, possibly coming out of the Department of Education's budget to offset the difference in negotiations between teachers and the upcoming negotiated round.
Minister, there was discussion a few years ago about establishing a virtual campus; a virtual campus within the Nova Scotia Community College is not a new phenomenon. It's done in other universities and other colleges. I understood the uptake was not as great in the initial round as what was anticipated, but the merits of a virtual campus clearly do exist and part of it is in promotion. I might say that the community college system does I think, a very brilliant job of communicating to the general public through their advertising. They catch my interest for what they offer.
The issue of not having enough money to promote a virtual campus, from what I understand, is part of the problem; the uptake wasn't as great. Virtual campuses reduce the cost of community college per se from bricks and mortar to providing intellectual property and intellectual education through a vehicle, their computer. It also allows for individuals who are working to take programs in off-hours and/or individuals working not having to give up their jobs to upgrade their educational skills. Can the minister inform me in regard to any future plans of how to reinstate or attack or tackle the issue of a virtual campus from a Nova Scotia Community College point of view, and secondly, have there been any discussions with regard to universities on the issue of virtual campuses for Nova Scotians?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the subject of the virtual campus has not actually come up in recent discussions with the college. I know we do provide something in our base funding for that. It is a good idea and the member is correct that it can provide an alternative for people who can't attend the physical campus at certain times. However, it will never replace, for the majority of students, the aspect of college life and teamwork and being around the teachers and other people they experience. I mean, whether it's college or university or public school, part of the experience is the people you're around and the teachers you can relate to. Even the most sophisticated distance learning techniques, that I've seen anyway, in this province - which the Collège de l'Acadie have actually - as good as they are, they are not quite as good as having those people in the room with you.
All the universities are involved in some forms of virtual teaching, whether it's web-based or television-based, and Mount Saint Vincent University, you know, does quite a bit this way. Partly, probably, because the Mount has a lot of part-time students who benefit from this, but it is a way for the universities to reach beyond their campus out into the province and certainly out into the world. The Mount has a lot of courses that they offer in the Carribean through this technique. So it is a very interesting alternative for some people, but I think it would be dreaming in technicolor to think that virtual universities are going to replace bricks and mortar. In fact, if they do, then we're going to have to worry about the virtual universities from outside the country.
[4:00 p.m.]
MR. DOWNE: I don't know if I normally dream in technicolor or not; maybe the minister does, but I will say . . .
MISS PURVES: Not lately.
MR. DOWNE: Not lately? Days of future past. Anyway, excuse me, Madam Minister. I'm going to share the floor with my colleague, and I had one question back to the Southwest Regional School Board, the split. I know I've asked you to - and you indicted you would go back and review why we don't want to save $100,000 by securing the South Shore District School Board versus the Southwest Regional School Board. I do have a question and you might want to answer that. But the other question is, currently the CEO - and I'm not passing any negative comment about the CEO, I think the CEO, from all accounts, is trying very hard to do a good job of trying to be fair but is responsible for buses, secretaries, buildings and some $93 million or $94 million. I would like to know, under the new structure that the Financial Measures (2002) Act brings in, how do you control what this CEO or any CEO with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of responsibility, what is the mechanism in place for you to be able to control that individual's spending and make sure those dollars spent are spent fairly and equitably across the board to the regions in the Province of Nova Scotia?
MISS PURVES: Certainly we would expect the Southwest Regional School Board, as represented by the CEO, to be following all the procedures other boards would follow. There is a particular difficulty in dealing with those two district boards. The review panel, the Dodds group, had recommended that there be more meetings at a political level with the CEO to make sure the budgets were understood. They rejected that notion; therefore, a committee is being set up at the staff level whereby the directors of education would meet with the CEO and go through those budgets because there aren't any secrets there but people think there are secrets. The point there is to communicate and show where it's going. But the actual mechanism for reporting - obviously the school boards, the elected boards, do want their own boards and they want a superintendent or a CEO responsible to them - right now, the situation is that the CEO is responsible to the deputy minister and, through him, to me. Ultimately, I'm accountable in the Legislature for the expenditures of those funds.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to recognize the member for Cape Breton The Lakes with 14 minutes left.
MR. BRIAN BOUDREAU: Good afternoon, Madam Minister. I'm going to be as brief as I can and ask short questions. You know that I'm on my feet because of the school closures in my area and that's where my questioning will lead. I understand from all the school board members in Cape Breton that recently you sent your deputy minister down there to meet with the local board in Sydney. The deputy minister delivered a very strong message, that he wanted these schools closed, and if they didn't close them, in his exact words, that he was going to close them. Did you, Madam Minister, send the deputy minister with that message?
MISS PURVES: I was recently down to visit the Cape Breton-Victoria Regional School Board with the deputy. I was at that meeting myself and I certainly didn't hear him say that. One of the things that school boards have to do is close some schools. There are a lot of buildings operated by the Cape Breton board that are not schools. What we're trying to get at is not to be quite so attached to buildings. The Cape Breton board is, as you know, struggling with declining enrolment and some school closures have to take place. They've gone through some, and eventually there will have to be others. It is something that other boards have had to deal with and got over with, and that that board was less reluctant to do. It is part of what they have to do. So I guess that was part of the deputy's message, but I doubt very much that he said he'd close them for them because he doesn't have the authority to do that.
MR. BOUDREAU: No, he certainly doesn't have the authority to do that, Madam Minister. Obviously there were two meetings, because you weren't at the first one. I would suggest that if you check the deputy minister's travel expenses, they would indicate that he paid two visits, an earlier one in which he indicated very clearly, gave his directions, his threatening directions, to the board and left town, then you came along with the good member for Cape Breton North and paid a visit to urban schools. My question, Madam
Minister, is why didn't you take the time to visit rural schools when you were in my riding or in the riding adjacent to mine? Why didn't you visit rural schools anywhere in Cape Breton?
MISS PURVES: As a matter of fact, I have visited rural schools in Cape Breton. They were the first schools I visited when I got this job. On this particular trip to meet with the Cape Breton-Victoria Regional School Board, I was spending a day with the member for Cape Breton North and I went to visit schools in his riding. As a matter of fact, it was a very long day of visiting school after school after school and it was a very interesting visit. Obviously, I could not visit all the schools in the area in the one and a-half days I was there.
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Chairman, as I think you and all members of the House are aware, it's not just buildings that are under attack down there; it's the teaching profession as well. I would like to ask the minister if she's aware of how many teaching jobs will be lost through - how many are being disposed of this year by your department in CBRM?
MISS PURVES: Any such numbers would be determined by the board after it looks at its final profile sheet. I realize this is a difficult issue, but I have a very clear idea of what the job of Minister of Education is and it has to do with education. The board in Cape Breton-Victoria has a very strong conviction that it's also responsible for as much employment as possible in Cape Breton. The two aims are not always compatible.
MR. BOUDREAU: Does the minister agree that every Nova Scotian should have the right to equal educational opportunities?
MISS PURVES: I don't know who could disagree with that notion. I'm not sure equal is the right word, but equitable, certainly. In many grades in the Acadian school board, for example, have very low class size, but, they are to receive an equal chance at education in their own language. There may be other schools that are brand new that have a better than equal school, but they may have some bigger class sizes. Or you may have another school where you have, for some reason, the best teachers in an area, so equal and equitable, yes.
MR. BOUDREAU: Madam Minister, the education system, many people in Cape Breton - I talk to professionals every day who are considering leaving Cape Breton because of the education system. One thing I have learned since I came to Halifax, at the beginning of your government's term, of course - you're aware of that - is that education and health care go hand in hand. For instance, a doctor - the Minister of Health could confirm this - the first question a health professional would like answered is, what type of education system do you have in place to educate my children?
Madam Minister, I would like to ask you what fair position, the community that I represent or the entire Cape Breton North, the entire industrial area of Cape Breton, with the dismantling of the Education Department that has been ongoing since you took over - since
you took over, it's been happening - how do you feel it's a fair, equal opportunity for our community to attract health care professionals?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the member opposite knows the education system is not being dismantled, very far from it. We're doing a great deal to try to improve the education system and have very good schools and teachers in Cape Breton, all over Cape Breton, not just the Sydney area. But he's right, professionals who move into an area are looking for a good education system. They're looking for a superior education system. That is one of the reasons that will convince them to move, and one of the reasons that will convince them to stay.
In my own case right here in Halifax, a full school was just closed. A very large group of health professionals had written to the Minister of Health to ask him to lobby to try to keep that school open. I do understand that there are difficulties in the education system across Nova Scotia, but to say that the education system is not working and that children are not being educated, that we don't have good teachers and principals and good schools, that is absolutely incorrect.
MR. BOUDREAU: Madam Minister, I agree and I'm glad to hear you say that, that there are a lot of educational difficulties in this province, because you and that deputy minister are creating many of them. They have been created since you took over the responsibilities as the Education Minister. I don't know how you feel. It's too bad. I will invite you the next time - I will do it here today, publicly, so that everybody is aware that I am asking you to visit my area, my rural community, and travel the roads the busses are going to have to travel where children are now going to spend as long as three hours a day on a bus because you're closing their rural school, a school that is very well attended. They are very well attended, the numbers are there to justify the schools, yet you sent your deputy down there and told the school board, directed the school board to close these facilities.
Those are the difficulties that are being created by you and the direction your government is going in, in regard to educational issues in this province. It simply doesn't fit in a rural setting, and that's why you didn't go there when you visited there. In fact, it's my understanding the residents of Gannon Road School approached you at the Memorial High School, and you wouldn't go out to visit their school. You refused to go. It's obvious that you have no interest in educational opportunities being created for the youth in Cape Breton. What do you have planned to ensure that the residents, the children I represent - in what direction are you going to take your little department and your deputy minister - to ensure my residents, my children get the same fair educational system as urban areas?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Before the honourable Minister of Education responds, I wonder if the honourable member in the Liberal caucus would permit an introduction of a very important and well-known dignitary?
[4:15 p.m.]
The honourable Minister of Health on an introduction.
HON. JAMES MUIR: Mr. Chairman, I thank the honourable member for Cape Breton The Lakes and the Minister of Education for allowing me this intervention. I am very pleased to stand up this afternoon to welcome to this House of Assembly Mr. Roy Romanow who is the Commissioner of the Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. As I am sure all members are aware, Mr. Romanow was the Premier of Saskatchewan for nearly a decade, and he has now been given the task to speak to Canadians about the future of our health care system.
Mr. Romanow has been touring the country for some time now, listening to Canadians and visiting as many communities and sites as possible. Tomorrow marks Nova Scotia's turn to put forth our thoughts and ideas, and I am very much looking forward to attending the hearing tomorrow, and to hearing Mr. Romanow speak this evening at the annual meeting of the Truro and District Chamber of Commerce. (Interruptions) I would ask that all members of the House rise and welcome Mr. Romanow to this Legislature. (Extended Applause)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, indeed. Sincere greetings are extended to Mr. Romanow and we certainly do appreciate, on behalf of all members in the House, the fact that you are serving the country, and wish you well in those endeavours. Thank you very much.
The honourable Minister of Education, if she would reply. The Liberals' time has expired, but we will let the minister reply.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, part of my reply would say that if Mr. Romanow is successful in his quest to reform the health care system, then I can guarantee you there will be more money in Nova Scotia for Education. (Applause)
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time is about 20 seconds, honourable member for Cape Breton The Lakes. You could place your question quickly if you want, a short snapper.
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Chairman, I will yield the floor, sir.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member, your time has expired. I could be guilty of taking a few seconds, I do apologize.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I think there are 42 minutes that the NDP is going to take on Education, and I believe the Liberals have another 30 minutes, then we are going to wrap up Education. I don't know if anyone has mentioned that to the minister.
If I can, just on a side note, with Mr. Romanow in the audience, tomorrow is also the 20th Anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Mr. Romanow is one of the fathers of our Charter of Rights, and as a lawyer who was actually able to take constitutional law from John White at Osgood Hall, it's always an honour to see Mr. Romanow here as well. I thought it was quite coincidental that he's going to be here in Halifax on the same day that the 20th Anniversary of the Charter will be celebrated.
I wanted to talk to the Minister of Education about, I think it's called Strathspey Place, the auditorium in Mabou. First of all, if I can ask the minister, can she explain whether there's any provincial money tied up right now in that centre?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, yes. There is about $600,000 owing on Strathspey Place. This was a deal made by the former superintendent, that if the province paid or fronted the money, that ACOA and perhaps ECBC would pay us back. We have not as yet been paid back.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, maybe the cheque from ACOA got sent to someone else, considering last week we heard about all the double-cheque issuing that ACOA gave. As yet you haven't been paid back. Let me clarify, originally, had the province funded the construction of the centre, and then it was to be paid back by ACOA and ECBC, and they have paid some back or they have paid none back? That's my other question.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I could be slightly wrong on the figure, but it's about $600,000 that we have paid back against the original, a little over $1 million. It's one of these issues of community enhancement which the department is in favour of, but from now on we're not going to do community enhancements on a wing and a prayer.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, the original $1 million funding for the centre, did that come from the Department of Education? If it did, was that done while this minister was the Minister of Education?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this was part of a school that was being constructed. (Interruption) Was it a P3? I'm double-checking on whether or not it was a P3. The community enhancement is part of all new schools. It's a regular part of the process if the community wants to pay. In this case, the school board requested that we do this, and the superintendent said the money would be forthcoming from other sources. Not all the money has been forthcoming from other sources. At this point, there is about $600,000 owing on Strathspey Place. It is, for the record, a P3 school.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, so, is there some sort of agreement that isn't being met and therefore are you able to go to court to enforce the agreement? Or, why is it that we're sort of saying we're owed $600,000 but you seem quite skeptical that we may never get the money? Was there a legal agreement, a binding agreement signed with the other organizations, and have they just not met their commitments? Or was it a more loose form of agreement that had been developed?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the board through its superintendent authorized the construction in writing, but we were not involved with any negotiations with ACOA or any other federal agency, as a department. To the best of my knowledge there is nothing written on that federal commitment.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, this is very curious. My question is then, how can the school board superintendent make a commitment of $1 million on behalf of the Department of Education? How is the Department of Education on the hook for, now, $600,000, because a school board superintendent makes a very loose agreement with ACOA and ECBC? I'm not clear how the superintendent of the Strait Regional School Board can make a commitment on behalf of the Department of Education.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the department never did but does not now pay for community enhancements. The department was assured in writing by the superintendent of the school board that the money for the community enhancements was forthcoming. Subsequent investigations into the doings of that board still leave that $600,000 in question.
MR. DEVEAUX: So basically the minister is telling me that the Department of Education, on the word of Mr. Sullivan, who was the Superintendent of the Strait Regional School Board, funnelled $1 million into this project on the word of Mr. Sullivan that it would be repaid by ACOA and ECBC. Is that correct?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there were several letters from the Strait Regional School Board, Mr. Sullivan, saying the money would be forthcoming. I do not have a copy of the letter with me. I will look for the letter to see if there is any mention of guarantees from a federal funding agency at this stage, whether that was actually written or verbal. I think it was written, but I can provide that letter.
MR. DEVEAUX: When was the commitment made from the Department of Education to basically pony up the money, the $1 million, the month and year?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I do have a briefing note here that I can table if the member would wish it. It lists all kinds of correspondence, back and forth, promising the money, when is the money coming, that kind of thing. The briefing note was actually written in November 2001.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The document is tabled.
MR. DEVEAUX: First of all, can one of the Pages make a copy of that document for me. Secondly, my original question was, when was the commitment made for the $1 million, the month and year, to the Strathspey Place?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry, there's a lot of correspondence here to go through. I think the question could have many answers, depending on exactly what you were looking for. There is a letter here, July 14, 1999, to Patrick Gillespie of Ashford Investments, authorizing some changes and the extra square footage for the theatre. Once that authorization is made and the construction begins, it's almost over - if you understand what I mean.
MR. DEVEAUX: I take it this was an enhancement in which $1 million was funded directly, it wasn't added on to the lease. This was $1 million paid by the Department of Education. If so, I'm asking a fairly simple question, when was the cheque cut? What was the date of the cheque issued for the $1 million to cover the cost of the enhancement?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, because the theatre is not school space, it is not a part of the lease. The department would have paid for that space when it was completed.
MR. DEVEAUX: One more time, Mr. Chairman. Maybe more than one more time. We know that the cheque was cut when the school was completed. What was the date that the school was completed?
[4:30 p.m.]
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I know that the member is asking a very simple question, we just don't have the completion date of the school here with us. The actual completion date of that school, in the strictest terms of what he's saying, we don't have that date with us. I can supply that, no problem.
MR. DEVEAUX: Maybe we can go with a little broader figure, can the minister tell me what year the school was completed? I would hope that we could at least get that answer.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, it should have been in 2001. Most of the correspondence going back and forth about payments for Strathspey Place and other payments are in the year 2000, but I will have to double-check on the exact date. I believe it was the year 2001.
MR. DEVEAUX: So, two weeks before the election, 13 days before this government was elected, there was a letter from an architect, I believe you noted, talking about the expansion. Is the minister going to tell us today that at that point, when she was elected
minister, it was too late to stop this project? Is it her contention that as Minister of Education it was too late to stop the project when she became minister?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, certainly it was not too late to stop the project. But at the time we had no way of knowing, and certainly nothing was flagged by the department, that there was going to be a problem with this theatre. We've had a lot of P3 schools and other schools built with community enhancements where there have been no problems. There has been additional gymnasium space, there has been a theatre or a bigger theatre, there have been soccer fields and so on, and there wasn't a problem. There was nothing at that time to indicate there would be a problem.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I've seen schools that have expanded their gymnasium, if it's a junior high school that gets a high school-sized gymnasium or an extra soccer field. Is it the minister's contention here today that in all those cases this is done on a verbal agreement that payment will be made, or even on a letter being written by a superintendent saying, I've gotten confirmation it will be paid for? There are no detailed documents laying out, in any of these cases, how payment will be repaid to the government?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, current practice is much stronger than it was in the past for enhancements, for example, that a municipality or a town wants. We require a resolution from the town or the municipality that they will in fact pay for that enhancement.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, can the minister explain to the House today when the rules changed as to firming up or having greater confirmation with regard to the payment of enhancement? When did these new guidelines come into play?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, it was mainly through the learning experience of Strathspey Place that we put tighter controls in place. There was no actual elected board resolution regarding Strathspey Place, and we require that now for board enhancements. We require a resolution from a municipality and from community groups, we often require cash up front, because we can't afford to have something like this happen again.
MR. DEVEAUX: Let's look at the time line on this, Mr. Chairman. The Minister of Education becomes the minister in August 1999; she's admitted here today that it was not too late to change around this project. Can we agree, can the minister agree with me that this Strathspey Place was a learning experience for her and her department, and that they basically accepted Mr. Sullivan's word that there were guarantees for payment?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the initial instructions for the building were given, as the member acknowledges, before we came to office. We had no reason to suspect there was a problem there because many other schools have been built with community enhancements with no problems whatsoever. We had no reason to suspect that the board had not given a resolution regarding Strathspey Place. It was one of the results, extremely
unfortunate results, of the whole experience at the Strait Regional School Board. We have not given up on this money or being able to recover this money if we can, but, yes, again, if we could go back in time and know what we know now, obviously the results would be very different in some of the events that occurred up at the Strait Regional School Board.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, so the minister is acknowledging that things could be done differently; she acknowledges that when she came to power that they could have stopped this project. First a comment, then a question. It seems clear to me from what the minister is saying that this project could have been stopped but that the government took Mr. Sullivan at his word. I think in the briefing note that she tabled there are notes that there were guarantees that Mr. Sullivan would ensure that the project would be covered by the school board, but there was no resolution.
My question is, why didn't the government - I guess the term sometimes used is due diligence - do the background check to make sure that this was a legitimate guarantee, not just something written on a piece of paper?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the answer to that question is because neither I nor the government has 20/20 hindsight. There were many projects under construction when we came to office. There is one project that has ended up like this, and that is Strathspey Place. I don't think any government coming to office - yes they look at what's going on - stops every piece of government business in its tracks, that simply would not be feasible. Of course, in retrospect, perhaps we should have stopped every single project that was going on, but it would have hurt quite a few schools and communities to do that. Again, neither the board nor the department had any reason to suspect the shenanigans that were going on behind the scenes at the Strait Regional School Board.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, we're not talking about a box of paper clips here. We're not talking about the Minister of Education putting a stop-payment on a $10 or even a $100 cheque, we're talking about a cheque for $1 million. She is acknowledging in this House today that her department did nothing to confirm or guarantee that that money would be paid back. I can't imagine that $1 million transaction would occur without something in writing. She talks now about resolutions being passed by the municipality or by a school board. None of that was investigated by her department, and they still issued a $1 million cheque. I find that hard to believe. I find it hard to believe that the Minister of Education, who from time to time likes to berate the members of the Opposition for, as she would suggest, our spending theories, would allow a $1 million cheque to be cut from her department, sent to Inverness County, to a school board to build an addition for a new auditorium at a new P3 high school, yet did nothing to ensure there were any guarantees that you would get any of that money back. I find that hard to believe.
I can't believe this minister would allow something like that to happen. For her to stand in this House and say that that's the way it was, we learned our lesson, aw shucks, it won't happen again. That's $1 million, and she talks about hoping to get it back or wishing we could get it back, or clicking her heels together three times and maybe it will come back. The fact is she has no legal - let me put it as a question. Can the minister tell me whether she has any legal ability to go to the courts to obtain that $600,000 if, out of the goodwill of the other organizations, they decide not to pay? Does she have a legal framework on which she can go to the courts to get that money back?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the legal status - if we could get that money back - is unclear, I am told. It is unclear if we can get that money, because there was no, as we can determine, formal commitment to the former superintendent that that money would be forthcoming. It is also true that we have it on paper, time and time again, from that former superintendent that the money would be forthcoming. There is no other case of a school board in Nova Scotia making such commitments and them not being honoured. There was no reason, until last fall, to believe that commitments made by a school board superintendent would not, in fact, be met.
MR. DEVEAUX: It doesn't seem unclear to me, what the minister is saying seems pretty clear. She has no guarantees, therefore she can't go to the courts to actually get this money back. Let me ask, through you, Mr. Chairman, has the minister gone to the Strait Regional School Board and asked them to pay this money?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, yes, there have been many discussions with the Strait Regional School Board about this money, and yes, it may be possible to recover some of that money from the board. Again, you see where this leads. Because the board gets its money from us and we all get the money from the taxpayers, it still isn't recovering the money from the person responsible for its expenditure. It seems very clear to me that though technically we may be able to get that money from the board, in the end it is money that was not spent on education. That is the problem with it.
MR. DEVEAUX: And yet this minister signed that cheque for $1 million knowing full well that money was not going into education, knowing full well - or she should have known if she had done due diligence - that there were no guarantees that that money would ever be paid back or that the school board had ever made a commitment to actually pay the money back or guarantee it.
This is what is so shocking, that this minister has tried to make herself out to be the white knight saving the residents of the four counties that make up the Strait Regional School Board, as the one who is going to come in and ensure that the money is being spent properly, when it's pretty clear, time after time we see the examples where this minister has not been able to prove that she has her finger on the pulse of the finances of her own department and where the money is going, and whether it's all going into the classroom. That's $1 million
lost, that's $ 1 million that has gone down the drain and this government has no ability to guarantee that money will ever come back from any organization, yet she sits in this House today and talks about yes, it's taxpayers' dollars. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest to you that's something she should have known when she first signed that cheque and sent it out, with regard to the Strathspey Place.
One of my final questions with regard to this issue, and I will ask the minister, subsequent to your being elected and appointed Minister of Education, did you have any conversations with the Minister of Tourism and Culture with regard to Strathspey Place, and any encouragement from him as to whether or not the cheque should be issued?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, let me make it clear, I didn't sign any cheque, that's not how it works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: He knows that. Neil signs the cheques.
MISS PURVES: He does know that, yes he does. The work was done, the work was authorized, the work was completed. The way it works in every other project that we do, there is no problem. There was definitely a problem here. I have made no secret of the problems with the Strait Regional School Board. I do find it odd that the members opposite are constantly saying we should be exercising due diligence and checking up on every single thing the school board does, and at the same time they don't like anything we do to try to go on with accountability of school boards.
[4:45 p.m.]
Mr. Chairman, no, the Minister of Tourism and Culture and I never discussed Strathspey Place until very recently when we both discussed that it's probably a good thing for the community, but it's not a place Education dollars should ever have been spent.
MR. DEVEAUX: I will just ask it one more time, and maybe she can give me a yes or no answer. Was there any conversations between the Minister of Tourism and Culture and yourself between your being appointed Minister of Education and the time in which the $1 million was requisitioned or issued from your department, with regard to Strathspey Place?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Tourism and Culture and I never discussed Strathspey Place until last fall when some of the difficulties at the Strait Regional School Board were beginning to come to light - beginning to come to light.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to go on to another subject in my 13 minutes that I have left and it's with regard to tuition agreements. This is an issue that I've heard a lot about, particularly from parents at Thomas Aquinas School, but I know Bridgeway Academy and Landmark East and many others have issues with regard to tuition
agreements. Just to clarify, if an IPP isn't working out for a student - an individual program plan - the parent can appeal that and see whether or not they can get a tuition agreement to allow the student to go to an alternative school, privately funded, if they feel that the school system and the IPP isn't working for them. I want to ask the minister to start off, does she have any intention of reviewing the procedure by which tuition agreements are developed?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there are no such plans at the time. There is an appeal process in place; that is something that the boards do have control over. We don't have any plans at this time to change that.
MR. DEVEAUX: Maybe we can agree on this. Can the minister say today that she feels that the public school system is sufficiently addressing the needs of individuals, particularly with behavioural issues like ADD or ADHD? Are they being addressed sufficiently and adequately in our current public school system?
MR. JOHN HOLM: No.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, a former teacher, the member for Sackville-Cobequid, says no. I think in many cases those needs are being addressed, but I believe in many cases they are not and this is not despite the best efforts of the people in the system. This is a big problem everywhere in the world where there is a school system of any sophistication. The demands are great, the needs are great, and some of the techniques for teaching are being developed even as we speak, as people learn more about learning disabilities. In the vast majority of cases, yes; in some cases, no, the needs are probably not being met.
MR. DEVEAUX: I hear from parents that there is a rule sort of set - and I think the term they use is globally learning disabled - which probably means there's no clear definition of the person's learning disability and inherently tuition agreements are denied for these students who are defined as globally learning disabled. Can the minister explain to me, first of all, if that's correct and, second of all, if it is, why people with that designation aren't provided with the same opportunities as others?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I've actually not heard that term "globally learning disabled". What the boards generally do in certain cases, that is information that I would have to go to each board to see if I could obtain and bring it to this House. I know that boards are generally fairly reluctant to sign tuition agreements, but I was not aware of what the member opposite just said.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, can the minister explain to us today how much money is budgeted for the tuition agreement appeal process by her department?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, that would be funded out of our public school branch, we don't have a specific allocation in the Estimates or in the Supplementary Detail for that. We could commit to digging out - ferreting out - the details on that to find out how much we actually may have spent last year and the year before on these appeals.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I just want to put that on the record. For the record, the minister is undertaking to provide us with those details, could she yes or no that?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I have committed to provide those. We will go through the cases last year and make an estimate of what it cost.
MR. DEVEAUX: Can the Minister of Education tell us how much money her department allots for special education in Nova Scotia, how much money they're actually spending? I think there's actually a specific designation to the schools with regard to special education. Can she tell me how much money is actually spent by the Department of Education to the school boards for that?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, it is a little more than $46 million.
MR. DEVEAUX: Sorry, I didn't hear the answer actually, could the minister say that again?
MISS PURVES: A little more than $46 million.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, can the minister tell me how much the school boards are spending on special education in total?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the school boards would be spending, or say they are spending, an additional $20 million approximately on special education, on top of the $46 million.
MR. DEVEAUX: I hear some skepticism in the voice of the minister. She says they say they're spending $20 million. Would the minister agree that she believes they are spending $20 million more than the province is providing them?
MISS PURVES: Well, the province is providing all the money, so they're not spending $20 million more than what we provide them.
MR. DEVEAUX: The municipalities are providing money.
MISS PURVES: Yes, they do a proportion. They may actually be spending more than $20 million on special ed., it would depend on how they define the categories. I would say that roughly the $20 million is correct.
MR. DEVEAUX: The whole point of inclusion originally was that the money was supposed to be taken out of schools like the children's training centres and other places and put into the system. A lot of members, if you talk to people who are involved in school boards, will tell you that they had always understood that the Department of Education would be fully funding special education. Presumably that's where the $20 million figure has come from, from the report recently, last year, the minister's own report on special education, suggesting we need an extra $20 million to be provided to this system from the Department of Education. Can the minister, here today, agree that her department is underfunding special education to the tune of $20 million?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, actually I don't believe that special education report envisaged a $20 million replacing the $20 million already being put in by school boards, they were looking for an additional $20 million on top of what's already being spent. I would say that in the area of special education, because it's so connected with health care in many ways, that the demands are very high and will only continue to get higher. Thus, you could say, not only in Nova Scotia but anywhere in the country, strictly speaking, special ed. is probably underfunded, education is probably underfunded, health care is probably underfunded, relative to all the demands and the expectations of the public.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, that leaves the minister with two choices: either she increases funding, or she puts in place some sort of regime that identifies how we will meet the education needs of our special needs' students based on the current funding. Can the minister tell us which one she intends to do, and lay out a plan as to how she will do it?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, there are pages and pages and piles of documents and procedures, in our department and in all the school boards, of how they deal with the various kinds of special needs in the student population. We have a lot of experts, a lot of resource teachers. One of the things we need is more of them. More of them are actually being trained in a new masters degree program that two of our universities are involved in. There are some things we can do without more money, and those we are proceeding on. No, the extra $20 million for special education is not there in this year's budget. The $3 million we put in last year is still there, so there is more than when we started, but the extra $20 million is not there and I've been quite clear about that from the beginning.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to yield the floor to my friends from the Liberals in three minutes or so, but I wanted to wrap up where I started, which is with regard to the issue of a vision. This is something I said I've heard all along when I was going around my riding and around the province talking about education, whether it's special needs, whether it's public, post-secondary, whether it's adult literacy, what is lacking from this government, and even in the last question I asked - how is this minister going to deal with special needs education? What I got was rhetoric and not any detail as to what her plan is with regard to special needs education in this province.
That is what is so dearly lacking. The minister has a tendency to say it's funding - yes, but funding flows from a vision, and sometimes that vision may not necessarily mean extra funding is necessary. But until we have a vision of where education is going in this province, how we will ensure that Nova Scotian children will get the best education possible, how they will have the skills necessary to be able to achieve and succeed - I go back a lot to the suggestion of Ireland. Ireland, a place 20 years ago, that made a commitment to invest in education, made a commitment to ensure its education system was top-of-the-line and they are now seeing the benefits, a better standard of living - better than the United Kingdom for example - good employment growth, high-tech jobs, and people are now returning to Ireland for work, where before there was an exodus.
That's not unlike Nova Scotia now, what Ireland was 20 years ago. Yet we have done nothing and this government has done nothing to lay out a plan over the next 10 or 20 or 30 years for how we can make education the great equalizer in this province, and how we can make education the catalyst for a more prosperous society in Nova Scotia. This minister has done nothing to address those issues and, until she does, she will continue to be berated by people like me or the members of my caucus, or Nova Scotians who are involved in the education system, because they are going to be constantly saying they don't know where she's going with education, she hasn't laid out a plan and, because of that, our system is in tatters. Here's a symptom of it, Barrington Passage School; here's a symptom of it, my child had to be pulled out of school because he has special needs and wasn't being properly taught; here's another symptom, and another one, and another one.
We're going to continue to get these symptoms because the system is sick, because this minister hasn't identified how she's going to address the big problems and, until she does, we're going to continue to have crises in our education system. I would encourage her to please look at how she envisages education over the next 5, 10, or 20 years, and hope that she may have some vision deep down as to where she wants education to go, because if she keeps trying to put out the fires, keeps trying to stick her finger in the dike to prevent the dam from breaking, we're going to continue to have the problems we have today.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond briefly. I would like to say that in the case of Ireland, the EU threw billions of dollars at Ireland and, if they wanted to throw some this way, I would be glad to take it - I would be glad to take it.
[5:00 p.m.]
Mr. Chairman, the vision that I have of education is very clear, it's just that the member opposite doesn't like it because it's very basic. The vision started with the adult high school that we started very soon after we came to office. The vision has to do with this: if you can teach every child to read and write and do math properly, that child grows into a person who is absolutely capable of teaching himself anything or learning anything. That is
the kind of system that we are trying to build, and we've been very clear about it from day one.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Moving right along, to the Liberal caucus, the honourable member for Lunenburg West.
MR. DONALD DOWNE: I thank my colleague for his questions. I thought his questions were right on with regard to the lack of vision and direction that this government has shown in articulating its plan for education and for the future of the province's opportunities through that vision.
Madam Minister, we were talking about funding for the Nova Scotia Community College, and we were talking about the virtual campus and everything from technicolour onward, but I want to talk a little bit about the fact that $5.6 million, as you corrected me, on the funding for the Nova Scotia Community College was specifically for the purposes of negotiations on salaries, and I want to go on to the issue of your blue book.
In your blue book you talk about establishing a provincial income tax relief program for graduating students with high debt loads. This is part of your government's blue book, although it's black in colour. It's on Page 26 and this is something that was promised to improve post-secondary education, and it would be during the first mandate of your government. My question to you, what are your plans with regard to establishing the provincial income tax relief program for graduating students with high debt loads, allowing students to redirect a portion of their provincial tax payments to retire the maximum of 30 per cent of the value of their original debt load? What is the status of that, Madam Minister?
MISS PURVES: There's really two questions there. On the detail of that, the Department of Finance has done a lot of work on the income tax side of it. That is something that they do not think is feasible, so what we are working on is a different form of debt relief that we intend to talk about more in the coming months, but it is not fully developed at this point. We intend to keep the promise in our first mandate, but the chances are that it will not be connected with the income tax side of things.
MR. DOWNE: I can recall the minister saying the Department of Finance has crunched the numbers and indications are that they cannot do that program. My question then is, would the minister provide the work-up data that the Department of Finance provided her staff to show that you cannot do what you promised you would do?
MISS PURVES: Yes and no. We can provide debt relief for students. Doing it through the income tax system would be very complex to administer, and we are looking at a plan that is much less complex to administer. It would deliver the result, but it would not be done through provincial income tax, at least at this point; that is our thinking at this point.
MR. DOWNE: The Loan Remission Program would probably be the simplest way to put an infusion of dollars back into the pockets of students, for which I understand your government has promised last year, promised to be brought forward this year. I believe you indicated to this House that you had asked the Minister of Finance and he refused to live up to your commitment. That would be the answer to the problem, Madam Minister. Is that what you're looking for now, a Loan Remission Program that may be released next year instead of the blue book promise of establishing a tax relief program for students?
MISS PURVES: What we're looking at is delivering on our blue book promise of debt relief to Nova Scotia students. At this point it does not look like it would involve the income tax system. It is true that the Loan Remission Program did provide debt relief to students, but we are looking at something that doesn't just reward need but rewards successful completion of program.
MR. DOWNE: So, Madam Minister, the Loan Remission Program will be tied to not only their debt but also their grades as well, so that it's a means test financially and an intellectual test, as it were, a test of how they actually did during the curriculum. Can you explain? I heard something other than an across-the-board program, can you elaborate more on the detail of that so that students can understand what you're really referring to?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I think the students could understand what I'm talking about; I'm not sure about the member opposite. What I said was successful completion of program, i.e. you get a BA or you get a BSc or you get an MD or whatever it is. It's not talking about going in there and saying did you get a 78 on Biology 3000 or whatever, no.
MR. DOWNE: If you don't complete the program, you don't qualify. Is that the answer, Madam Minister?
MISS PURVES: That is part of what we are looking at. As I said, the program is not complete in our department, there has not yet been an R&R, it has not gone to Cabinet at this point.
MR. DOWNE: Mr. Chairman, in other words, just so I have it straight - and your backbench seems to understand this answer, but I don't know if the backbench really truly understands this answer - if an individual is in their first year and because of financial difficulty has to leave, or their second year and because of financial or physical issues has to leave, or their third year and they have to leave, there will be no Loan Remission Program for those students, only the ones who were able to get a degree would qualify for a Loan Remission Program. Is that accurate, Madam Minister?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, not necessarily. There could be gradations on this program. It could be you get so much if you do this, you get so much if you do that; we're looking at something that has degrees attached to it, not one or the other. Certainly someone who had to drop out in year one is not suffering from the kinds of huge debt loads that we're talking about for some of the kids who have to go through school. So yes, we are looking at a combination of need combined with success that may have various gradations in it, but again, it's not complete.
MR. DOWNE: Madam Minister, students who are listening to this debate are asking the question, if they complete year one or year two or year three and do not have a degree, will they qualify for this Loan Remission Program, yes or no?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, in an effort to be open I have told members of this House and the member opposite of the kinds of things that we're thinking of. The kind of questions he is asking, he knows I cannot answer, because the debt relief program has not been developed. So that question can't be answered. It's not that I don't wish to answer it, the program is not developed yet.
MR. DOWNE: Madam Minister, it's in the Budget Address itself and it states here, "Officials from my department and the Department of Finance are presently developing a program to help those Nova Scotia students, most in need," most in need, it didn't talk about graduated students, it didn't talk about students with PhD's or their master's degree - they say "most in need, with the high cost of a university of college education. The details of this program will be released over the course of the next 12 months." My question to you, Madam Minister, is, when will you have a schedule for releasing that information and will you then explain in that delivery that students with one, two or three, who maybe have a great deal of need but do not have a master's degree or a PhD or a degree at the end of it would not qualify for this program?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I can try to make it easy. One, the program is not developed; two, an R&R has not gone to Cabinet; three, it has not been discussed by Cabinet. When all those things have been done and we have an allocation of the monies that it will cost in future years, then it will come before this House and to the student leaders and to everybody else who wants to have a say in it and ask as many questions as they can. Until that time I cannot answer certain questions because it is all hypothetical.
MR. DOWNE: Mr. Chairman, there's nothing hypothetical about the fact that the minister just alluded to the fact, to this Chamber, that students that do not have a degree at the end of their time at university would probably not qualify for a Loan Remission Program if and when we ever have one. That's certainly what I understand in the discussion as being, if it's not that, it's certainly one of the options that the minister is looking for in her deliberations with the Department of Finance. When you read in here the "most in need," the most in need only are the most in need of those who have graduated, not the most in need for
those individual students who for whatever reasons had to leave the university scene. My question to the minister is, during this discussion or the negotiations with the Department of Finance - for which you must feel extremely bad about after promising last year you could do it, only to have the Minister of Finance say, no, you shouldn't have promised that last year, you will have to just eat those words and maybe perhaps next year I might think about it - will the students who are requesting these programs, will you negotiate or discuss those matters prior to the announcement of a Loan Remission Program, have input by the university students who are affected by the high cost of tuition?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, one of the steps in coming forward with this program will certainly be consulting with the Advisory Board on Colleges and Universities, which have a number of students on them, to see what they think of at least the philosophy behind our program, which is what I was trying to explain to the member opposite. I'm not sure why he has a problem with trying to encourage success, but that is at the basis of our philosophy and we will begin the consultations with them. Student leaders talk regularly with people in the higher education section of the department and I meet regularly with them, certainly any program, once it had all the flesh and bones on it, would be explained to them and discussed with them.
MR. DOWNE: Madam Minister, in the Budget Document, why wasn't it acknowledged that a Loan Remission Program would be developed for those who will reward success - not need, but success? Why didn't you specify that this is going to be a reward for only those who are successful at the university level and are prepared to go the long term if they can arrange to have financing for whatever reasons, but if anybody else jumps off the board, tough luck? Why wouldn't you have simply laid that out, because clearly you would have had to bless this document before he presented it to the Legislature, so why do you have in here for Nova Scotia students "most in need"? It doesn't classify and state that a person in need who had three years is less in need than those who had a degree? Madam Minister, my question is, can you give me a specific timetable, within a period of a month, 30 days, of when this report will be coming forward?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, at this point we are looking at late summer or early Fall before we will be bringing something like this forward. I recognize that the member is trying to get details out of something that has no details but, again, I repeat, we're looking at a combination of success and need, a combination of success and need not just one or just the other. I think that there could be no one who could object to that combination in any student debt relief program.
[5:15 p.m.]
MR. DOWNE: Madam Minister, in the greatest respect to you personally, you seem to be changing the tune in the middle of the dance here. One minute you are talking about simply rewarding success and then (Interruption) Oh, you didn't say rewarding success?
Then you go on to say that there could be other criteria that are tied into completion of graduation degrees. I think, Madam Minister, you are walking around this issue and I wish you would just come straight out with the goods because I think you've got most of this figured out. My question, Madam Minister, is - late summer, a possible announcement - a question that many students in this province are going to ask, will they be able to apply for a student Loan Remission Program this year on your program that you're committing to announce this fiscal year that you're announcing in late summer?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the answer to that question is no. Obviously, the former Minister of Finance would know there is no money booked in this year's budget for that.
MR. DOWNE: So we have another broken promise and we have a commitment to release the document for it to gather dust on the shelves of somebody's office but, at the bottom line, we have students out there who are having problems and there's no program available. Would the minister commit that in the subsequent budget year what is she going to do to be more successful to live up to her personal commitment and her government's commitment to find solutions to the debt reduction program or a Loan Remission Program for students in the Province of Nova Scotia? It's not just your comments, Madam Minister, but your government's comments. What are you prepared to do to find a solution to this issue?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, we will be pushing very hard, not just me and the rest of the government, to live up to this blue book commitment. It is one of many we will have lived up to at the end of our mandate, one of the most important being the one we're discussing right now, and that's the balanced budget.
MR. DOWNE: I don't want to go on to a whole bunch of rhetorical comments or comments about living up to commitments, but it is an issue, Madam Minister, and my hope
is that the inner Cabinet who surround the table, either if you're in or you're not, that you convince them - and I assume you probably are in it, I would hope that you are, and controlling $1 billion (Interruption) Well, you wouldn't know, minister, you wouldn't know the inner Cabinet. You don't even know sometimes what day it is let alone what's going on in the Cabinet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The member for Lunenburg West has the floor and is addressing questions to the Minister of Education.
MR. DOWNE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will not try to follow the rabbit tracks of ministers who want to be in the inner Cabinet and obviously aren't, but I will say to the Minister of Education that I hope . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Order, please. The member for Lunenburg West has the floor.
MR. DOWNE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your intervention. My question to you, Madam Minister, is, there is a problem in Canada right now with children with learning disabilities. (Interruption) The members of the backbenches can take that in a sarcastic way, but I want you to know that this is a very serious issue facing Nova Scotians and I sense the minister, she, too, realizes the importance and the concerns that are out there with regard to children with learning disabilities. We have children with special needs and the system is set up to try to deal with everybody they can.
As I understand it, Attention Deficit Disorder is affecting a number of children in the Province of Nova Scotia and not all of them can fit into the general educational stream, and function. Some of these children experience a great deal of harassment, a great deal of abuse. We were talking about bullying earlier. These children go through a very traumatic time. As I understand it, there are not a lot of facilities available for children to go to without a great deal of additional cost to the parents. Can you explain to me what your department is doing to try to address this situation in the Province of Nova Scotia and it's one that seems to be getting larger rather than smaller and it is a very serious issue and it's not one that I take lightly and I trust the minister doesn't take it very lightly as well. What are we doing about it, Madam Minister?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the department has a number of people and experts constantly working on all the issues to do with special education; many of them are learning disabilities; some of them are physical disabilities; many of them, behavioural problems, problems of aggression, sometimes a lot worse than what the word bullying would seem to cover. Each school board has its own experts and resource teachers in this area. They assess every child who comes into school, every child in whatever grade to try to, and in most cases succeed, in being able to tell whether children need one type of program or another type of program or something different. A great deal of time and a great deal of money is spent on this issue.
There are special resource teachers. Some school boards have what they call learning centres because there are some parents' children with learning disabilities who have seen good results from having the kids separated out of the classroom for a few hours a week and so on, to learn things a certain way; there are others who don't. The system tries to accommodate them all as best it can. There are thousands of children on what they call IPPs, individual programs, whereby it is determined that that child can achieve certain goals and if it's not the goal of the so-called normal class, nonetheless the child can achieve certain goals progressing beyond what he or she can do at the present time.
That being said - and I'm sorry I forgot - one element of it is, of course, we have a lot of teacher assistants in Nova Scotia, who in some cases are looking after a physically disabled child and in other cases are looking after an emotionally disturbed child and in some cases to someone who needs to be paid attention to at all times. We also have teacher assistants associated with young people who may have come out of prison or a young offender's facility who may need someone with them at all times. It's very complex. It's very expensive. It is undoubtedly not meeting the needs of all children in the system.
A great many parents want to send their kids off to special schools, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, such as Bridgeway Academy, to name the two here. Some even want tuition agreements to send their kids to private schools, like the Halifax Grammar School or Armbrae Academy, because they feel they'll get more attention in those private schools. So it's a very important, complex and expensive issue. We are spending a lot of money on it. Does more money need to be spent? Yes. It's not just money, but money has a great deal to do with it because the member for Lunenburg West is right, it is not only a problem that reached a certain stage in the early 1990s, it is definitely a growing problem and it's a growing problem across the country and across the world partly as a result of recognition of learning disabilities, but also as a result of more disabilities occurring in the general population, period.
MR. DOWNE: Mr. Chairman, I will be asking just a finishing question and then I will be sharing the rest of my time with my colleague. Actually there are two points, Madam Minister, one is the issue is very real with people I know and it is a huge problem. Early intervention is the key issue here. Early intervention is a huge issue that I support greatly, and whether or not we're doing as much in early intervention as we should is constantly a challenge for us all. Is the department considering any changes to the issue of inclusion in a classroom? Secondly, just as a parting note, Madam Minister, as enjoyable as this little time I've had to ask you questions has been, I want you to recall the earlier questions in regard to the South Shore board. I would ask if you would give me some time frame where they can be a stand-alone, self-reliant, fiscally- conscious independent board that can meet the requirements and obligations of providing quality education in our community?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I'm not prepared to give a time frame on the two school boards - well, the one school board that you're particularly interested in at this time, but obviously, unless we make changes to the Education Act, the pilot would expire in 2004. Now, we're not going to leave everything up in the air to the last minute before the next school board elections, so we will have to be coming forward with a plan that may, in fact, give the boards what they want, but that decision has not been taken yet. It's going to require a great deal of consultation both with my colleagues here and with the boards and the NSSBA.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Leader in the House of the Liberal Party.
MR. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I just have a few rapid questions here. The first one has to do with the provincial achievement tests. The latest school achievement indicators program test of students ages 13 and 16 found that they were not performing up to their grade level. The minister said the poor showing was expected given the results of provincial math testing released last month. School boards have been given the impression that results will be given to individual schools so they can assist the problem areas at their school. My question to the minister is, when can schools expect to receive the scores for their individual schools in order for them to ensure that schools will receive this information in good time?
[5:30 p.m.]
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, the individual schools will be getting the results of the math testing that we did in Grade 5 within weeks. It's just about ready to go.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I'm sure the school boards certainly will be looking for that information. I just want to move to curriculum initiatives. Under the public school section in the Supplementary Detail, the section on public schools is responsible for implementing new curriculum initiatives in our schools. All new major initiatives to curriculum development requires new resources - textbooks, certainly professional development for teachers and evaluation of this implementation. Could the minister indicate if dollars have been allocated for professional development for new curriculum initiatives under this budget?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, a lot of this is contained within the budget for English program services. Of course we also do it on the French side as well, but a lot of the budget for some of that professional development - for example, there's $450,000 going out to the boards very shortly to do with the in-servicing of the mathematics teachers, the ones who we hope to be the math leaders back in the schools who would be heading up our new math initiative and that's just one of them. They're not huge amounts of money and they are mostly professional development contained in there. As for actual books and textbooks, that's in the other budget we discussed recently, the learning resources credit allocation.
MR. GAUDET: So, Mr. Chairman, as I understand, the minister indicated that the department would be providing somewhere around $400,000 to the boards to implement this new math program. With any new initiatives that will be introduced by the Department of Education this year, in this fiscal year, I don't know if there are others but, if so, is the department ready to provide some additional funding to school boards to help them implement these new initiatives?
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, most of these new initiatives, with the exception of the Canadian History course, they are not new curriculum. What they are is additional books and additional time. For example, Active Young Readers, we have budgeted for providing those books to the classroom and, of course, there is professional development to go with that, but it's just help in spending more time with kids in reading.
Again, the grammar initiative is to signal the importance of the writing, and the Writers in Action. There will be a usage book that will go to each individual student that the student can take with him or her as they go through the system. Again, with math, we're not implementing new math curriculum. We're saying we need to pay more attention to math and we need to spend more time on it. We need to spend time on it every day and here's how you can be a math leader in your school or your family of schools, and we're trying to develop lesson plans to make them simpler. A lot of the stuff now that the Education Department sends out or expects teachers to do is too airy-fairy. I mean it all sounds very good, but if you actually went to teach a class with it you probably couldn't unless you were a very experienced teacher. We're providing focus and professional development and money for books, but we're not inventing new courses for the sake of it and expecting teachers to just be able to teach them on the turn of a dime. So there is money in there for that. There's no money beyond what's in this book though.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, my last question, I want to go the Public Accounts. On Page 50, Clare District High School received $15,000, on the same page École Secondaire de Clare, the French school, received $10,000. I'm just wondering if the minister, I don't anticipate she might have that information at her fingertips, but I'm just curious why these two schools receive $15,000 and $10,000?
MISS PURVES: I wonder if the member could give the page number again?
MR. GAUDET: It's on Page 50 of the Public Accounts. Mr. Chairman, if the minister does not have that information at her fingertips I can certainly wait for a future day. I was just curious what that was for.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We appreciate that, thank you.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, this may be for the junior high school network, that's a guess, but we can certainly provide that information to him.
MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I guess I've probably gone over my time that was allocated. In closing, I want to thank the Minister of Education for providing us with some answers to try to help us get a better understanding what real impact this budget from the Department of Education will have in the classroom, on the school boards, on teachers, support staff and others. So with those few comments I will take my seat and yield the floor to the minister.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to thank both the NDP and the Liberal caucus. I don't see any other speakers so I would ask the minister if she would like to stand and wrap-up please, with closing comments.
MISS PURVES: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to say a few words before I wrap up. I have three pieces of information to table that were requested in the last few days. One of them has to do with Public Schools Branch, Grants and Contributions. The other had to do with French Immersion Program costs, the federal share. The other has some explanations for the hotel costs that a member of the Official Opposition was asking about. So I would like to table those documents.
Mr. Chairman, I would just also like to thank the members opposite for their questions. They were all good questions and I appreciate the time and I appreciate the fact that during these estimates we do treat each other a little more respectfully than during Question Period. I do appreciate it and I thank them very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Madam Minister, for your comments. Shall the estimates stand?
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, would you please call the Estimates of the Minister of Community Services.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to call the Estimates of the Minister of Community Services. The time is 5:40 p.m.
The honourable Minister of Community Services.
HON. PETER CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, would you please call Resolution E2.
Resolution E2 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $648,995,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Community Services, pursuant to the Estimate and the business plan of the Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation be approved.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Community Services.
HON. PETER CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, as staff join me, I do have some opening comments to make about the department and I would like to share those with the House. I would like to introduce the staff from the Department of Community Services here with me today: Barb Burley, Assistant Deputy Minister; and Clem Hennebury, Director of Budgets.
Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to introduce the budget for the Department of Community Services for the fiscal year 2002-03. This budget provides the financial overview of the department's plans for the fiscal year, but to get a fuller picture of the operational side the members should also refer to our business plan. Over the next few minutes I would like to talk about some of the changes that have been introduced in the last fiscal year and then highlight some of the initiatives we will introduce this fiscal year.
You will recall when I reported to the committee, I spoke of the redesign of social assistance. In the last year we introduced an Employment Support and Income Assistance Program to replace the former Family Benefits and Income Assistance Programs. The new Employment Support and Income Assistance Program went into effect on August 1, 2001, which included changes that focussed on assisting income assistance recipients; to help enhance their employability and promote their self-sufficiency; to help them achieve academic and development services success; with support services ranging from personal development services to therapy and academic upgrading, to job preparation and employment supports; and also, to increase child care and transportation allowance.
Mr. Chairman, by November 1, 2001, 8,800 people were participating in the ESS services and 2,400 had secured part- or full-time employment through our ESS Program. Also, another 2,400 were participating in academic upgrading and skills training programs. We believe this program is making a difference. It was no easy task to restructure and redesign well-established programs. Clients and interest groups became familiar with the programs and immediately became concerned that changing it will somehow eliminate what's good in the program.
I believe the improvements made to our Employment Support and Income Assistance Program show that changes can indeed make a difference to Nova Scotians. Last year, we also introduced a new appeals process for clients seeking income assistance, and I'm pleased to report that it has allowed us to clear the backlog of appeals. The new streamlined appeal process has enabled the department to respond to appeals in a much more timely manner. More than 50 per cent of the appeals received under the new system have been dealt with in the 10-day period, while the remaining have been dealt with in the 45-day time limit that we set out in the new system.
In addition, we restructured and increased benefits children receive through the establishment of the Nova Scotia Child Benefit. We no longer provide assistance to children through their parents' monthly benefit cheques. Assistance formerly delivered in that way is now provided through the Nova Scotia Child Benefit. The National Child Benefit and Nova Scotia Child Benefit are combined in one single monthly payment. The combined benefit goes to all low-income Nova Scotians who qualify, not just those on assistance. The maximum benefit has been set at a standard of $1,700 per child per year. As my colleague, the Minister of Finance, noted last week, approximately 35,000 Nova Scotian families and approximately 60,000 children receive this benefit.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that we have been able to provide a source of support to all children of low-income families whether they are receiving assistance or not, support which allows parents to move from welfare to work without jeopardizing their children's benefits. As a government, we have tried, even as we met the challenge of balancing the books, to ensure we keep services for children as a priority, especially in the early years.
We took some important steps in that regard last year as part of the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Early Childhood Development Agreement. This agreement is based on four pillars: one, healthy pregnancy, birth and infancy; two, early childhood development, learning and childcare; three, parenting and family supports; and four, income supports.
Through federal funding we were able to help stabilize the childcare sector with grants for wages and a total of $3.4 million was distributed the last fiscal year. We also provided assistance to centres who were able to expand their services to include children with special needs. The Department of Health is developing a nurse and lay visiting program for newborns and for families. This year we will be working on developing a comprehensive system of early childhood development.
Mr. Chairman, I think it's important for the committee to note that the budget for Community Services has increased, as it has done in each year of this government's mandate. We were able to do that even as we absorbed the impact of municipal contributions to our Social Assistance Program. As you may recall, under service transfer, the provinces took over responsibility of the Social Assistance Program from the municipalities. There was a period of five years when the municipalities provided some contributions to these services. Last year we received the final payments from the municipalities of $6.6 million. Now with the province assuming the full cost of Income Assistance Programs and with no contributions from the municipalities, the province's municipalities are saving approximately $44 million per year.
This is an important milestone to achieve, not only that we have moved to a single-tier provincial model of income assistance, but it is a program fully funded by the province. As a government we recognize the importance of social services. Our focus this year is to
ensure a sustainable foundation for our programs. That may mean a redesign of some programs and a change in service delivery. Greater care will be taken to ensure the impact on clients is kept to a minimum where possible, however we need to take these steps now to ensure that we are able to offer core programs to Nova Scotians in need.
This month the department will begin meeting with service providers in the area of family service programs to discuss how to best restructure the programs in that sector. These programs include transition homes, women's centres and men's treatment programs. They have been developed in different communities to meet perceived needs over the last generations. We have never looked at these programs as one system. The time has come to do that. Knowing that we have fewer dollars to spend, we need the input of the sector to make an effective design.
We believe we can make differences by changing the service delivery model and through administrative efficiencies. We do have to make choices. In meeting with the sector, we will get into more detailed discussions on the delivery of services in particular areas and what they see as the most urgent need. Our commitment to safety for women and children has not changed. The design will help us to expand the options to respond to currently available needs. At the request of the sector, we will be meeting on Wednesday, April 17th. Later this month we plan to begin our consultation with the service providers in this sector.
Mr. Chairman, many of the programs in Community Services are provided by community agencies. The child welfare system is a prime example. We have a network of Children's Aid Societies and Family and Children Services organizations who provide these services and who we fund. In some areas of the province, where Children's Aid Societies do not operate, the Department of Community Services provides these services directly. This mixed service provider system is unique to Nova Scotia, and one that has been the subject of much debate in the sector over the years.
Last June, I asked representatives of the Children's Aid Society to work with our staff on a joint committee to look at how child welfare services are being delivered in Nova Scotia. I have received the report, and asked them to present the report to the people who work in the sector and discuss the best model for our province. I look forward to hearing back from them later this spring.
As you know, the restructuring of the department two years ago resulted in the addition of housing services to Community Services. Since many of our programs have a housing or shelter component, having services located here, makes sense from a policy and a program perspective. We have approximately 12,000 public housing units in the province. One of the major initiatives of this division this year is the negotiation of the agreement with the federal government for an affordable housing program. As the four Atlantic Provinces have similar housing needs, we are working together on this initiative and hope to have
discussions with the federal government very soon. Officials from the four Atlantic Provinces and the federal government will meet in Halifax April 25th.
Mr. Chairman, these are some of the programs Community Services provides through a network of regional offices across the province, and the good work of more than 1,000 employees. As with any large organization that provides service to the public, you need a strong service delivery foundation. In Community Services, we recognize the current technological system has reached, if not exceeded, its capacity to properly handle the day-to-day work to provide help and support to people in need.
With our client service delivery initiative, we are exploring ways to ensure that the business processes, information technology and organizational structure will help us significantly improve service delivery to do this in a more efficient manner. We are in the process of trying to engage a private sector partner to work with our department, to help implement a new delivery system. We are hopeful that it will take an innovative approach, that we can address this issue and improve service to our clients.
Mr. Chairman, in my years as Community Services Minister I have seen the commitment a caring staff give to Nova Scotians in need. The challenges are many, but I think the commitment' to improve our programs and to help those in need in Nova Scotia are well served. I look forward to answering questions from the committee.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.
You have 6.5 minutes before the moment of interruption. The NDP caucus has one hour in turn.
MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister for his comments with respect to his department. I want to tell the minister up front that there is no question about the dedication and the competency of the staff within the Department of Community Services. It's a staff that continuously sees a department coming under the gun of the Minister of Finance and a department that has allowed itself to be gutted with respect to continued funding to those people who are most vulnerable and those individuals who are in need.
We have witnessed and we have recognized, over the last year, a couple of years, as a matter of fact, that the Department of Community Services has continued, because of its gutting of its department, to rely upon agencies and organizations in the community to provide for those who are most vulnerable. Many of the agencies and organizations that I have had conversations with over the past year have found that people are finding themselves in increasing difficulty in this province, particularly the most vulnerable individuals, children in particular. This province has now reached a 12 per cent level where we have children in poverty in Nova Scotia.
We recognize that earlier, some time ago, back in 1989, there was a resolution put before the federal Parliament with respect to the elimination of poverty in Canada, that included the elimination of poverty in each and every province, and the commitment by those provinces to eliminate poverty. What we now see is a continuous growing of food banks in this province, and a continuous need and a demand for services by food banks, clothing depots, furniture banks. We have agencies and organizations coming to the aid of individuals, particularly those individuals who are disabled, because the department provides no funding for technical aids or wheelchairs.
A whole host of those very issues should be the responsibility of the provincial government, namely the Department of Community Services, and their role has continued to be eroded. Mr. Chairman, there is no question that we recognize as a political Party the need to get our fiscal house in order, we recognize the need to get rid of the deficit, to pay on the debt, but also we recognize that there is a disproportionate amount of responsibility here that is being placed upon those who are most vulnerable and those who are least fortunate and those who can't possibly afford to pay.
Mr. Chairman, a few years ago the Voluntary Planning report had indicated just exactly the demographics of Nova Scotia. It clearly spelled out to the Minister of Community Services what the demographics were. The demographics were that, in fact, 50 per cent of Nova Scotians have less than a Grade 12 education, and 50 per cent of Nova Scotians earn an income of less than $20,000 a year. Last year's report from Statistics Canada, and if the Minister of Community Services was very much aware, would have shown the Minister of Community Services that 38 per cent of Nova Scotians paid no income tax at all, and another 29.4 per cent of Nova Scotians paid less than $1,000 in income tax, which would imply that individuals earn an income in this province of less than $25,000 a year, not $20,000 but $25,000 a year. I would say to the Minister of Community Services, there's a tremendous responsibility for helping those who are the working poor, and those people who are the most vulnerable in our society, those people who are now living on social assistance.
Mr. Chairman, I would say to you that the Minister of Community Services has made no mention within his statement or his initial address with respect to those persons with disabilities and what his department was going to do in the fiscal year, 2002-03 to assist individuals with disabilities. The minister made no mention about the Kendrick report which cost some $51,000 to produce, and the recommendations in the Kendrick report, the seven most outstanding recommendations that could get this committee on the road and moving forward. The single, most important recommendation of all that the minister could have stood here and talked about during estimates was, in fact, that he would have supported the notion of setting up the blue ribbon committee so that this process could get underway.
Mr. Chairman, I will cede the floor now for the moment of interruption, and then I will come back later.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to thank the member for Dartmouth North. We have reached the moment of interruption. The committee will stand adjourned until 6:30 p.m.
[5:59 p.m. The committee recessed.]
[6:30 p.m. The committee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, order. The committee will now reconvene. We are debating the estimates of the Department of Community Services.
The honourable member for Dartmouth North.
MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I believe that when I had paused for the moment of interruption I was speaking around the Kendrick report, the minister not mentioning the Kendrick report in his statement through budget estimates, and the importance of the Kendrick report because we know what it has recommended that this government do. I talked about this government not committing itself to the establishment of the blue ribbon committee that, in fact, could be the basis for the development of some of the recommendations that the Kendrick report has brought forward to this government.
We also recognize that community-based options and small options homes - as a matter of fact there was a report just as the minister came into office with respect to the recommendations around community-based options. As we know, there is still a freeze on the number of spaces in community-based options, yet there are continuing increases for small options spaces. The minister has talked about the client delivery services initiative involving the private sector.
We have yet to see the real picture or the impact of the client delivery initiative. We have yet to extract from the minister or his department just exactly what we can envisage with respect to the client delivery service. I will be posing some questions around that very idea. We know that the technological systems must change, but we want to make sure that when you introduce a client delivery service, at least make sure that there is optimum delivery of service to the consumers or the persons who are going to be requesting that service.
I want to go back, Mr. Chairman, once again, to what I've said about this government being reactive. This government has been reactive on the basis that it continued to react when in fact we watched underfunding to transition homes over the last year. We would often hear that request, the government would then, in turn, challenge them to go out and fundraise and raise more, when in fact they've actually fundraised and extracted all the revenue from the community they possibly could, good and charitable organizations, and were on the brink of closure before government would react to provide them with additional funding to keep them on for the following year.
We've seen this most recently in the recent budget, with respect to transition homes. The $890,000 cut to transition homes was a deliberate attempt in this budget to help the Minister of Finance to balance his budget on the backs of the most vulnerable Nova Scotians. I want to tell you that it was because we were here and we challenged the minister on the importance of transition homes, women's centres and men's programs to reduce the level of the potential abuse out there in the community.
This government talked about recognizing their right to assist those among us who are disadvantaged by poverty and disability. They also recognize that the government is about choices, and choices in delivery of programs and services. The Department of Community Services is a department that many Nova Scotians rely on, particularly those who are most vulnerable, who rely on government to provide them with service.
I want to go now to the Minister of Community Services, because he now has had approximately, almost, a year - in fact the minister has introduced the bill and its regulations and has had some time to make it work with respect to Employment Support and Income Assistance Act, that was Bill No. 62, if we recall. The minister, in his advance statement to the budget, had indicated that there are now some 2,400 full-time employees. I think he's making this as a direct correlation to the Employment Support Services Program. In fact, there are another 2,400 in education training, I believe, is what the minister has stated.
Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister of Community Services, I'm wondering if he would not agree that there are a number of people who get full-time employment, and historically over the last five, 10 years, there has been a decline in the number of people on social assistance, particularly when the economy in particular areas tends to grow. When the economy tends to grow, it opens up the marketplace for employment opportunities. I'm wondering if the minister is simply taking advantage of an employment opportunity here that normally would have grown under the existing economy as it has for the last several years. My question to the Minister of Community Services is, please elaborate exactly on how you have calculated and defined that those individuals have in fact gained employment as a result of the Employment Support Services Program?
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member has raised a whole series of questions. I will come to his question, but I think, in terms of some of the questions he raised in his earlier remarks, I would like to make a couple of comments. Honourable member, you mentioned about child poverty. In my opening comments I did indicate about children - out of the income assistance - so that people going back to work and all low-income families were getting those benefits.
The other one that you mentioned, that I would like to just briefly touch on, is people with disabilities. The honourable member and I have had the discussion before, we both understand that Nova Scotia has an extremely high incidence of disability. The honourable member probably also knows that we are under an HRDC Development Program, a pilot
program, to look at the disabled, people who need supports and people who need programs to work in areas with children, people in community supports. I say that to the honourable member, saying that's the only program in Canada. We've been chosen for that program. I hope it's because we have made the point of our high incidence of disability in Nova Scotia and that's why HRDC wanted to become involved with us.
I go directly to his question, how do we know somebody is going back to employment. What we in the department do is, we have a matrix. The matrix tells us what the people are doing, where they're going and what services those people have taken advantage of, and where they're going back to work. As the honourable member will know, we introduced this as part of our program last year, people are able to get return-to-work supports, so they indicate whether they're part-time or full-time. That triggers those benefits that are available. Those report to us what they're doing, when they're going to work and if they're part-time or full-time.
MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister of Community Services, I guess the matrix is there, but I'm just wondering, how do we determine the number of individuals who no longer have sought social assistance versus those who come through the Employment Support Services Program? Also, I'm just wondering if there is anyone who may have been disqualified as a result of not complying and taking the program?
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, the question is, how do we know if people are coming off assistance because they have stopped requesting it or because they're going back to work? As the honourable member knows, people file with their caseworkers the reports of what has been going on in the last period of time. If people choose not to file and they choose not to do that, that's certainly their right to do so. Once again, if they're going back to work, they would indicate that and they would be looking at the supports.
I think your question is, if I interpreted it correctly, how many people would have been disqualified because they chose not to go back to work or chose not to take the training program? I simply don't have that number here, but I will get that number and provide it to you during the estimate debates.
MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister of Community Services, if I can draw a picture here - if someone has decided that they no longer are seeking social assistance, they may have found a job and they may have found that job on their own rather than through Employment Support Services, do you calculate that on the matrix as part of your program of finding that person employment or is that person's employment calculated as someone who has actually found their own employment? Do you know how many individuals have actually found their own employment? I'm wondering if you can tell us a small bit about the Employment Support Services program, what is offered, and what type of education and training program might be offered as well?
MR. CHRISTIE: Just for the member, your question was to give you some information surrounding the employment support and to share with the honourable member, as I mentioned in my comments, Mr. Chairman, that 8,700 were involved in employment supports. That breaks down as follows: people participating in academic upgrade programs, 965; participating in skill training programs,1,454; vocational assessments, 660; prior learning assessment portfolios completed and finishing up, 150; people who are involved with Employability Assistance for Persons with Disabilities program, 1,450; the number of EAPT participants enrolled in post-secondary training, 850; involved with activities under Human Development Partnerships Committees, 2,575; and secured full-time employment through the ESS.
The way of determining that is, people are in these programs moving to employment and, as I indicated earlier, people going to employment still seek supports. Some might want to have coverage of Maritime Medical Care to have their health care coverage, some might be looking at servicing those back-to-work incentives that we have. So, as people are accessing those programs, we exclude those as people who are coming back through the work stream because they're accessing our program. But, that gives you an approximation of the 8,000 people I was referring to and where they are in the programs.
MR. PYE: You made some mention with respect to higher learning and assists. Those are the individuals who are already grandfathered into the higher learning program and are receiving social assistance benefits. My understanding is, anyone who's on social assistance now must make application for a student loan, the student loan is then approved and there is no assistance from the Department of Community Services. You can correct me, Mr. Minister, if I'm wrong, but I would certainly want to know if the minister is just simply assisting those who now remain to finish their degree on the higher learning program?
[6:45 p.m.]
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member is correct. That figure I gave you is for people who are enrolled in university and they are grandfathered in and they will continue. In your comment as to whether people get programs to go back to university, as we've indicated, our program does not support people who are attending university. Our programs support people who, as a means of last resort, are looking at other programs. We have done that, we have indicated the major challenge of our department is to take the 50 per cent of the people on our assistance rolls that have less than Grade 12 and to bring them along so they can receive the academic training. So the answer to your question is, yes, those are the people that are grandfathered in, but we do not provide assistance for people who are attending university now.
MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I guess my question would be then is, how does one obtain a well-rounded education when one is a single parent and one wants to continue to go to university but is unable to go to university or an institute of higher learning simply because
the allocation of the student loan will not allow them to do so? If we are to introduce an employment supports program that is going to make sure that people get quality, meaningful jobs, can the minister explain to me why he made the decision to cut assistance to higher education?
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, I guess as I indicated in the last question the honourable member had, the question is, do we provide assistance to people who are attending university? Those people have available to them other programs, bursary programs and other loan programs, the same as everybody. But, I will come back and your question was, why did you make the decision not to do that? The decision that we had to face as a department is, as I indicated, more than 50 per cent of our people on assistance have less than Grade 12. We felt that to move forward, to assist those people to get back into the workforce, to become self-reliant. We had to deal with that large number of people and provide the education so they could achieve their Grade 12, they could move to a post-secondary education and get back into the workforce. That's why we made the decision, because of the number of people we had requiring their Grade 12, academically.
MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, my understanding is not only at institutes of higher learning are individuals expected to pay their way for education, I believe that at local community colleges, they are expected to make application for student loans and again, individuals are not funded appropriately from the Department of Community Services. Can the minister elaborate on that as well so that I have clarity?
MR. CHRISTIE: When we have that program for people who are on assistance, to help them become self-reliant, we have identified programs where people can go and we support. If people choose to have programs outside of that, then they have to look at alternate means. As we were developing those supports to get people trained and back to work, we had to look at a series of programs; we couldn't make it universal simply because we weren't able to manage all of the different programs that were there. We had to look at certain programs and what the honourable member is suggesting is, are there programs that fall outside the proscribed programs that we provide support to and the answer is yes.
MR. PYE: Well, that makes it extremely difficult, Mr. Chairman, because if in fact we recognize that a high percentage of Nova Scotians do not have a Grade 12 education and we recognize that we're going to provide employment supports to Nova Scotians so that they can have a better quality of life, then I guess the only programs that would be available would be retraining programs in some particular fields that certainly I would be appreciative if the minister would make clear, so that we know the kind of jobs that individuals can expect to receive as a result of going through the Employment Support Services program.
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, let's just come back on this question of the people and programs. You will recall, as we talked about the income support program last year, what we had indicated is people coming to us needing support, we would do an assessment of
what they needed to become self-reliant and what it was that we could do to support them to get back into the workforce. At the time we indicated that programs that we were able to support were indeed the programs that would get people to achieve their Grade 12 education, but the area we would be post-secondary and community colleges for up to two years. So people selecting those programs and falling into those programs are the areas that we support. Now if there is a program for a person who has a particular need, they have a particular skill, or their work program says they need something that falls outside that, we do it. But what I was trying to say to you is the general rule that we have is people that would be looking at programs that fall within the two-year post-secondary level.
MR. PYE: My question to Minister of Community Service is, if that's the kind of support program you are providing, what I can extract from what you are telling me is those kind of support programs or training programs would certainly not allow an individual to earn an income of more than $10 an hour, probably most would be minimum wage. The minister told us earlier that some 2,400 individuals have received full-time employment. I'm just wondering - and he did say that they have a matrix there - if in fact the minister has tracked what kind of employment opportunities the individuals have for the most part received, what kind of salaries were tied into those employment programs and possibly, maybe, the minister could tell me if they would still not be considered some of the working poor and still need to have their income supplemented by the Department of Community Services, as well as having a drug card?
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, I guess part of that question was, do we follow people once they've left the department. Well the answer is once they've gone back into the workforce, unless they're looking at being with us for medical reasons or for other reasons, we wouldn't be tracking them at that point. The first part of your question was do we have data which would say where people have gone or what fields people have gone into and what the rate of pay would be per hour. We will put that down as another question that we had to see if we can look at data and provide those answers. As I indicated to you earlier, our thrust is to try to take the people who need a Grade 12 education, get them back into the training and get them the education level they need so they can move on to post-secondary.
Now the honourable member says that that means that they're going to go to low-level, low-paying jobs. In some cases that would be true, but in other cases, in terms of people going and taking apprenticeship training at community colleges, people taking for example the programs for long-term care or for others, as the honourable member knows, having visited the community college, there are some areas where there's high demand for certain services and if people are in those, they achieve more in wages. But what we will do is we will undertake to find the data on your question, we're seeking to find where have the people gone and what are the salary ranges. We have the other question of providing you with the model figures and we will put that down to provide you with it as soon as we can.
MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I guess the reason I ask that question of the minister is because he did indicate that the individual clients had full-time employment, some 2,400. So if the minister stated that they have full-time employment, he must have known where they received their employment. I guess the concern is that this simply - although we want to push people up through the income assistance program into gainful employment - still does nothing to enhance the quality of education, because when you reach a certain pinnacle, the Department of Community Services drops off. For example, if someone receives - I shouldn't say receives, but - graduates from a Grade 12 education, as a result of going through this training program and then all of a sudden makes application for community college or to an institute of higher learning, the individual is left on their own, unless there's something here that I don't see. The individual is left on their own to continue on through the community college programs that are available or through the university programs. I guess if the minister can respond, I would certainly appreciate it.
MR. CHRISTIE: I guess to elaborate for the honourable member, we were talking earlier about when people come into assistance and they're looking at their back-to-work plan and how they're going to do things. As I indicated, we do an assessment of what programs they're going to do, how we're going to provide those programs, and what their back-to-work goals are. We have the counselling for training and looking at the areas that they want to go. But I think if the member is suggesting that people come off assistance because they're going to community college, that is not correct. We provide assistance to people as part of the program to get them back to work, as they're developing through their assessment program to get back to work. So those are provided for, Pharmacare and special needs are provided. We provide a number of those things. The goal and objective is to enable that person to achieve their assessment program and their back-to-work program. That's how we view it.
MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I guess there's a question around the one-year period. Now the Department of Community Services, as I understand it, helps them through this transition of employment for a one-year period. They may provide them with a drug card, Pharmacare, they may provide them with special needs assistance, you know, it may be clothing, it may be footwear, it may be transportation, all those special requirements in order to get them to their place of employment. I guess as the minister decided what would happen after the one-year period expired, when the Department of Community Services had committed to do this - yet the individual's income continues to remain the same as a result of the employment and there needs to be income supplement.
MR. CHRISTIE: Mr. Chairman, I guess the question is why did we pick a year. What is it that's magical about a year, why a year to put them on. I guess as we develop that policy - and I had an opportunity to talk to a number of people as part of that program and they had identified the area of the Pharmacare Program as being one of their major concerns about leaving income support - one of the reasons we looked at a year is because if people go to employment, basically as they move to employment and they have completed a year, in most
organizations or a lot of organizations, they arrive at being able to become eligible for their benefit package.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Time for the estimates has expired for this evening.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise to report considerable progress and beg leave to sit again on a future day.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing that, the committee will rise to sit another day.
[7:00 p.m. The committee rose.]
