[Page 185]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Good Afternoon. The Committee on Supply will now be called to order.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. MICHAEL BAKER: Mr. Chairman, I call the estimates of the Department of Health.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Glace Bay.
MR. DAVID WILSON(Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, I'd like to go back somewhat and go over a few things with the minister here on a number of the topics that we've been talking about over the last little while. To begin with, with respect to the value-for-money audits that I had asked some questions on earlier, to the minister, and just to recap, these audits are currently being done and there is an approximate $1 million price tag on these audits. The minister indicated that these audits are meant to capture a snapshot in time within our acute care sector. One question I would like to ask the minister and just to clarify, did I hear him correctly, is that the case, are these audits being done to measure a snapshot in time, so to speak? Is that the purpose of the audits?
[Page 186]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Health.
HON. CHRISTOPHER D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and once again, thank you very much for the opportunity to debate the estimates for the Department of Health. To the member opposite, it is basically taking a certain number of months in looking at the operational pieces within those months, but it's also looking at past performance, to make some suggestions on O.R., and other pieces within that acute care system. It's from when to when? I'm just trying to remember the actual dates that they're taking that snapshot. I'll try to get that information for you before I stand up next time.
MR. DAVID WILSON(Glace Bay): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, it would be very useful to have the dates of exactly when that snapshot is going to be taken. Would the minister please tell us if Corpus Sanchez, who's going to be doing the value-for-money audits, will be making recommendations to government at the end of the day? Will Corpus Sanchez make those recommendations to you and your department and if so, exactly what types of recommendations are they going to be making?
[12:45 p.m.]
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, yes, Corpus Sanchez was the successful bidder on this contract. We are expecting them to give us a whole range of recommendations, we're hoping late Fall, somewhere near the end of October, November range.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, would the minister be a little bit more specific when he says they expect a whole range of recommendations, exactly what types of recommendations is he expecting to get from that value-for-money audit?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, rather than listing here the number of things that they'll be doing, I will provide him with a copy of the RFP, so he could actually have a look at what we're asking them to come back with for recommendations.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, that will suffice, I guess. Basically what we're looking for here is - the whole idea of estimates is to have the minister and staff here to answer questions, not to provide the answer every time that he's going to be providing a list at a later date. The whole idea of having the minister and his staff here is to get some answers here and of course, as anyone knows, your answer could depend on the next series of questions. For instance, I'd like to know - and as an example, Colchester-East Hants had a value-for-money audit performed on them back in February 2004, I think that's when it was completed. Is Corpus Sanchez going in and
[Page 187]
once again doing a value-for-money audit on Colchester-East Hants, after having already done one back in February, a couple of years ago?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, with Colchester-East Hants, since they already had their value-for-money audit, they'll be using the data that was collected during that piece and maybe asking for another couple of pieces of data to fill in the blanks. For the most part, that work has been done and we won't be asking them to redo it.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, the minister will be fully aware that one of the recommendations that was made in the value-for-money audit that was done a couple of years ago in Colchester stated the following: The Department of Health, in co-operation with the DHAs, should develop standardized reporting and benchmarks to facilitate comparisons of performance between the district health authorities. Could the minister please indicate now what progress has been made with respect to the recommendation that came from that audit a couple of years ago?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the previous bidder for the Colchester-East Hants value-for-money audit, PHSOR - there's a whole bunch of acronyms that we're going to be calling it - was Virginia MacDonald and Associates. They did suggest a whole range of recommendations, things that we are working on when it comes to reporting and standards, when it comes to the implementation of certain accounting programming and those kinds of things. Fortunately, that information will be uploaded into our larger value-for-money audit, and I'm sure there will be some similar recommendations.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, the value-for-money audit done in Colchester two years ago also indicated the development of a funding formula that was supposed to provide a fair, equitable and transparent funding to the district health authorities. Could the minister tell us now, has this been done?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, ultimately, as we move down most funding - of course, as I've been saying, it's business-plan based, service based, depending on the services you have, depending on the funding you receive, plus several other issues of staffing and other programming. As we move along through this phase of recommendations and research, I would suggest that we'll probably be moving toward some kind of base formula. Of course that would have to be done in discussions with all stakeholders, including the DHAs.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): I'm not sure, Mr. Chairman, if that was a yes or if it was a no, whether or not it has been done. This was a value-for-money audit which was done a couple of years ago in Colchester-East Hants, over two years ago. So over two years ago the minister, after receiving that recommendation - it wasn't he,
[Page 188]
personally, who received the recommendation, it would have been a previous minister - but surely you know by now whether or not they followed that recommendation through. I don't know exactly how much was spent on that audit, probably a considerable amount of money. But you would know by now, I would think, anyway, whether or not - in particular, the development of a funding formula - whether or not there has been any progress on that recommendation. I'm asking the minister again, has it been done? If it hasn't, then, why not?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, as we've taken value-for-money audits of, in particular, DHAs, they've come back with a number of recommendations. Two of them, I think, at this point, have revolved around the idea of having a funding formula. With the Colchester-East Hants audit, we felt that in order to sort of work on that recommendation on a province-wide basis, that we would have to go towards having a full value-for-money audit across the system to start using that data to develop a true funding formula. Other jurisdictions in Canada have tried, and of course it has been quite a challenge in most jurisdictions. We want to make sure that should we go down the path of a funding formula that we have all the data and information required in order to have the most fair formula possible.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, so the minister is telling us now that one of the recommendations we can expect from the Corpus Sanchez value-for-money audit, one of those recommendations will be a province-wide funding formula for DHAs. Are you expecting Corpus Sanchez to make that kind of a recommendation?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, what I'm saying is that from the previous value-for-money audits, since they had those recommendations held within them, we're expecting Corpus Sanchez to come back and suggest certain models for a true funding formula. So basically we've accepted the idea, but we want to make sure we have our information, get the data collected and consult with the DHAs before we have a true discussion of the formula, and make sure it's the most fair one possible for the whole province.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, let me change topics, if I may, to the subject of home care. I believe it's on Page 11.16 of the Supplementary Detail, it outlines some increases in home care. The overall increase is in the vicinity of $21 million, I believe. Could the minister please indicate whether the increases in the various districts reflect any new programs, or do those increases just simply maintain the status quo?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, most of that increase would revolve around utilization increases, as well as wage settlement, in some, expended home care services, and of course the increase in self-managed care, pretty much in order to maintain status quo with the increase in utilization.
[Page 189]
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, the next page - Page 11.17 of the Supplementary Detail - shows increases of over $31 million in long-term care. Let me ask the minister, do any of those increases reflect an increase in nursing home beds in their respective DHAs, or are the increases, again, maintaining the status quo?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, of course some of it would be built around maintaining the status quo. That money was underlying the 50 restorative beds in the province, the completion of the Richmond Villa, which of course is a replacement, 25 new beds Northside-Seaview, 26 additional beds between DVA and ourselves. Interim strategy for the ALC pressures, which is the funding we provided through to the DHAs, or will be providing through the DHAs, in order to expand the ALC beds in the province.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, there are increases in nursing home beds. That's what the minister is saying. Again, which district health authority budgets reflect those increases?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, I'm just trying to make sure we have that. The interim strategy for the ALC beds was across the district, so it's held centrally to be passed along, depending on the proposals. The 50 restorative beds were, of course, across the system and the 25 new beds, the Northside Harbour View facility and Seaview Manor in Cape Breton, as well as the 26 beds - I'm not sure where those are being dispersed.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, more of a general question. Mr. Minister, how long does it take for a nursing home bed to be available for use? Once an announcement is made, once you have announced that there is a new nursing home bed, how long is the period of time to actually put that into use?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, what I'm being told is that on a greenfield situation, when there is no structure there, we are looking at a three-year plan and build process. If we're looking at expansion of existing facilities, that would happen in more of a 24-month span.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): So those new beds which were announced - how long ago, it's leaving my memory right now, but anyway - those new beds will be within two years is what you're saying? Is that correct, Mr. Minister?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I believe he means out of the list of 826 beds, I think is what he's referring to. We are expecting that to have all of them on line would take about the four-year span, but we're hoping there are a number of programs and requests going there that would have a few of those up and running within the two- to three-year span. There are a number of facilities that are
[Page 190]
already in progress. There are almost 200 and some that are already in process, so those would be built as soon as possible, so within the 24-month span.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): So if the government made a commitment that new beds are supposedly going to open in one area - I don't know, let's say down around Middleton or some place like that - if the government made a commitment to that area that new beds would open in 2008, it should be sod-turning time, shouldn't it, Mr. Minister?
[1:00 p.m.]
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Of course our commitment to Middleton will be one of great interest for the member for Annapolis, I'm sure, over the next little bit. Fortunately, once that discussion is had and the prioritization happens, let's say we're able to get some of that information out and done by the end of summer, then I would suspect it would take about two to three years to construct, by the time you do the plan and make sure you have all your RFP process complete.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): If you have made a commitment, which your government has, made a firm commitment that it will be done by 2008, then you would expect to keep that commitment. That would be a promise that you would be keeping. If not, then it would go down as a broken promise, one that is not kept.
I'm sure the minister intends to keep that promise because that was a very strong commitment made to the people of Middleton during the election campaign. I know personally that the member for Annapolis will certainly make sure that commitment is kept - you'll be in trouble if it's not, let me put it that way.
Let me move on, if I may then, to another page, the very next page in the Supplementary Detail, Page 11.18, which deals with diagnostic and medical equipment. It shows a decrease there by some $25 million. I think that's a result of no more federal funding for medical equipment, I'm assuming anyway. So this fiscal year the minister there has budgeted only $2 million. Is $2 million enough?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, the $2 million is an item we put in in order to cover some expected replacement costs over the next number of months. The decrease really represents the decrease in federal funding for equipment, which is one we hope to continue negotiating with the federal government in order to have a bigger number in there for the rest of the year.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Would the minister have any idea how many requests have come before the department from the district health authorities for medical
[Page 191]
equipment to date? How does that stack up, the number of requests and the amount of those requests, how does that stack up with the $2 million budget this year?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, of course we ask our DHAs to basically underline their top three priorities for replacement, to bring the ones that are ready to, well, kick the bucket, for lack of a better term. We have about three requests in right now that are in around the $2 million to $3 million range.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): So if that's the case, you already have more requests in than you've actually budgeted for. Without knowing specific figures, but from what you've indicated today, the amount would be more than the $2 million. I understand you're saying you're negotiating with Ottawa, with the federal government, that you'll have more money there, but as it stands right now, you don't. You only have $2 million that has been budgeted, but the requests that have come in from the DHAs now are more than the $2 million you have budgeted. Is that correct? Is that what you're saying?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Right now, the immediate pressures are at the $2 million range. We do have a couple of things we're aware of that might be in the over range, but we're hopeful that within the DHA funding, within our funding, we should be able to maintain the system as it stands today.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): That was quite the answer, I must admit. That was one of the best I've heard so far in this Chamber and I've heard quite a few answers. What I didn't hear was - let me read this into it, what you're telling me now is that you haven't budgeted enough on that line item and now you're depending on district health authorities to use their budgets to just maintain this equipment or perhaps purchase new stuff while you wait for Ottawa to come through with more money for equipment - money that you're not sure right now is even coming.
What happens if another piece of equipment breaks down at whatever district health authority? Have you left any room there at all for emergencies? Obviously not, because the $2 million you've said is already eaten up by the current requests. So what do you do if something pops up?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, ultimately we are still in a budget-type thing. We're trying to make sure we use every dollar to the utmost. We felt that from the request coming from the DHAs with the equipment capital and equipment monies they had within their budgets, that should be sufficient for this year in order to maintain the system at current levels.
Of course, we still are bringing on line a number of new MRIs, we're bringing on line a number of pieces of equipment as we speak, and we will continue to invest in
[Page 192]
new equipment across the system. Right now, on replacement and new equipment, we budgeted the $2 million and we do feel that will be adequate for the near term.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): I'm glad that you mentioned the MRIs. It's ironic, I was just going to get to those, so I'll skip right to the next item because a couple of years ago there was an announcement made that there was funding from the federal government, the federal Liberal Government at the time, with respect to MRIs. Four were announced, one was for Kentville, Yarmouth, New Glasgow and Antigonish. A year later, there was a supplier that was selected and these four MRIs then turned into six MRIs, with two coming, as well, to the Capital District. So my question for the minister is, are any or all of those MRIs up and running in the original four areas, that being Kentville, Yarmouth, New Glasgow, and Antigonish?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, back when we originally made the order and made the decision to purchase new MRIs for the province, we were in the line for five through group purchasing. I think it was a partnership with Ontario, at that time, to purchase these new machines. So we were able to basically squeeze another MRI out of it, which is, I think, good news for all Nova Scotia.
When it comes to the implementation, the replacement, of course we are replacing two here in metro Halifax, HRM, and then installing new ones across the system. My understanding right now is that they will be in-house, I think, by the end of summer; if not, early Fall. I believe Yarmouth is getting close to its operational date, where they do have the facility ready to install it. What we had was an issue with the machines themselves, where there was a new machine coming available with new software, we wanted to make sure we had the up-to-date machine possible, so that did delay it by a few weeks.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for his answer. Even though it was a couple of years ago the announcement was made, as of today, none of those MRIs in the four original areas are up and running. None of those are up and running. Has all the necessary staff been hired for those MRIs in those four areas mentioned?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, as we're planning to have all those MRIs on line by the end of December, there has been training going on with the existing staff at the hospitals in question. Also, there has been some extra staffing put on, and $3 million has been put in for training and new staff in order to run these MRIs.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, when the minister gets up again maybe he can clarify, I thought he said there has been new staff hired. So maybe he could clarify where. The original announcement was those four areas: Kentville,
[Page 193]
Yarmouth, New Glasgow and Antigonish. The two MRIs in the Capital District, can the minister tell us, are they operational as of yet?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, no, the MRIs in Halifax are not installed yet. We felt it would probably be best to install those last so we don't have interruption in service across the system, because our wait list there, of course, is one of our long ones and we want to make sure we don't disrupt that more than we have to as these get installed across the system.
The hiring has been happening over the last year or so, in particular DHAs. I'm not too sure which ones have had their staffing increased. I can get that information for him, if he wants. Ultimately, there has been some training going on over the near term. I know there are two or three technologists within Yarmouth who have been going to, I believe, Manitoba to get their training done on these new pieces of equipment.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate that information, Mr. Minister, on staffing levels and in what DHAs, and whether or not they are new staff who are being hired on and trained, or whether they are existing staff being trained. I'm going to ask you a further question, just on the Capital District. You said you're leaving them until the end. You've indicated that the other areas won't come on until perhaps late Fall. So are you saying that it will be late Fall or early next year that the two MRIs will be operational in the Capital District?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, as we said, by the end of December all MRIs will be functioning within the DHAs, so within the outer districts, and hopefully soon after those are operational, we can start the replacement of the ones in Capital District, as those will be just strict replacements, popping one machine up, popping the other machine back in, doing the correct connections. So those should be operational pretty soon, after the other four are on line in the province.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, before I leave that subject, perhaps, to me, anyway, I don't know, the minister may be able to explain this. The longest, the biggest waiting lists are in Capital District. So if you had two MRIs that would help alleviate that waiting list, why wouldn't you install those MRIs first in the Capital District to help cut down that waiting list, instead of waiting in Kentville, Yarmouth, New Glasgow and Antigonish. Not that those areas don't deserve MRIs, but why wouldn't you go where your biggest lists are first?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member for Glace Bay, simply, the large number of people on the wait list here in HRM are, of course, from those areas. So by getting the MRIs installed in those hospitals in Yarmouth, Kentville,
[Page 194]
Antigonish and New Glasgow, the wait list in HRM will go down dramatically and then give us the time to replace one, and then the other MRI here in HRM.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): It wouldn't happen to be now because you're not having problems finding staff in the other areas? That wouldn't be part of the problem, because it was anticipated that there were some areas in the province that you were putting MRIs in that had absolutely no staff whatsoever who could operate those MRIs. So all of the areas in the province that were identified a few years ago as to where the MRIs were going, you now have staff who are capable of operating those MRIs, is that correct?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, yes, we do have staff in those areas to run those MRIs. There have been two things, of course, that have had to happen: training, hiring new professionals in order to take up those machines; as well as renovations to the hospitals they will being going into. I know there have been a number of places that have to fully renovate certain areas because, of course, these are heavy machines and the correct renovations had to be done. So there have been two pieces that have been holding this issue up, including the purchase itself, to make sure that we have the most up-to-date machines possible.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I'll buy the minister's explanation on that for now, but it would still seem to me, even if you are servicing people from those other areas where you have the largest waiting list - is the minister saying that after those two MRIs go into Halifax, in the Capital District, and all the rest go into Kentville, Yarmouth, New Glasgow and Antigonish, surely the minister is not saying you will have cut down the wait lists in the Capital District to the point where maybe you don't need all of the MRIs that you now have in the Capital District.
Do you understand my line of thinking there, because if that's the case, then (Interruptions)
[1:15 p.m.]
Well, it's not a conspiracy theory. What it is, when you're thinking ahead, the minister is telling us right now that because this takes so long, and you are not doing them until last in the Capital District because you want to do them first here to cut down on those waiting lists, I would suggest - and I'm not sure, I'd have to look at the figures - that the majority of those waiting lists in Capital District don't come from those other areas, from Kentville, Yarmouth, and I'm sure there's some of it, but I'm talking about the majority of it, I'm almost certain, would be from the Capital District and surrounding districts in that area.
[Page 195]
Anyway, we'll move on and keep a close eye on the situation with MRIs. Mr. Minister, I know it takes time with capital projects, and I know the complexity of these machines, or at least on the surface anyway, it does take time to make sure things are done right and to make sure they have the proper room and the proper staff to go with them, but it was over a couple of years ago that these announcements were made. The minister knows, and we all know the importance of these machines in diagnostic health care, which is extremely important in some cases, and can mean life or death, in some instances, to a lot of patients. We appreciate the importance of this whole topic.
Mr. Minister, on Page 11.19 of the Supplementary Detail, it's kind of interesting. It deals with what's called Funded Staff, the staff complement for Other Health Care Initiatives, Other Programs and Care Coordination - Service Delivery. They are all decreasing from 2005-06 to 2006-07. The only area where the staff complement is actually going up and increasing from estimate to estimate is in administration.
Now, Mr. Minister, I find it a bit ironic because if you look back to 1999, which in my previous remarks was a date that was often brought up, it was a Progressive Conservative Government that promised less administration. So with the increases in administration, perhaps the minister could elaborate, where will there be increases in administration and why do we have those increases?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, on that item, if we look at estimate to estimate, which is about an increase of six people, we are looking at a number of different items. Some of them have to do with infrastructure management. We need a project consultant for that, for the management of the hospitals and the renovations and those kinds of things that would go to maintaining the structures we have today. Senior policy initiatives and planning development officer, we're looking at two positions there. The planning development officer, continuing care administration, making sure that we have the correct staffing there. We are trying to put in a diversity coordinator, and also a manager for the Provincial Blood Coordinating Program. So from estimate to estimate, I'm sure it shows a slight increase. We had, over the last year, a number of vacant positions that we are trying desperately to fill.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned, the Other Health Care Initiatives, the Other Programs and Care Coordination, are all going down, they are all decreasing. Maybe the minister could indicate and elaborate further as to where the actual decreases are, and why are those decreases occurring?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, I think some of the decreases we see there, Other Health Care Initiatives, Other Programs, just basically shows a readjustment of programs that have come to their end and the staffing is no longer needed. Also, under the Care Coordination piece where you're seeing a re-organization of the department,
[Page 196]
that's just more reflective of the actual people in place and a couple of added positions there. So it's just a re-organization of the department.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Thank you, Mr. Minister. Let me ask you some questions now dealing with the Wait Times Reduction Fund. In 2004-05, government received over $18 million in the form of a Wait Times Reduction Fund; again, last fiscal year another $18 million; and this fiscal year over $34 million. So in total, over the last three fiscal years, some $70 million has flowed into this province in the form of a fund that is intended to be used to reduce health care wait times.
Now, with the wait times data that's coming out of this province, I think one could easily assume that not one red cent is being spent to specifically address that issue. So could the minister please outline where the $36 million was spent and where he intends to spend $34 million this year?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, any initiative, at this point, that we put into the Department of Health helps wait times, such as the Continuing Care Strategy, as we move people into the correct facilities in order to free up time in acute care hospitals - working at the primary health care level, making sure that we have the correct type of supports in the community - it helps wait times at the back end.
More specifically on the $18 million, we are looking at issues of oncology, increasing the funding there, dialysis, mental health, the cardiac cath lab, general med and surgeries. So these are our fundings that are going directly into the system, which are in some cases helping out on the wait times. Are we there yet? Absolutely not. Are we going to get there? I certainly hope so.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, the minister knows full well that this is money that came in the form of a wait times reduction fund. If you're saying that money has gone into the acute care sector, then perhaps you can tell us, you know, specifically, what specific wait times reduction projects you've funded when you gave the money to the DHAs to reduce wait times. Can you tell us that then, what are the specific projects that you have funded with the wait times money?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: We're just making a quick edit because that funding went into a lot of initiatives to make sure we have the correct fundings in place: $5 million went to our cardiac care in this province and making sure that we have the correct type of professionals and the types of systems involved; $6.7 million went into our orthopaedics program in order to help the wait lists there; $3 million went into oncology in order to make sure that we have the correct professionals and drugs. Actually I think that number, if you add up within our own funding, is about $12 million this year alone. So we want to make sure that those are there.
[Page 197]
Any investment coming from this funding that goes into our system specifically for programs as I've underlined, helps out in the wait times and, of course, there are other wait times initiatives that we're working on such as the data collection through the Web site, such as the purchasing of certain IT solutions to make sure that we have the flow of information. I hope to be investing over the next year into some similar types of programs right across the system to improve wait times.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Minister, it's some $70 million. That's a pretty large sum of money, and you've just listed a few smaller instances of where that has gone. I'm not accusing the minister of being vague on this issue or trying to skate around it, but if you have that money, and I'm sure there are other people who are thinking along the same lines that I am, either you sink the money into the acute care system or wait times reduction, you fund specific wait times reduction projects, or you're not spending any of the money at all and you're just sitting on it.
So, you know, I guess what I'm asking, Mr. Minister, is which is it? Are you sinking that money into the acute care sector? Have you specifically come up with a wait times reduction plan for which you'll spend this money, or is the money just sitting around at the Department of Finance not being spent at all?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, we are currently still developing a wait times strategy and working with our wait times committee. That committee is coming up with a number of recommendations that include everything from investment in oncology to investment in IT solutions across the system.
I'm going to list off some things where we've spent in last year, which is 2005-06, which we feel are investments into places where we've been having wait lines that are unacceptable, and I think that our investments in those areas have helped out in those areas. That's the whole idea of this, is to make sure that we invest in places that are going to help out the patients in Nova Scotia.
If anyone has a pen, here you go: $2.526 million, oncology; $4.75 million in orthopaedics; $1.4 million in expansion of emergency rooms; $683,000 in dialysis; $800,000 in mental health; $4.9 million to the cardiac cath lab; and $2.94 million in general medical and surgery, all of these impacted wait times as per the program.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Thank you Mr. Minister. I know those are some of the items, not that my math is good, but if I did a quick calculation there I'd still be under about maybe $15 million. Again I go back to the original figure, there has been some $70 million that has come into this province in the form of a fund that's intended to use to reduce health care wait times. Even if we added up all those figures there, you're still looking at a huge amount of money. All I'm asking right now is, where is that
[Page 198]
money? Given that the department budget for the Department of Health has increased by an amount that is less than the amount that the department is receiving this year in the form of the Wait Times Reduction Fund, then not all the money is being spent. It's quite clear not all the money is being spent and I'm asking the minister why. Is it perhaps because you really don't have a plan to address the issue of wait times in this province?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member opposite, as I just stated in the last answer, we're still waiting for our full wait times plan and we're hoping to have that within the next few weeks. The recommendations, as I've said, have a whole range of things including a lot of IT infrastructure that we're going to have to increase. This $18 million per year is not accumulative, so if we don't spend it we don't get it.
I can say that in 2004-05, if we can get our calculators out once again, we've spent $2.56 million on oncology; $4.75 million on orthopaedics; $1.4 million in emergency room; $683,000 on dialysis; $800,000 on mental health; $4.9 million on cardiac cath lab; $2.4 million in general medical and surgery. Again, that's $18 million total if anyone was doing their addition on their calculators. We felt over the two years that these are the things that we're aware of to spend, to make sure that we have some investment in places where we know we're going to have to spend our money because of our previous work.
I think it's incumbent to make sure that we have the best strategy possible and our wait times committee will be coming with suggestions within the next few weeks so we can go on and invest in solutions that make wait times better here in Nova Scotia. Also let's not forget that wait times are not just an issue here in Nova Scotia but they're right across the country, and we want to make sure that we learn from other jurisdictions as well and hopefully make the health care system better for all Canadians.
[1:30 p.m.]
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): I apologize for my math, as I said it wasn't that great. The minister upped it by about $3 million, but still at the same time wait times are not a new issue. Wait times just didn't start to occur when you became Minister of Health. Wait times have been around for quite some time now, and your previous ministers have done absolutely nothing to try to solve the problem that still exists there. One would ask the question, if you're not spending all of the money and you said, maybe it didn't come in the form unless you had identified something for it, then surely one would ask the question, why haven't you identified something in terms of wait times when you know it exists there?
The Nova Scotia data shows, and it's clear, that what's happening in this province is not a solution to wait times in health care. You know where the problems are, you
[Page 199]
know that they exist. What I'm asking is if you didn't have a plan, that's perhaps why you didn't identify the areas that the money should be spent on. If you did have a plan and stopped wasting time on this issue and put a plan in place, then you could be spending money that's coming to you from the federal government, money that has been earmarked specifically for wait time reduction and to reduce health care wait times. This is a lot of money that's been handed to you on a platter, so to speak, by the federal government; this is money that is specifically earmarked for that purpose.
So again, Mr. Minister, any initiative in this province that goes toward - and you've listed a few of them - the reduction of wait times is a welcome initiative, there's no question of that. But what I'm asking now is, is there a lot of money out there that perhaps isn't being utilized, isn't being used because of the fact that we do not have a plan in place to address the issue of wait times?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member. I can assure the member opposite that we're spending the $18 million and a lot more money in order to improve wait times here in Nova Scotia. Are we there yet? No. Are we going to get there? I certainly hope so.
We will continue to work on our initiatives, the ones I just spoke of, and identify the number of programs, the investments in oncology, the investments in cardiac care, the investments in emergency rooms, in order to make sure that we have the staffing there in place, in order to see the people, in order to have the equipment necessary to do those procedures, as well as having the IT infrastructure.
We are currently still working with our wait time strategy committee and waiting for those recommendations to come back. I can assure the member opposite that every cent is being spent on wait time improvement, and a whole bunch more.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Chairman, I don't have much time left - I guess about nine minutes or so - and there are a couple of questions I want to ask the minister in his final minutes of estimates. One had to deal with a catastrophic drug plan for Nova Scotia. When exactly are we going to see a catastrophic drug plan in place in this province?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member for Glace Bay. I thank him for that question, because it's one that I'm very happy to be working on with my provincial counterparts across the country, as we work on our national Pharmacare strategy. Within it, we'd be looking at expensive drugs for rare diseases, as well as a catastrophic drug plan. I'm hoping that as we have the document prepared and brought to First Ministers that we'll be having a true design phase happening over the next year. So I'm hoping early next fiscal, or the second quarter of next fiscal, that we
[Page 200]
would have a true Pharmacare Program for folks who don't have them here in Nova Scotia.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Minister, it's my understanding that that was supposed to be done about a month ago. So now you're saying that this will be further delayed - for how long, for another year, perhaps, that we're into another fiscal year before we would actually see it? I know the minister understands the importance of this, because I know he knows there are a lot of people in a situation here - and we understand we're dealing with a lot of money, but still there are a lot of people here who are at risk. It's my understanding that the timetable should have been a lot sooner than what the minister has indicated. Is that the case?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Mr. Chairman, within the process we're talking about probably three different items here when we talk about catastrophic drug coverage. One of them is expensive drugs for rare diseases, which is the discussion we're having under the MPS with the federal government and other provinces; there is the working families drug plan, which the Premier announced during the election, and one we want to make sure we have ready for next fiscal; and there's also the national catastrophic drug program.
There are a lot of initiatives going on. I think what the member opposite is talking about is that the First Ministers had asked the provincial ministers to come up with a national drug strategy, or Pharmacare strategy. That information was to be complete - as it was last week as I sat with my counterparts in Fredericton - to be delivered and presented to the First Ministers at their meeting in Newfoundland and Labrador at the end of this month.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Mr. Minister, let me be more specific. I think you're blending some things together there. In particular, I'm talking about the catastrophic drugs - for instance, Fabry's disease. I think the people who have been lobbying on behalf of that association - you had indicated at one point anyway that perhaps it would be as early as last month that something would be in place to take care of that, and we're talking I think a couple of hundred thousand dollars a year in order to cover patients in this case, so could you specifically give me a for instance on that case involving Fabry's disease?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: I think he, too, is blending a couple of things together. (Interruption) Well, we'll talk about a couple of things here. Within the whole national Pharmacare strategy, which is one that provincial ministers through the council federation have asked provincial ministers to come forward with, through that there are a number of things we are talking about: a universal catastrophic drug coverage program; EDRD, or expensive drugs for rare diseases; drug safety; the national formulary; as well
[Page 201]
as the national purchasing and pricing program. So there is a big strategy going on there that we're trying to do provincially.
When it comes to the Fabry's issue - and I think that's where we're heading a little bit - we wanted to make sure that everything was in line, it was a negotiation that took far longer than we would have wanted, far longer than the people with that illness would have wanted, but I can say to the member opposite we are hoping to have an announcement on that. I was hoping to have it a month and a half ago, but we were still waiting on a few of our partners to sign off on their documents. I wish I could say it, but I can't - but we've been working with the doctor involved and making sure that we have the orderings done, so when we can make that announcement in the next few weeks we can get those people on those enzyme therapies as they should.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): That's specifically what I was talking about, although you haven't nailed down a date. It seems like every time these people get that close to within having a solution to that problem something happens, usually it's an election, whether it's federally or provincially, and the next thing you know the rug is pulled out from underneath and there's no solution. As you've indicated, the only solution here is to make sure that those people get that enzyme therapy that they require. It's a real serious concern, so I would have preferred to hear a date and that is the one that I was talking about, which about a month or so ago the indications had been anyway that it would be taken care of - hopefully within months, we'll say?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Within days.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Within days? I'll ask that specifically on the record then, Mr. Minister. Will we be hearing something about that perhaps within days?
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Boy, am I getting out on a limb here, but I'm going to commit to days because there has been a tripartite discussion here, there has to have been three Parties agreeing, and I believe that all Parties have signed off on it so we're just waiting for some paperwork. So I'm hoping within days we can make the announcement on Fabry's.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Thank you, Mr. Minister, I'm sure we're all happy to hear that kind of commitment that you've made in the House today, and certainly it'll go a long way in solving that problem.
I only have perhaps a minute and a half left, or whatever, and I wanted to take the opportunity to thank the minister and his staff for appearing before us in estimates. It's always a tough task and a gruelling experience to go through estimates, not only for the minister but more in particular for his staff, as a matter of fact, who provide him with the many answers that are there.
[Page 202]
Mr. Minister, I think from the 12 hours that the NDP caucus and our caucus have asked you those questions you are of the understanding that the whole issue of health care in this province is one that we're not looking for immediate answers, but we know there are some answers out there which have to be found in order to ensure that every Nova Scotian gets the health care that they deserve in this province. We know and we expect from any Health Minister, from any government, that no stone will go unturned in trying to find a solution to some of the problems that we are now experiencing in health care in our province, and we trust that indeed you and your department will do your utmost to make sure that it occurs.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I will wrap up my comments during this estimate.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Health, for any closing remarks.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank the members opposite for their questioning, for their patience with me. As they are very well aware, these are my first estimates with the Department of Health. My last, I think the longest estimates I was able to do with the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries was four hours. So this has proved to be quite different and very interesting. I'm hoping that we provided the best answers possible, and we still have some further information to provide to members opposite. I want to thank my staff, as well, for being here with me.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E9 stand.
Resolution E9 stands.
Resolution E15 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $25,114,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Executive Council, pursuant to the Estimate.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E15 carry?
Resolution E15 is carried.
That concludes the debate on the estimates of the Department of Health.
The honourable Deputy Government House Leader.
MR. PATRICK DUNN: Mr. Chairman, are we having a short recess prior to the estimates from the Minister of Education?
MR. CHAIRMAN: A short recess prior to the estimates for Education.
[Page 203]
Is it agreed?
It is agreed. (Interruption)
Yes, just before we break, the member for Dartmouth North has an introduction.
The honourable member for Dartmouth North.
MR. TREVOR ZINCK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to rise in the House to acknowledge one of the constituents of Dartmouth North. Douglas Day, if you would stand please. Everywhere you go in Dartmouth North, everybody recognizes Doug Day for all his volunteer work and his commitment to the community, particularly every year during the Polish Festival. So I would like to join all the members in applauding and acknowledging Doug Day today. (Applause)
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will recess for 10 minutes.
[1:45 p.m. The committee recessed.]
[1:54 p.m. The committee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Just for further clarification on the Department of Health estimates, the portion of Resolution E15 moved was $642,000 for Acadian Affairs.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
We will now call the estimates of the Department of Education.
Resolution E3 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $1,138,222,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Education, pursuant to the Estimate.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Education.
HON. KAREN CASEY: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to open the estimate debates for the Department of Education. Preparing for this debate has been a wonderful experience. I've had the portfolio for 13 days - this would be called immersion. I've quickly learned that this is a good-news budget, and it's good for all students of all ages in Nova Scotia. I do trust that all members of this House will understand and hopefully appreciate that I do not have all of the answers at this time, but
[Page 204]
I will make a commitment to them that we will seek the answers and, if they're not available from staff today, we'll provide them later, as requested.
The Education budget, including assistance to universities, accounts for the second-largest departmental budget in this government - that's a $1.37 billion commitment to learning in Nova Scotia. This fact alone confirms the importance that members of this government place on education, on educating our children, our youth and our adults. Education is an investment in our future, in our prosperity and in Nova Scotia. As Minister of Education, I commit to the members here today and to all Nova Scotians that our department will remain open and accountable to the people of this province. This government has accomplished a lot since 1999, and we will continue to make education a high priority.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to, if I could, introduce the staff on whom I will be relying a lot during the next eight hours, and during the months ahead. Dennis Cochrane to my left, Deputy Minister of Education; Darrell Youden to my right, Senior Executive Director of Corporate Services; and in the gallery Kevin Finch and Ben McIntyre. I thank them for their support.
While this is a debate on the department's intended investments in Education as contained in the 2006-07 budget, some questions may focus on programs, initiatives and investments over the past year. Mr. Chairman, if I could, my comments will address some of those activities.
Last year, we successfully launched a pilot for a pre-Primary program in 19 schools across the province. This is a first for Atlantic Canada, and the initial response has been positive. We took steps to guarantee labour stability in our schools by negotiating a new contract with the Nova Scotia Teachers Union and the 10,000 teachers that union represents. Class sizes for Primary to Grade 2 were capped at 25 students, and we will extend that cap to include all elementary grades over the next four years. These are but a few of the initiatives we have introduced and will continue in the future.
For 2006-07, we are forecasting an $85 million increase in the budget for the Department of Education. This breaks down into $63.8 million more for public education, post-secondary education, and skills in learning, and an additional $21.2 million for assistance to universities. The P-12 system, for example, will see increased funding by approximately 6 per cent. This is well above inflation, and this is happening at the time when we have declining enrolments, enrolments decreasing by 2.3 per cent. This translates into more support, either directly or indirectly, to our students.
School boards have had a long-standing concern over equitable distribution of funding, and the department is responding to those concerns. The Hogg report reviewed the funding issue and recommended that funds should be reallocated among school
[Page 205]
boards. That means taking existing dollars and reallocating them. But we, as a government, could not accept this premise. This reallocation could have had some boards experience a decrease in funding and this in turn, we felt, could have affected the supports and programs we deliver to our students.
After extensive consultation with the school boards, this government committed to maintaining and funding for the boards that would have seen decreases, and to begin to transfer additional funds to those boards that should have had increases. By doing this, we believe that we were ensuring boards will have the funding they need to get the job done and that no student would be negatively impacted by the distribution of those funds. Boards are pleased with the additional funding in the 2006-07 proposed budget and, in fact, that expression has come to our department from the Nova Scotia School Boards Association earlier this year.
The department's multi-year strategy for public education is called Learning for Life II, and there will be reference to that throughout the budget presentations. Learning for Life II is a vision and a commitment for the future of our students. There are six themes contained in that strategy: Raising the Bar; Closing the Gap; Developing Healthy and Active Learners; Providing Time to Teach and Time to Learn; Measuring and Reporting on Success; and Strengthening Partnerships.
[2:00 p.m.]
Raising the Bar. Raising the Bar is designed to improve both school and student achievements, and this will happen through such programs and initiatives as the school accreditation program, we will be providing more mentors and supports for math and language arts teachers, and we will be improving our French as a Second Language programs. We will also be introducing an International Baccalaureate Program to more schools across the province.
Closing the Gap. Closing the Gap is designed for students who are not succeeding in the public school system, and we will provide such students with more options. To that end, we are pleased to include the extension of the Tuition Support Program to a third year. This will allow students with special needs to attend a designated private school when it's determined that such an intervention would help "close the gap" and prepare the students for re-entry back into the public school system.
Another exciting program, which is called the O2, or Options and Opportunities, will provide comprehensive educational programs that will help bridge high school to post-secondary education and/or work destinations for every student. Successful programs currently exist in some of our boards, and this program will build on those successes. All school boards will have some high schools offering O2 this fall. There will be 27 schools in total.
[Page 206]
The third theme is Developing Healthy and Active Learners and it is designed to ensure that students become better, more engaged learners at school, and healthier Nova Scotians for life. The Department of Health Promotion and Protection provides financial support for this initiative delivered in our schools. Each school board now has a consultant to lead and support these programs at the board level, and they will work closely with teachers and other staff. Providing education and raising awareness of students regarding their health and their lifestyles is our goal and it will help students make better choices.
The fourth theme, Providing Time to Teach and Time to Learn, will focus on student readiness to learn and will include the continuation of the pre-Primary pilot for four-year-old children, which began this year in 19 sites. The students from the first year of that program will be entering our Primary in September of this year and their progress will be monitored throughout the year. In addition, how instructional time is used will be revisited, and required times per day for instruction in math and language arts will be identified.
The fifth theme, Measuring and Reporting on Success - mathematics and literacy assessments will be conducted in Grades 3, 6 and 9, and these assessments will be developed by Nova Scotia teachers for Nova Scotia students, based on the Nova Scotia curriculum. The Minister's Report to Parents will be the primary source of sharing that student achievement data with our publics.
The last theme, Strengthening Partnerships, recognizes in public education our work with school boards, parents, teachers, students, communities, and the support for school advisory councils, for example, will be continued. The Learning for Life II is a solid plan, evidence-based, and reflects extensive consultation with parents, teachers and others. But our planned improvements do extend beyond the P to 12 system into post-secondary education - within the Budget Estimates for 2006-07 our community colleges will receive more than $6 million in new money, a 7.4 per cent increase in the funding over last year, and we will add 321 new seats at the Nova Scotia Community College, and this is all part of the $123 million investment in our community college system, including the new campus in Dartmouth.
Last Spring the government provided $4.75 million to support the development of NSCAD University Port Campus. We are building new schools and college campuses and renovating existing institutions to provide students with safe and healthy learning environments, but a subject related to school construction is that of school closure and, as promised, the review of regulations under the Education Act will begin this Fall with the report due in early 2007. With the exception of one school from the Cape Breton-Victoria Regional School Board that has been closed for safety reasons, no additional school closures are expected before 2008.
[Page 207]
As students migrate from our public school system to post-secondary education, they can be confident that the province is taking steps to make a college or a university education more affordable for more Nova Scotians. The province signed a memorandum of understanding with its universities in late 2004, and this MOU provides predicable and stable funding for our institutions and in return for that provides a 3.9 per cent cap on tuition increases for most students. In fact, Statistics Canada recently reported that Nova Scotia had the lowest tuition increases in the Maritime Provinces - proof that our MOU is working.
The Millennium Access Grant program was announced one year ago and this program, in partnership with the Canadian Millennium Scholarship Foundation, opens the door to a college or a university education for students from low-income families. We are reducing the parental contribution and doubling the employment and repayment bonuses under the Debt Reduction Program.
Our government continues its support for public libraries across the province. There was a $10.8 million support at the end of last year. We were able to provide them with an additional $1 million. School libraries have received targeted funding to be used to refresh their school library resources and to address staffing of school libraries with library technicians.
There is another significant element of the department that must be discussed and that is the Skills and Learning Branch. This division offers a number of programs and initiatives that are designed to promote the skills trades and lifelong learning in our province. This year's budget will support many initiatives that maximize opportunities for our young people while developing a skilled workforce for our province. A $174,000 funding increase will help the One Journey - Work and Learn program which identifies specific industries in need of employees, and works with industry to train and provide employment for Nova Scotians who were previously on income assistance. Additional investments will support youth apprentices and attract more apprentices to the skilled trades.
The Nova Scotia School for Adult Learning continues to have success in providing a wide range of education programs designed for adults who want to improve their reading and math skills, or to complete their high school diploma. These programs are offered at more than 170 sites across the province, and this year alone more than 500 Nova Scotians earned a high school graduation diploma for adults.
So, Mr. Chairman, if I could recap. The Department of Education's budget will increase by $85 million, to a total of $1.37 billion. This includes priorities that were identified in our election platform. I would like to remind members of those priorities.
[Page 208]
We will initiate a multi-year program to make university education more affordable to our students; extend the public class size reductions up to and including Grade 6; introduce vocational and composite programming in our high schools; provide more support for ESL, English as a Second Language; increase investments in public school and university infrastructure on a needs basis; begin consultation on the second phase of the Nova Scotia Community College's growth plan; extend the province's tuition support program to three years; expand the number of international baccalaureate sites; continue to act upon the conclusions of the Black Learners Advisory Committee Report; expand the Skills Nova Scotia Framework to address the looming skills shortage in this province; ensure community welfare and student benefits are legislated criteria for school boards when they consider the future of schools with declining enrolments; review the bus transportation criteria to ensure young children are not walking too far or in unsafe conditions to their schools; make physical education a mandatory high school credit; and eliminate the need for not-for-profit groups and organizations to buy insurance when they use school buildings for recreational and community events.
These were the priorities identified in our platform and we, as a government, are committed to those priorities.
While spending per student is a useful benchmark, it should not be the only benchmark for assessing the quality of education. Per-student spending in Nova Scotia may lag behind some other provinces, but it's important to note that our pupil/teacher ratio matches the national average. Our province has a well-qualified and dedicated team of teachers who are making commitments to their students every day. They are the front-line educators who make a difference in the lives of thousands of students across this province. I'm proud of the contribution that they are making.
This concludes the introduction to the budget estimates. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are ready for the questions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Chebucto.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, try Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. CHAIRMAN: My apologies. The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: I'm the better looking, more athletic one. Thank you, that's okay, Mr. Chairman, not a problem.
Thank you for your introductory comments, Madam Minister. I want to welcome to the historic Chamber some familiar faces. Of course, across the way, not that I always
[Page 209]
agreed with them, but let me tell you, there's no one more accountable in this province than Dennis Cochrane. He's always available. At times, I think, maybe the media thinks he's too available. It has been a pleasure working with the people in your staff, Madam Minister, and I look forward to a continued positive relationship when it comes to some of the important things that we deal with in Education. My compliments to you, Madam Minister, on a 13-day learning slope, and I meant, like, you're going up the scope, and I know where you're coming from in that particular vocation.
Many of my comments, of course, as probably one of your predecessors tell you, comes from my own experience, or from people I hear from. I have heard from some people, I've heard from Grace Rogers, who recently retired as the librarian at Sir John A. Macdonald High School. I'm going to bring a few of Grace's comments to you. I've heard from Jim MacFarlane, who was the principal at Fairview Junior High, and he wants me to bring some of his concerns to your attention. But since you've become the minister, I would assume that you have heard from some of your colleagues in schools you've worked with in the past. I'm wondering, these people whom you've worked with in previous positions during your career, what have they been asking you to put as a top priority as the Minister of Education?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, when teachers and principals and parents are talking to me about education, their one request is that any and all supports are there to serve the needs of all students through all grades, and if we err on the side of the students, we cannot be faulted.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Well, I can't say that I have that consistency because, as we well know as people who have taught in this school system, everybody has strong opinions on something. When it comes to certain issues, they are going to make sure when issues are brought forward, whether publicly by their MLA or the critic for a particular responsibility, I think it's always incumbent upon us to make sure we are there to bring forward certain concerns.
I'd like to begin with an issue that's of major concern to many of my colleagues, to some teachers in my community of Timberlea-Prospect and, I would say, probably across the province - a concern that resonates from classroom teachers from one end of the province to the other - and that is the growing violence in our schools. Violence in our schools that results in the fact that on certain occasions, for various reasons, there have to be students who end up being suspended from school and they have the privilege of attending their school removed from them for a period of time.
This had been an escalating problem. It has been a concern that educators, vice-principals, principals, guidance counsellors, parents and many Grade 12 students point out the fact there is a growing trend within our schools that more and more problems are solved in a violent manner by students enrolled in the school system.
[Page 210]
In November of last year, in fact November 11, 2005, Amy Smith, the provincial reporter for The ChronicleHerald, covered the release of some statistics that the researcher for the NDP, Lorraine Glendenning, had very conscientiously gone about collecting from the boards around this province. Ms. Glendenning, recently coming here from Ireland, she got her induction by fire when I said to her after she received the job, the first task I'd like to know is, how many students are suspended around this province?
I thought it was a pretty simple question. I thought you called the Department of Education up and asked, what are the statistics? Tell me who has been suspended, for what reasons, how many times?
[2:15 p.m.]
That just didn't happen. Ms. Glendenning called me back about two days later and said, this is an impossible task. There is a complete lack of consistency across this province and no matter what the minister is saying about tracking results, there is no such thing underway in this province.
So here we have very anecdotal comments about violence in our schools, but we don't have the statistical results to say how many students have been suspended for what reason, over what duration of time. So, of course, the press release was issued, the numbers were eventually gathered and, to Ms. Glendenning's credit, she did eventually track down the huge majority of numbers.
But in the report Ms. Smith brought forward in The ChronicleHerald on November 11th, the headline says: Muir questions NDP figures. I'm going to quote from it - and I can table this document if you're interested: Education Minister Jamie Muir is questioning NDP figures on student suspensions, but the minister isn't offering up any numbers of his own.
So as someone with 13 days on the job, can you tell me about the tracking of suspension numbers? When will we ever be able to get a real handle on suspension numbers from one end of this province to the other?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. Recognizing student violence and bullying and inappropriate behaviour in schools is stressful to teachers, there's no denying that, and what school boards are looking to do with the support of the department is to gather these statistics you speak of and to look at putting in place some initiatives that will help better track that.
For example, we are currently looking at a student information system which will do that. It will track the number of incidents in a school, the number of times, for example, that a student is sent to the office, the nature of the infraction, and the outcome
[Page 211]
of that. That information will be readily available and it will be on a provincial system for tracking. That is not in the short term, but that is in the plan, and schools will be in-serviced and administrators and guidance counsellors will be in-serviced as to how they follow through with that tracking system and what they record and how it's recorded. So we recognize that the safety of our teachers and our students is a concern, and we'll be working with the boards to try to address that.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, that response isn't what I'm looking for. I've heard this thing before from your predecessors. We all hear of the anecdotal comments, the subjective analyses, and I will tell you there's a lack of consistency from one end of this province to the other when it comes to what is inappropriate action or inappropriate language for length of suspensions in what particular board or what particular school.
This isn't rocket science. What's wrong with having the numbers centralized in the department? Why does one researcher for one political Party have to take almost five weeks of her new life in Canada, as she comes in from Ireland, that she's working for the NDP caucus doing work that basically should be in the Trade Mart Building and should be there and be ready to be analyzed? That doesn't seem to be rocket science to me. I mean, it takes a phone call to a particular CEO or superintendent saying, we need these numbers, how are you tracking them? What are you, at this stage, looking at when it comes to consistency, because as we well know it differs from one school to another school; it differs from one board to another board.
I heard your answer - it will be looked at, it will be tracked. How long will this take, because if we have the problem in our school system and if we have the problem which we believe we have when it comes to out-of-control children who are taking a disproportionate amount of time, what's the problem with getting the numbers together to conclusively prove, yes, in certain boards, in certain schools, there are issues?
I can tell the minister opposite, and I think your staff will tell you too, there are school principals who are pretty devious, and I'll use that term, devious - when I'm in the Legislature, I guess I could say such a thing - they're pretty devious when it comes to the fact, and they say, oh, we don't suspend anybody in our school. No, there hasn't been anybody suspended. Well, I mean, they're misbehaving teenagers, if you're in a junior high school, in particular, what do you mean, they're not being suspended? Do they have in-school suspensions? Oh, well, yes, we have in-school suspensions; oh, yes, but we provide homework for them. So you suspend students.
That lack of consistency from school to school and board to board is a glaring error. I know we're just starting off this hour, but I'm basically quite sick and tired of saying the tracking will take place. The tracking should have taken place, and it should
[Page 212]
be taking place now. Can you give me any specific guidelines when we could be looking forward to receiving the specifics of this information?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, a couple of points. Three years ago there was a code of student conduct that was developed provincially and provided to all school boards to be implemented, and that code of student conduct does address some of those inappropriate behaviours. More specific to the tracking, we have a commitment in our budget this year of $415,000 to work towards developing that student information system so that those kinds of statistics can be recorded, and administrators in the boards can respond to those inappropriate behaviours. It takes a bit of time to develop that. Time is of the essence, we recognize that. We also recognize that this is a concern all across Canada. Many provinces have looked at implementing an eight- to 10-year plan, and we have begun, this year, with that initial investment of $415,000.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Well, I'll leave that topic. I know that particular teacher asked me to bring that concern forward. The principal of Fairview Junior High was always concerned that there were certain schools in the province that did a very studious, conscientious job in collecting these numbers. We were always asked to move them on to a board level, but they sort of disappeared into this bottomless pit at the Halifax Regional School Board and we never knew where they ended up.
I want to turn to another topic - standardized testing. It is a philosophical question, and it is one, of course, that I think we have differences of opinion on but let's get it on the record right here. There is a need in this province for standardized testing. It is an important component when it comes to having students, as they move on to the next, secondary, post-secondary level of education, there is a role for standardized testing.
I wonder if the new minister could outline for us - and I'm not going to give her a free-wheel here - what she thinks about the current standardized testing process, particularly with Grade 12 math, in our high schools across this province.
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. I did mention in my introduction, but I will elaborate a little bit more, that we are looking at testing math and literacy at the Grades 3, 6 and 9 levels. This will be an assessment that is developed by our Nova Scotia teachers, based on our Nova Scotia curriculum, and we will be collecting that data and using that assessment data to track success and progress. If there are areas that appear not to be showing the progress we want, the assessment is detailed enough that we can bore down into that and determine what particular strand, in either math or language arts, needs further assessment.
[Page 213]
So we are very proud of that assessment tool and the one component we would emphasize is the monitoring and evaluating of that assessment tool, so that we do have it for comparison purposes and we do have it for program building to address the areas that may not be progressing as quickly as we would like it to be.
With respect to the Grade 12 math exam - and I'm sure there has been lots of discussion in the House about that - again, we're looking at that math assessment by a comparison basis, so that every student in Nova Scotia, when they leave Grade 12, will be going into whatever post-secondary training program they can go into, having achieved or been exposed to the same curriculum and been successful with the same curriculum all across the province. So that is, I think, addressing the standardized component of the assessment.
MR. ESTABROOKS: So I can take it from your comments that you are generally satisfied with the process when it comes to standardized testing in this province.
I want to bring a concern forward, and I want to use this math teacher's example - again, it's one of the schools in my constituency. I can say there are many Grade 12 math teachers who are not impressed with the process. They are not impressed with the input they have, they are not impressed with the fact of how they are called upon - as they say so often to me, teaching Grade 12 math is like being on a conveyor belt, you just never stop. Of course when it comes down to if you are in a semestered school and you happen to miss two days of school because of winter weather or for whatever other reason - winter weather is usually the big problem - you are missing a huge amount of time and that conveyor belt, called Grade 12 math, has put these teachers in very stressful situations and it has put the students in very stressful situations.
I want to ask a rather specific question, and I appreciate the fact that you might not have this here with you, but one of the lines in every budget comes down to markers' fees. That is, after all, when it comes to the marking of evaluations for whatever courses or whatever standardized tests. I don't expect you to have this number right at hand but that breakdown of markers' fees was something that I would be interested in. When we look at the Grade 12 evaluation of those standardized tests, I fully question whether we are getting the best bang for our buck when it comes to these exams.
Exactly, can you provide for me at some time - perhaps not today, I understand that - can you provide a breakdown of the markers' fees by standardized tests? How much did it cost to mark the Grade 12 math exams? How much did it cost to mark the Grade 12 math exams? How much did it cost to mark the literacy test for Grade 6? There are many teachers who are questioning the fact - we're talking about limited dollars all the time, but are we really getting a good bang for our buck when it comes to standardized testing and the markers' fees?
[Page 214]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, one part of your question, I will suggest to you that we do not have the detail as to the number of markers per standardized test and the cost for that, but we can certainly make that available. However, I would want to suggest to you that not all math assessments, for example, are marked centrally, they are marked by teachers in individual boards. A random selection of those would be submitted to the department for marking here. So the marking budget that you're looking at, I think you need to understand that it's not every math exam being marked by a set of markers at the department. We do have teachers who do mark those exams in their own schools. As far as the detail as to what the costs are per standardized test, we will provide that for you once that's made available, no problem.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I want to go back to the Grade 12 math results, in particular. It seems to me that there's a growing lag of when we get the information. The students write the exams, and the teachers are marking a portion of the exams, they're then moving the results on for analysis at whatever board or at the department level. There's a great, huge amount of pressure on these teachers to have that material submitted and get it in as soon as possible. Then it seems we wait forever to get the results back.
In some situations, particularly in a semestered school, a teacher is teaching a particular subject, and I keep coming to math because it is that lightning rod course, it always seems, when results come out, if we come back to the semestered system and we look at, well, how did they actually do - and I've used this example a number of times with staff at the department - if there's a problem with the quadratic equation question on the standardized Grade 12 math exam, then let's deal with that problem. Let's deal with the teachers, let's deal with the problem, looking at the students - why aren't they getting Question 38 which is on quadratic equations? By the time that next exam comes out, we don't even have the results yet.
[2:30 p.m.]
Now, I could be wrong with this, but the time lag of last January's semestered results, we don't have those yet. We don't have - we, I don't need them, my daughters, thank God they had their mother's brains, endured Grade 12 math and moved on to other things. The teachers, the parents, they're not aware of the semestered results of the January exams. What takes so long? The teachers are under the gun, if I can use that expression, to get the results in, make sure they get into the department, make sure they're the board through the department, make sure that they're there, that we can have these results done as quickly as possible. Then it takes forever for the results to be brought back forward to the eye of the public, when we can look at what are the results.
Now, last January, we had a semestered school system finish. We still don't have the results, and the question is why not? Are they being held back? The obvious question
[Page 215]
is are they so bad that we don't want to admit them; or, on the other hand, heaven forbid we're negative, we are looking at the fact that these exam results are so good that we should make them known to the students, we should be complimenting the students and complimenting the teachers? But now we have nothing. The Grade 12 semestered exam results from January, where are they, and why does it always take so long to get the results?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I think I mentioned this earlier, but the exams that are prepared by Nova Scotia teachers based on Nova Scotia curriculum for Nova Scotia students are marked by Nova Scotia teachers, and teachers have those results immediately. Those results can and will be shared with parents as the teacher and the school deem fit. What happens with the samples that are pulled in here and which become part of the minister's report, if you're speaking about the delay in getting that information, that's one issue, but if you're speaking about the delay in teachers knowing what areas of the exam provided some difficulty for students, that information is known immediately when the teachers do the marking of the exam. Most teachers, I believe all teachers, would take that as information that they could use to go back and revisit some areas of the curriculum that may need more attention.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, the teachers are always interested in comparing how their students do with other students and other schools. They're intrigued with the fact, if I can use the quadratic equation example again - and heaven forbid I had to teach anybody anything about quadratic equations - but the teacher is saying my students don't do well on quadratic equations, what's it like in the rest of the province? I understand the marks are going back, but at one time, with a previous minister twice removed, if I can put it that way, it sounds like a family relation, I believe it was Miss Purves, was always very accountable when it came to getting the results out. We haven't seen these results, and more and more people are looking at the fact, well, by the time they eventually come out, what is actually going to be the result?
This time I want to bring the concern up of an ex-student of mine who is old enough to admit that he has a daughter that I also taught in school, so I guess if we do the math I'm getting there. I want to talk about a wonderful little girl who graduated from Brookside Junior High School named Laura Boutilier. Laura Boutilier, the daughter of Mike and Julia Boutilier, is attending the University of Maine for a B.Ed. She has to go out of this province and out of this country to get an education degree. There are some students who are saying, you know, there are some extra dollars and it's tucked away in the northern woods of Maine, which makes it an advantage or a disadvantage for a father concerned about his daughter being away from home for the first time. The concern is, they can go to the University of Maine and get a B.Ed. quicker and probably with a lot more efficiency than they can with the current two-year B.Ed. program that I'm talking about within our province.
[Page 216]
Can the minister offer some guidance and leadership on this issue? Why is it necessary for kids who want to be teachers in the Province of Nova Scotia to have to go to the University of Maine to get their degrees when, surely, there are within this province, based on the universities that we have, ample opportunities here? I know we can talk about the numbers, but it seems to me, really a shame that kids, young kids like Laura Boutilier - incidentally, she's going to be a math teacher, probably with French immersion, she can probably pick her spot, she has probably been hired, as I speak, but she could not get accepted here. She has a B.A. from Mount Saint Vincent University, because of numbers, the limited number of people available, she has had to go to the University of Maine. In my
view, that has to stop.
Kids in this province should be educated within our universities. They might go over the Tantramar Marshes to go to a fabulous university there, but I'm looking at the fact that they're going out of our country, going out of our country to get a B.Ed. I'm wondering, does the minister agree with me that, really, B.Ed. students attending the University of Maine should stop? Perhaps our universities here should look at expanding the program; perhaps, further, we should have a one-year B.Ed., 12-month program.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, teacher training, I guess, is something that's kind of near and dear to my heart. I would expect that during the time as minister it will be something that will be under review. I will suggest to you, I've just been advised that discussions did take place between our department and universities, looking at a reduced B.Ed. program so that the situation you're sharing would not or did not have to happen. It's my understanding that the universities did not support that. So I guess my answer to you is, it has been raised before and it will be discussed in the future.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I'm pleased to see that. I can point to my colleagues from Cape Breton - I know the member for Cape Breton Centre has a son who graduated from Acadia with an education degree, and his daughter graduated last year from Cape Breton University and she is going to the University of Maine. She's enrolled in the University of Maine and I'm sure she will receive some good training there, and she will be a fine teacher when the time comes with the training she's going to receive.
I'm aware of the fact that at Cape Breton University there is this agreement with Memorial University - and I'm aware of some of the complexities of it, but I'd rather not go into that. We're always looking at boosting our universities, we're looking at the fact that we're going to have a teacher shortage for whatever reasons - mainly because we're retiring because of age - something progressive has to take place here.
An obvious place for a teacher training institution would be at Cape Breton University; it would be an ideal location. It would be an institution that would benefit
[Page 217]
from the program and furthermore there would be students from across the Island and the province, probably across the region, who would decide they want a B.Ed. and they're going to go to Cape Breton to get it. I urge the minister to take a leadership role on that particular issue.
Now, I'm going to turn to school librarians. They're like dinosaurs. My old friend and colleague from years ago - who, incidentally, was a teacher during the days when the young member for Queens was a student at this high school - Grace Rogers has retired. Using her words: It's like being put out to pasture. Now we no longer have librarians; in fact, I could get specific and ask how many actual school librarians we have in this province. How many school librarians do we have - teacher librarians, not library techs, not library assistants - how many school librarians do we have in this province?
MS. CASEY: In my introductory remarks, I did mention the support to our school libraries and the positions in the form of library technicians. In answer directly to your question, school boards are putting library technicians and library assistants in their libraries in place of, or in lieu of, librarians. The numbers of librarians who currently are in our schools would be very, very few.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Well, I'll throw out the number three, and now that Ms. Rogers has retired from Sir John A., I guess we're down to two librarians. Yet, we're going to talk literacy, the focal point of a school, we're going to talk about books and having them available to students, we're going to talk about all those wonderful things, but the person I always relied upon many years ago in the high school that I attended, and as a classroom teacher the person I always sent my students to is the librarian - we're going to the library with a particular topic of the week that is this, that, or whatever, and the school librarian is going to be of huge assistance to us. I think it is a regressive step. Library techs do their job, they do it well, but a school librarian has always been and should always be a vital part of the academic growth of any school.
I want to turn to guidance counsellors because I have a number of friends still in the teaching profession, one in particular, Bonnie Steeves, who is a fabulous guidance counsellor in a junior high, as is Sue Hannem, a guidance counsellor at Tantallon Junior High. They've brought this concern to my attention - and I know you can say the board should be handling that, but I think there should be designated dollars to say there should be guidance counsellors in elementary schools.
I believe that in junior highs, guidance counsellors play a crucial role, and of course in high school, as they prepare students for post-secondary institutions, they also play a very important role. But a guidance counsellor in an elementary school deals with hugely personal issues, and maybe in the days when we went to school there wasn't a need to have a guidance counsellor in an elementary school. I'm sure with the size of some smaller elementary schools, guidance counsellors might be shared between a
[Page 218]
number of schools. I believe, and I'm wondering if the minister would comment on this, that there is a need for designated dollars to make sure that guidance counsellors are not a phenomenon that suddenly starts in Grade 7, or middle schools in Grade 6, but there should also be guidance in elementary schools. I'm wondering, could you share your thoughts with me on that topic?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the concern that you've raised about guidance counsellors in our schools was also raised by principals at a most recent conference where the department listened to what principals were saying about the needs and the concerns in their schools. One of those needs and concerns that was raised was directly related to the number of guidance counsellors, and the ratio of guidance counsellors to students. So the department listened to that, and reacted to that. In the budget, you would see, you will check a line, there is a $500,000 commitment, the first time that that commitment has been made directly to support for guidance counsellors. That money will go to the boards to be used for guidance support, and it would be at the discretion of the board where the needs are within their board. It is the first of many instalments to bring that guidance counsellor/student ratio up to an acceptable standard.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I point out to the minister opposite, those are provincial dollars. You should have a direct influence on where those dollars are spent. You should have a direct influence of saying, well, you can use that with guidance. I'm saying that it should be designated to be dealing within elementary schools, because elementary school children, these days, have a whole different set of circumstances, issues that perhaps when we were in school were delayed for various reasons until junior high or even high school.
There are now students at the elementary level who are coming to the classrooms across this province with issues, huge issues, and if you are going to expect a classroom teacher to refer somebody in his or her school to someone with advice when it comes to some personal counselling, opening a door with whatever kind of psychological help for whatever reason, I mean, that's the role of a guidance counsellor. In the school system I worked in, there was always that delay but the matter got addressed, in the meantime, on the ground in your school, you had a guidance counsellor who would deal with the issues.
[2:45 p.m.]
On the topic of personal issues, I know that teen health centres are an important and vital service now provided in our schools. The issue that I point out is, teen health centres shouldn't just be in high schools. In fact, I could be corrected on this matter, I have been corrected in the past, there is a teen health centre in one junior high, Ridgecliff junior high, in the community of Beechville, which services Beechville-Lakeside-Timberlea, one teen health centre in one junior high. Now, it says to me that when it
[Page 219]
comes to many of the issues that people who are dealing with teen health, teen sexuality and many other issues with young people across this province, we should have teen health centres in every junior high. They are important in high school, but in every junior high there should be teen health centres. So I need a guarantee that the funding will be in place in Ridgecliff.
I recently attended a fundraiser for the teen health centre in Ridgecliff. At that time there were four volunteers in our community who were recognized. We had a beautiful meal and an auction, the auctioneer, of course, was a very good auctioneer and actually made some money for the group. Here we are funding a teen health centre in a growing community, in Beechville-Lakeside-Timberlea at Ridgecliff junior high because we're having an auction in the school, we're having a fundraising dinner, and we're recognizing volunteers in the community. So I think it's of real consequence that this government and future governments commit to the fact that dollars should be made available for teen health centres, teen health centres in junior highs, because that's a huge gap.
I know that the previous minister, at times, was taken aback when, on occasion, I would call junior highs a "curriculum wasteland", because it seems to me that there's a lack of leadership, for one reason or another. All the glory goes to the elementary kids, everybody loves elementary teachers. When you're in high school, of course, the lights are at the end of the tunnel, and aren't they great they're going out the door, but you really earn your stripes as a junior high teacher. You really earn your stripes because of the various issues that take place among the young men and women at that age, so I want the minister to comment on the need for teen health centres in junior high schools.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only teen health centre in this province is located at Ridgecliff Middle School in the community of Beechville-Lakeside- Timberlea.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. I couldn't agree with you more that teen health centres are a critical part of all of our high schools and should be a part of all of our junior high schools, and that is certainly a goal that we're working toward. Teen health centres are the result of a partnership with both Health and Health Promotion and Protection, and quite often with the communities. We are quite anxious to work with those partners to make sure that we extend that service, as funds permit, to include all junior/senior high schools. High schools that are combinations of Grades 7 to 12 schools now that have teen health centres would have access to that centre by junior high students.
We recognize the need, we recognize the partnership and the funding that comes with it. When we're building schools the Department of Education provides the spaces and the facilities or the renovations of a space or a facility to accommodate that health
[Page 220]
centre, so it truly is a partnership. Is it enough? Not yet, but we certainly have a goal to reach that.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I thank the minister for that reply - that's encouraging. I encourage other MLAs that when the time arises this Fall and we need a break from the routine of this House, come out to Ridgecliff and see the teen health centre and see how important it is and how vital it is to that school. It's really the area of the school where students feel comfortable dropping in, speaking to the teen health people who are working there, and it's a vital part of that school and it's a success model that hopefully will be followed in others.
Now, the minister and I will be differing on various things - and the previous minister and I, I think, agreed on this topic, but I'm going to throw it out there because nothing absolutely drives me to distraction more than the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies review of high schools across this province. Mr. Cirtwell - you might know of his wife, she was a recent candidate in a local election (Interruption) She didn't do that well unfortunately, I don't know if you followed the results or not, but she ran a good campaign, a lot of money was spent - Mr. Cirtwell is the spokesman for the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies and once a year they receive huge publicity as they rank the high schools across this province.
There is nothing more divisive, there is nothing more negative, in my opinion, when that ranking comes out. It makes no sense; they don't rank the high schools according to enrolment, they don't rank the high schools whether it's a Grades 7 to 12 school or a Primary to 12 school, they rank the school by never going to the school - think about that - you're going to rank schools across this province, yet you never stood a foot in any of the schools, and you receive all this publicity, you've ranked them for this reason and that reason and, incidentally, in the last report he wasn't too pleased with some of the responses that he received from the Department of Education, particularly when it came to discipline statistics because they weren't available.
I want to know what the minister thinks of the yearly AIMS report, because basically I'm just sick of their free publicity. I think it's a really negative, divisive tool pitting one community against another community, pitting one school against another school - but I'm waiting to see what the minister thinks of the yearly AIMS publicity stunt.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The report from the AIMS group certainly raises a lot of controversy every time it's published, and probably some of the most anxiety is amongst the teachers and the schools that are in that ranking list. Because of that negativity to ranking, you'll not find that our department does that and we do not support the AIMS approach to ranking schools, so I think we agree on something else.
[Page 221]
MR. ESTABROOKS: You know, I will share with the members present who I think, and what schools I think, high schools, schools I've been in, and I want to share with members opposite - I know that one member in particular is always intrigued when he stands in his place and starts to talk about the Cobequid Cougars, but let me tell you, you go into CEC, you go into Parkview, you go into those schools and you see the traditions and the banners and the musicals and the community influence, those aren't things you can measure. Those are things you have to feel. Those are athletic accomplishments, they are academic accomplishments, they are musical and drama accomplishments. That's how you rank schools.
If it's necessary to rank them, you look at the schools and how well they've done, or perhaps how, in some cases, they haven't done so well, but I think it's really a divisive report. It's not something you know - I know that members opposite at times think there's not a microphone or a TV camera that I don't like, but when the AIMS report comes out, I'm not interested in talking about it. It's a waste of time.
I see the previous minister with a smirk on his face. Take me up on that, I guarantee you won't see me commenting on the AIMS report. Not because of Mr. Cirtwell's involvement. I've given him advice, a number of years, to at least go out and see the schools, to at least walk into that gymnasium at CEC and realize, how can you not rank that school in the top five in this province? How can you not rank it there? If you look at the number of university students, or at the number of people who move on to whatever institution, and that's the mark of success of a school, that's not true. One of the categories is how many of them move on to post-secondary institutions, and how well they do as they move through their school career. That's just not the way you rank schools.
Schools are many other things, they serve an important role in our communities, teachers take it personally, and they're just downright unfair. Anyway, enough of that rant. It has been said, again, good luck, Mr. Cirtwell, and not necessarily in the next election.
I want to turn my attention, if I can, to an alarming trend in this province called the growing number of private schools. I think it's alarming, to be quite truthful with the minister. It's alarming because it's a growth industry which, for some reason, is a reflection on the fact that the public school system is unable to deliver - particularly when it comes to high-needs students - the service that parents want for these children. I'm very pleased to hear, and I've supported it before when the tuition support system went from two to three years. I know that I've had a number of friends who have set up private schools for various reasons, and their enrolment, they just keep turning people away.
In September, when enrolments come in for private schools, particularly at the elementary-age level, Primary to Grade 5, Primary to Grade 6, you will see that it is a
[Page 222]
growth industry that is, unfortunately, not a real great endorsement of the public school system in this province. I can use the example of a fellow Mount Allisonian who was concerned when his little girl headed off to the school, who believed that probably the best place for her to attend would be the Crossroads Academy in Tantallon. Private school, very well run by those teachers because the enrolments are low; in most classes, they are 12 or under. A huge advantage, if you can afford it, when it comes to private schools, particularly at the elementary level.
So I'm interested in the minister's view on my comments as to whether she is alarmed with the growing number of private schools. Maybe it's just my perspective, I don't know, across the province, the number of private schools. I do know in the community I represent, there are more and more students who are attending private schools. They're attending private schools for the reason of enrolment, but they're also attending private schools because perhaps this young man or young woman is a high-needs student who needs more attention than the regular classroom and the regular classroom teacher - through no fault of his or her own - can offer, but that these young men and young women attend private schools.
I can mention the Halifax Christian Academy in Timberlea, the Crossroads Academy in Tantallon. There is a private school on the Hammonds Plains Road, its name escapes me. There are, of course, the various institutions within the HRM. The Churchill Academy, in particular. They are turning students away. It's a trend that's an unfortunate one and it's really a comment on the fact that across this province, or at least across this region, we are unable to deliver the service that parents expect and therefore they're opting to send their sons and daughters to private schools.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. People use a variety of reasons for why they might choose a private school and that choice is theirs, those decisions are theirs; however, as Minister of Education, as a teacher in the public school system for a lot of years, I continue to be very proud of . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: We don't know how many years.
MS. CASEY: That's right, I didn't tell you that, did I? I started when I was 10, okay?
To get back to the question - a lot of parents make decisions to send their students to private schools for a variety of reasons, those are their personal reasons, but my experience in public education as a teacher, as a supervisor, and as a parent, is that we do have a good quality program, our teachers are second to none, and we will continue to put money into our public schools to make sure that quality of education continues to be delivered.
[Page 223]
You spoke about class sizes, and that's one of the areas that we've addressed, and one of the commitments in the election platform is to look at capping class sizes so that we do have reasonable numbers in those elementary grades, for pupil/teacher ratio there to be something that is workable. If people want to make those choices, that is their choice, but I'm not convinced it's because the quality of education in public schools is not good.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Well, that's a topic we can have at another time - not just our respective ages, but I started teaching school when I was 14, incidentally.
There's another school in this province that has been suddenly put under the microscope, and it has been working for a long time in a great way. Classroom teachers are always saying about the Memorial example in North Sydney, what a wonderful school that is and the programs that they're offering, particularly when it comes to the flexibility in programming, but why was it only at Memorial? How come it was only allowed to continue to survive there? When we look across this province, and under a previous government of a different stripe - I remember some of those days, although I won't go back into Mr. Harrison's days in particular - but let me tell you, the Memorial example in North Sydney is a wonderful one. It's one that we have to continue; it's one that we have to spread across this province.
[3:00 p.m.]
When I attended the Truro conference at CEC, I know I could sense when I attended that O2 part of the conference - and if there are people present who aren't aware of the O2, they're breathing new life into the school system, I'll put it that way - that O2 program is a great direction, it's one that I fully support, but it's like reinventing the wheel, every once in a while in the school system they seem to say that's not working, we have to change all of that.
I want to point out for an example some of the most prominent graduates of the communities that I represent. Coastal Restoration. Coastal Restoration operates out of beautiful downtown West Dover, and the two young men who run Coastal Restoration, Bryce and Blaine Morash, graduated from the Grade 9 program at Sir John A. Macdonald and they went on from there to vocational school and they came out with a trade - a bricklaying trade - and now when you see Coastal Restoration and how they are repairing these historic buildings around this province, two very successful men who have worked hard their whole lives, employed many people in the communities that I represent, and they are particular graduates of a program that has worked so well.
My issue, of course, comes down to the fact that Memorial is a good place to have it, but we should have it in Isle Madame, because there are examples in Isle Madame where the fishing industry could be benefiting from examples such as there are
[Page 224]
in that community in Richmond, and we should be doing it in other parts of our province. We should be having the O2 program breathing life into schools around this province. So my compliments to the previous minister and to the department, but let's not wait too long - let's make it work. We know it works, teachers know it works, let's make it happen.
That's a success story, and now I've got a negative one - it must be my nature as an Opposition member. Ridgecliff Middle School is one very difficult school to get into for community use. Ridgecliff school, the school I mentioned earlier in the community of Beechville, is a P3 school under a previous government. Wasn't that an experiment we all want to forget? Well, each year the Beechville community hosts an annual basketball tournament. In the second week of August, they wanted the opportunity to be able to get into Ridgecliff school to use the facility. The answer, no, not available this summer because of the cleaning schedule at this P3 school.
I've heard the minister talk about this and I know my time is quickly going by, because I can go on about this forever. P3 schools, public schools, the private partnership, access to the schools - there are other examples around the province that I hear aren't working too well, but when we deal with the P3 group that runs schools in the HRM, it is very difficult to get into their schools. If they do let you in, they charge you an arm and a leg.
So here's a community, an historic community of Beechville, that wants to have an event scheduled in this school, their school, up on the hill in Beechville Estates just above the historic community of Beechville. The kids from Lakeside and Timberlea also go there. The answer is, no, you can't get in. What do you mean, no, you can't get in? It's a school in our system. We should be allowed to get into these schools, they should be allowed to be in there for free. It's a non-profit organization. It is a community group that has deep, deep roots in the community of Beechville. But they not only can't get in with a cost, they've just been told to go away.
Now, I've put up with this for a number of years, minister. I have heard that we're going to allow non-profit groups, seniors, young people and soccer groups to get access to schools across this province. This summer it's not happening in my community again. It's not happening again. Basically, the communities that are served by P3 schools in particular are sick and tired of it.
I'm wondering if you could be of some assistance to the community of Beechville, Lakeside and Timberlea on this important issue.
MS. CASEY: P3 schools have provided our communities with beautiful facilities. They have, however, taken away some of the responsibility and direction from the department because they are private developers. What I would encourage communities
[Page 225]
to do through their principal to the private developer is to look at more workable schedules for cleaning so that community concerns and community events and community activities can be accommodated in those schools.
There are certainly agreements with the developer that have to be acknowledged and we would encourage people to look at ways to open those schools at more convenient times for some of those summer activities that do involve community and are important to community.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I appreciate the fact that this is that steep learning curve we're talking about. I know we can talk further to the minister on this topic and I know staff is involved in these negotiations. That's a disappointing answer. I understand - I hope you don't take this personally - there are a lot of complexities there and these developers have to be put in their place. They have to be put in their place. We're running the school system in this province, not a developer. I don't want to pursue it because it just drives me crazy with the fact that these are beautiful schools and we can't get in them.
Let's move on. Let's go to something else here. September will soon be here, of course, quicker than we've ever seen as provincial legislators. You'll see the headlines, school fees, away we go on school fees. They will do this potpourri as we go from school to school, what is involved in this school, yearbooks cost so much in this school, lockers cost so much in this school. We'll all look at it and say, that shouldn't be the way we charge kids to go to school. They'll have to buy school agendas in some schools. It's like a smorgasbord. You send the information home to the parents and in some situations - I want you to know that we talked about it at our caucus meeting recently - we want to be able to help students in our schools, or parents of students in our schools, who cannot afford these school fees.
Now we've heard it before, we have heard the concerns before. This September, is it going to be any more consistent across this province than it has been in the past? We are charging some kids in some situations for necessities. A yearbook is not a necessity. Maybe if you're graduating from Grade 12, yes, they want a yearbook. A yearbook is not a necessity. A locker is a necessity. A locker to get a kid organized, to know where they're going, to have them ready for the day is a necessity. Is it still necessary to charge kids for lockers? Is it still necessary to charge kids for lab fees? When my daughter was an arts student, the lab fees she faced over the years - she would come home and say to her mother, Mom, I need this amount of money for this particular trip we are going on, or I need this because I need new material in art, or I need new material in chemistry even though my lab fee for the second semester is so much.
We aren't talking about yearbooks here, we're talking about charging fees for necessities in the school system. Predictably, in September, staff will be preparing and
[Page 226]
I know you will be prepared to comment on this topic. It is a yearly, annual pain in the butt - if I can say that, excuse me, Mr. Chairman, usually you're listening - it's an annual pain in the rear end but let me tell you, sir, it's an issue that's not going to go away. I wonder if you are ready for September when you are asked to comment on school fees and the lack of consistency from one end of this province to the other.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, school fees fall into two categories, but we do have a policy and we will make sure that policy is enforced. That policy says that it will ensure that students are not charged for core curriculum activities. That would be your lab fees. What I would ask the minister opposite, if you find in September that a school is charging a lab fee, I would like you to let me know because lab fees are not to be charged, they are considered to be core curriculum activities.
A yearbook and athletic kinds of endeavours are school-related and school advisory councils are in place at every school. As part of their advisory capacity, they work with the administration at the school and have a lot of input, or should have a lot of input, into such things as yearbook and school trip fees and so on. There should not be and there will not be fees charged to students for curriculum-related activities.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Time has expired.
The honourable member for Kings West.
MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly welcome the minister for her first go-around on the estimates and I also welcome members from the Department of Education, and in particular, the deputy minister who I had a number of dealings with in my earlier critic role. I'm now back as the Liberal Critic for Education and am pleased to be there. However, I'm just getting up to speed on some of the more recent topics and concerns there.
I did pen a few notes to start off today. I'm certainly pleased to speak on the estimates on education. As a former educator for 30 years and vice-principal at West Kings High School in the Annapolis Valley, certainly the education system in a general fashion, and in particular in relation to that school, very much have a good feel for.
The education system in Nova Scotia employees thousands of people dedicated to the teaching of our students to provide a better future. This not only involves teachers but administrative assistants and staff members with various jobs. Our education system has the potential to be the best in Canada, but we must begin now to ensure that this is possible. Certainly when it comes to the national stage, it would be nice if I could stand here in my place today and say that on all of the national testing parameters we do have, Nova Scotia was back at least to a place somewhere in the middle when it came to standards measured across Canada. For a number of years now we have been at the
[Page 227]
bottom. We've been nine or 10 out of 10 provinces on much of the national testing programs that we are part of. So it would begin to see us start to climb again and reach our potential.
Our children deserve the best in education and we must provide this service to them and the only way to do this is to make certain the Department of Education is working correctly and funding is distributed to the appropriate places. That's why we're here today, Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased to see that the Public School Program will be receiving more money according to these estimates. This shows support for our teachers and staff. More money for our public schools means more educational services to our children, which we'll all benefit from.
Certainly as I've looked at the estimates over the last three years since I became a member, I would have to say that a lot of the increase, a high percentage of the increase, has actually gone to support the staffing in our schools. Much of that actual increase in the Education budget would reflect, in fact, the contractual agreements between the Nova Scotia Teachers Union and the province. I think the time has come to show that here is the exact dollar that's going towards and working to improve our classrooms.
The fact is, Mr. Chairman, now is a critical time in our education system and we must meet the challenges that we face head-on. One of my concerns is funding for children with special needs. Some children require more attention than others and it's up to government to make sure our schools are equipped with the right professionals for the job. I remember speaking with a school board member from the Strait Regional School Board earlier in the year and they were frantically trying to fill a position at a school for a language pathologist to aid children with specific speaking disorders. This particular school had the funding available but could not find someone to work there.
[3:15 p.m.]
Mr. Chairman, this is indeed a serious problem and we must address it and find a resolution to situations like these before they arise. We must ensure that more funding is provided to our post-secondary institutes and dedicated professionals in fields to help children in special education find employment. I believe we must fund programs for children with special needs and I strongly recommend the government review its policies regarding this matter and direct more money to this area. I would stop there for a moment, and once again relating a little bit to the member opposite, to talk about special needs, for a whole number of reasons we certainly now identify more students of special needs in our schools. Also the pre-Primary program will be another area in which we will be able to identify children who have special needs or high needs and again, hopefully, they will be addressed, and I'll have some specific questions to that as I go along.
[Page 228]
Another important topic that must be discussed, Mr. Chairman, is that of school closures. It's a shame when a school in a rural community must close its doors, leaving a town or village with no educational institute. I might add that this is not only happening in rural communities, but in large areas like the Halifax Regional Municipality.
Recently a member of this Legislature put forward a resolution regarding the closure of schools under the Halifax Regional School Board. So, as you can plainly see, this is not just a rural issue. Having said that, it seems that more often than not it is the rural communities suffering because of the closure of a school. This is causing distress in a number of areas, Mr. Chairman; for one, the children are denied the right to education at a school close to them. When a school closes, they must travel long distances by school bus to attend another school, a larger school. This also causes distress to many parents. Many parents will tell you that they do not want their children taking an hour or more bus trip to school. Often they must drive their children, causing them to spend even more money on their children's education.
The fact is that we must find a more viable solution to this problem. The government must invest in providing children with a suitable learning centre within reasonable distance of their homes. Closing the school is a difficult decision and I do not envy those who have to make that decision. Schools are not only educational institutes for our children but many times are, in fact, the community centre, the heart of the community. Activities and public events regularly take place at schools due to their size, very often location and historical use of the schools. The information highway is upon us more than ever; the Internet has replaced the telephone and it is rapidly becoming the most important and swift way to communicate and research. Many schools use their computer areas as public access domains for those who do not have computers at home. People pay a fee at the school and use their facilities, just as they would at an Internet Café in a more urban area.
Closure of a school can be necessary at times, but I believe we must look harder and find a resolution to this problem. On many occasions this could have been avoided and government has to work harder with school boards and their members to see that the closure of a school is the last possible resort to a situation.
This brings me to another point, Mr. Chairman. Almost two years ago we had completion of a government-funded report, the Hogg report as it is generally referred to, funding formula for the students and the school system in Nova Scotia. The Hogg report has been repeatedly supported by the Halifax Regional School Board. It can be a model for other school boards across the province. It certainly shows how to resolve some of the problems our schools face today, such as school closures. The Liberal caucus is also in full support of the implementations based on the Hogg report. I'm delighted to see that finally the government will be investing $5 million to implement the recommendations of the Hogg report.
[Page 229]
I wonder why, however, it has taken so long to implement these recommendations. This was completed almost two years ago. It shows a lack of action by the government and how little they believe in the future of our children. However, let me stress that with these recommendations our children will now have a better chance to receive the full benefits our education system has to offer.
Mr. Chairman, I would be failing to act as the Education Critic for the Liberal caucus if I did not bring up the next issue. The Pre-Primary Pilot Program is an excellent initiative that can help numerous children across the Province of Nova Scotia. I believe the government has done the right thing by initiating this project. However, I will start here to ask some specific questions and I will go back over some of the topics, themes I have alluded to as we move through the next hour.
First of all, Mr. Minister, did all 20 locations receive funding and go forward with the Pre-Primary Pilot Program?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, it is my understanding my staff have just indicated to me that there were originally 20 sites. One board did not take advantage of one of the sites that were identified, so we are funding the 19 sites that were agreed upon by the boards.
MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, I was also wondering, what was the cost of this pilot project for its first year?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, our quick math here gives us about $1.5 million for the 19 sites.
MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Minister. Are all of the school boards agreeing to second year with regard to the pre-Primary and also does it look at this point like the government is committed to this project for the long-term?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, we will be adding the second year in each one of those 19 sites. We will be monitoring the progress of those students who have moved from a pre-Primary into a Primary and that whole pilot will be assessed to determine the effectiveness of it. In answer to your question, yes, all 19 will be going into their second year and, yes, we will be monitoring and evaluating the pilot.
MR. GLAVINE: I'm pleased to hear that boards are going ahead with the second year.
There are a couple of issues in the local area where one of the pilots did take place this year and that was at Dwight Ross Elementary School in the Greenwood area.
[Page 230]
One of the concerns that I had raised at my office and also which I personally took note of was that - and being a strong believer in early childhood education and that education prior to school will help those who are disadvantaged by their socio-economic backgrounds - this program did not necessarily reach out to that group. It was once again parents who were very much aware of what was going on in the school system, who were perhaps subscribers to the local newspaper or who were in the circle of finding out about this program. In many ways it didn't reach down to that group and I'm wondering, especially at the pilot level, if there couldn't have been a more concerted effort to draw some of those children in. One of the reasons in the rural area was the inability to be able to transport the children to these sites.
I am a believer that this will become, and should become, a standard educational program across the province. During the pilot stages, addressing a couple of those concerns I think would be of real benefit to families and to children who could really benefit from the pre-Primary. So if you could just comment on those two areas, Madam Minister, it would be much appreciated.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, you're correct, transportation was not provided as part of those pre-Primaries. We understand that in some boards courtesy busing is allowing some students to have access to transportation to the schools for the pre-primary, however as part of this review and in consultation with Transport Canada we will be looking at if and how that transportation might be provided.
MR. GLAVINE: I'm just wondering, Madam Minister, have you had any first-hand contact with one of the pilots - what are you hearing generally that is being said about the Pre-Primary Pilot Program? In my area there have certainly been a good many positives - and one little negative that I will bring up after your response - I'm just wondering where you are in terms of familiarity at the personal and professional level?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. Perhaps on a semi-personal, professional level I have had an opportunity to visit one of the sites in the Brookdale, Cumberland County, area. I was there as part of facilitating a new school project and so during my visits to that school, as a follow-up after the school opened, I did have a chance to visit one of the pre-Primary classrooms that's being piloted there.
On a professional basis, I know the comments that are coming to our department from the screening kind of pre-registration clinics for students coming into Grade 5, that some positive comments are being made about the readiness of the students who have gone through the Pre-Primary Pilot Program as they begin to register and enter Primary. So those informal comments that are coming through to us are positive but, again, a more detailed assessment and response and reaction from the participants, whether it's parents or teachers, will be part of the assessment.
[Page 231]
MR. GLAVINE: I'm just going to follow with a couple of other questions here because I see this as an initiative that can make enormous, I think, positive gains for our students as they begin their Primary year and as they continue on through the school system. I'm wondering if there was a considerable amount of work put into, maybe not so much the curriculum but rather the development of the program for these children - is it somewhat of a carbon copy of a program that we have in Ontario? Is this very much based on early childhood recommendations here in the province, and at what stage of development of something fairly prescribed from the department is now in place?
[3:30 p.m.]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. It's my understanding that it was locally developed; it was developed at the Department of Education. It was developed by an educator who was on loan from Community Services to the Department of Education to develop that, and it is an activity-based program geared to the age groups of students at pre-Primary.
MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Minister, for that little overview or synopsis because I believe it's a critical piece as to what we do have in place for the children, of course a combination certainly of play and discovery and some prescription for a program, and certainly one that I think in year two will perhaps get a little bit more of a critique and so on from school boards.
One of the concerns that I did go to the superintendent of the Annapolis Valley District School Board with was the fact that there was a concentrated area that children were taken from, the four-year olds, and it had an impact on two local private nursery schools in our area - one closed after the year got started last year and a second one will close in the area this year. Now, we can always talk about the number of reasons perhaps as to why a private daycare, nursery school would close, but nevertheless the impact of taking the four-year olds out in a concentrated area did impact economically for the owners and deliverers of those nursery schools.
I'm just wondering, was there anything made at the department level this year as the second group of first-year children came into the pre-Primary, whether or not anything was designed to lessen its impact? It is my understanding that this happened in a few other areas as well.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the second year of the pilot is intended to use the same sites. We've put significant dollars into developing those sites, facilities and resources, in those spaces. So the second year of the pilot is to continue to use the investment that we made in the first year as far as facilities, equipment and resources. Therefore, it will be drawing from the same catchment areas.
[Page 232]
MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, another area - I guess I'll probably go through the cycle of schooling from pre-Primary to Grade 12 and on to university, as I make my remarks. Not necessarily because I'm always that sequential and logical in my approaches, but it seems like one of the things to do here. One of the areas that I had put my emphasis on and had meetings, a couple of meetings with the deputy in regard to this area, was the P to 3 breakfast program. I was certainly pleased to see government bring that program in.
I know last year was the first year when financial support was put in place across Nova Scotia, really to assist with a universal breakfast program. Again, I'm wondering if this was implemented across the province - there were supports that were provided to schools - I'm wondering, to what degree of implementation did that program receive last year?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the P to 3 breakfast program that's currently in place represents a $750,000 investment by the government, and that investment is in our budget for this year so that that program will continue. Health and Health Promotion and Protection, of course, are also involved with that, but Education's commitment is the same as last year, $750,000. That's working at the site with school advisory councils and other community staff, but it's the same financial commitment from our department.
MR. GLAVINE: I'm also wondering, Madam Minister, if some of that money is actually used to supply the food, produce, the perishables, or are schools and school boards having to make that commitment before the program is implemented? You did say that it is only partially implemented at this stage. Certainly, if there are some schools and school communities that are having difficulties with that part of implementing the program where they may not have a full year-long commitment for the food supply, I'm just wondering, where is the balance from the department's perspective?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the $750,000 is for the school boards to provide the foods, the materials. We did put in a $400,000 commitment to get facilities set up and to buy equipment initially, but the $750,000 is in addition to that. Again, it is working with partners in the community and maybe local suppliers, but that's to be worked out at the school board level. There's an expectation that the money that we give them, along with support from the community, will allow that initiative to be sustained.
MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, it's certainly a program that I think is long overdue to be in all of our schools. It's certainly one of the success stories in light of the challenges that many families have, and circumstances to deal with children. In my earlier time as the Education Critic, I heard from a number of people across the province and advocacy groups asking to see this take place. I guess the only other piece to ask at
[Page 233]
this stage is whether or not in schools that are P to 5, or that have any other additional grades associated with elementary schools, or whether it be the remaining years in our public school system, is there any kind of plan or support program around a breakfast program or a nutrition program?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the administration of that plan is now under the direction of the Office of Health Promotion and Protection, so perhaps the minister from that department may be able to provide that information, but they do administer that program now.
MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for that piece of information. Certainly we will pursue that there.
One of the real advances made over the last couple of years in the province has been the elementary cap from P to 2. I think for many of our schools, and certainly in talking with a number of administrators in my riding - I think there are six elementary schools and I have been in them all this year - they certainly applaud that initiative by the government. However, last year, and I brought this to the attention of the minister of the day, there were a number of classrooms by the end of September that had 27, 28, 29. There were actually about six such classes in the area.
Knowing that official enrolment figures do not have to be in until September 30th, most of our elementary schools in small-town rural areas have those numbers pretty well fixed and firm when school is shortly underway. I'm wondering if the onus is on the school board or are there directives from the ministry to make sure very early in the school year? Hopefully planning right now will allow for those classes to start the year and be staffed so that we don't have to wait until mid-October, as was the case with six classrooms that I'm familiar with in the riding last year. They had to pick up a new teacher and divide the students after five or six weeks in the school. I know it was at least six weeks and in a couple of cases a little longer, because you have to go through the hiring process.
I would like to know, are there stronger directives there from the ministry, to make sure that the cap is adhered to and that it's followed in all cases?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, it is my understanding that generally speaking across the province that was not an issue and not a concern , but that in your particular board, because of the makeup of the classes, the P-1, P-1, P-1 combinations, that did surface as a concern and our department did go in and provide additional money midway through the year to help resolve that. Hopefully in the planning for next year that will be avoided. It's a unique situation and it is unique to your board, but we certainly did come through with the funding that was required to help resolve that.
[Page 234]
MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly am aware that the problem was identified and the problem was corrected. I was just wondering if there was something a little bit more general that was happening across the province, or was it just difficulty getting the information to have staffing in place, so thank you for that explanation.
One of the areas that I heard about a number of times when I was the Education Critic and again this year, probably two or three e-mails to my office that I'm very much aware of, knowing the parents who did e-mail me, is again more resources. This year I also heard from a couple of teachers who talked about needing two or three years to get a set of textbooks. In particular, one of the teachers from the junior high in Coldbrook wrote me and said that he was working on his third year trying to get a set of texts.
I know that there are credit allocations to schools and I'm wondering, especially when new courses are brought in, or within a few years, if there's a way to be more responsive here and to have a full class set of a pretty basic text. This may indeed be the 21st Century and electronic technologies are filling our homes more and more, but certainly most of the parents still talk about having a basic text as a tool for their children. Again, I'm wondering, are there plans to expand the school credit allocations for textbooks and is there something in particular at the elementary and junior high level for textbooks?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, you're correct, there is a textbook allocation and that money goes to the boards and the schools have access to that money to purchase textbooks and other resources that are required for the delivery of curriculum. If it is a new course that is being introduced by the province, then we look after providing the textbooks for that up front, because textbooks are very expensive. We would not expect the school to take the money out of their textbook allocation to implement a new course, but we do provide the board with those dollars, it is administered at the board level and teachers are provided with the textbooks that they identify as being needed in order to deliver their curriculum.
It is my understanding that the per-pupil allocation is up to $65 per student and so when you're looking at your total population, you can use that as a guide as to what kind of dollars are going out to that board, and it's at the discretion of the board to order the books that are identified by their teachers as required.
[3:45 p.m.]
I would say that a lot of our courses now are activity-based and the whole notion of every student having a textbook for every subject is not as it was when we were in school.
[Page 235]
MR. GLAVINE: Madam Minister, while I would endorse that statement as well, it's not always the parent who will buy into that statement, I'm afraid.
One of the areas that the NDP critic brought up and was very strong in talking about goes back to an area that we were basically familiar with, that is guidance counsellors at the senior high level. Occasionally a Grades 7 to 12 school would have a guidance counsellor assigned for junior high, but more and more I'm hearing from teachers, from schools and also from parents who will call and say my child has this problem. You've been an educator and sometimes you get calls because of that as opposed to being the MLA. In terms of guidance in elementary schools and people trained in child psychology, I certainly see a big need to expand that particular role and I see it juxtapositioned along a very well-resourced community centre at 14 Wing Greenwood. At the resource centre they have a number of people who work with young children, but yet at the local school we don't find such a service or a professional in place.
I'm just wondering what the Ministry of Education in the province is thinking in regard to moving this need into a strong action plan. I think the time has really come for our elementary schools to have somebody available. Generally our teachers have a very full day, the principal as well. Many of our elementary schools don't have a vice-principal. I know, having been in the role of a vice-principal, guidance falls in that domain sometimes, but having a professional in place at the elementary level may be something whose time has come on an expanded scale. I'm wondering, what is the Department of Education thinking and planning in that regard?
MS. CASEY: When I spoke earlier about the infusion of money into guidance, it was the first time we have taken a lump sum and earmarked it for that, it's targeted for guidance counsellors. We recognize that the first draw on that will be to make sure that we have all of the guidance counsellors in place at the high school level, then move down into junior high. Your concern about needs of students at the elementary level does not go unnoticed. I recognize that. I think we all recognize that there are many students who need guidance and support and in a lot of cases, the best source of that is in the classrooms and at the schools. We recognize that.
The deployment will be monitored so we will know how boards are using that money. It is our intent to continue that support until we do have the guidance counsellors and systems in place in all of our schools to address student needs.
MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Minister, for that response. It certainly is positive. I know there isn't a timeline nor a specific dollar figure attached, but certainly the direction is one that I concur with.
[Page 236]
One of the topics that has already been debated, presented here in the House since we've started the late Spring-early summer session, is regarding small schools. The closure of schools - I know we are at a time when there is a review of this very, very important topic. It's one that all school boards at one time or another do face. My own experience shows that once a school drops down below 100 students, it's in a pretty precarious position as to its survival. We don't often look for a strong enough raison d'être to keep it going, to have it remain as a vital and integral part of the community.
First of all, I know you've put a panel in place to review school closures in the province. I'm just wondering what course that will take. What is that process going to be? We all know that sometimes in the work of Voluntary Planning, of commissions and so on, a report is done, sometimes without the voice of the community being strongly presented or adhered to. I'm just wondering, what will some of that process be?
MS. CASEY: The review, as you've mentioned, has been called for. It will begin in the Fall and one of the main components of that review will be consultation. We want to hear what people in the communities are saying and we would encourage people to take advantage of the opportunities, whether by going to present a submission to them, using e-mail, or going to a public meeting. The purpose of the review is to find out what Nova Scotians, communities and parents are saying about school closures.
We all know there are bodies of research out there that support the small school and the large school, and you can take whichever body of research you want and you can use it to your best advantage, but what we want to hear from is what the people in these communities have to say, and the review provides an opportunity for them to do that. Then those responses and the information that we hear through consultation will come back, and we're asking those who are doing their review to give us a report and recommendations, and the consultation process is very much a part of that review.
MR. GLAVINE: Madam Minister, I'm pleased to hear that the goal is indeed the widest possible consultation, because having been at a couple of school closure meetings over the years I know there are few more emotional kinds of settings and climates for parents to certainly present their views. My goal, and hope, from this process is that at the end of the day we will have a very defined, maybe not so much a school closure policy but rather a small school policy - one that will identify perhaps the necessity of having small schools. There are in fact, I believe, community schools that do need to be kept open, and resources should be given to those schools so that they in fact can go well down below the normal per-teacher funding formula. Certainly it is my understanding that the Hogg report was in fact to embrace some of that difficulty and frustration that communities are now experiencing in regard to their small schools.
I think if we take a look in the statistical summary we see a number of small schools - and I forget now what page this is on here - certainly the number of small
[Page 237]
schools in Nova Scotia is indeed pretty considerable, some below 50, a number below 100, and I'm wondering, will the thrust of the review be a closure policy or in fact will it be a small school survival policy?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The review is a review of the legislation that currently exists. If the results from the review, report and recommendations deem that there needs to be a change in the legislation then that would come before the House. I might say that in reference to your small schools, there is an allocation in the funding that goes to the boards to address those small schools - $150,000 I believe it is per school to address the small school needs. That part of that report is being implemented and is included in the allocation that boards do receive.
MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, that in my view is a pretty small amount of money. If we take a look at the reality in Nova Scotia right now there are 57 schools that have less than 99 students. We have 57 small schools that are very vulnerable to closing, and it would be my hope that the legislation would reflect that most of these small schools have a vital place in their communities and that would be the thrust of the legislation and certainly funding would reflect those kinds of needs. I'm just wondering, has the minister anything further to present along those lines in terms of the mandate given to the review panel?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, when I spoke earlier, I was talking about a review of the legislation, but there's also a review of board policies and procedures with respect to school closure studies, so that will be reviewed at the board level, as well, by the same review team. So it's the legislation in the Act and board policy and procedure.
MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Minister, for that clarification, and I certainly look forward to, hopefully, presenting and attending some of those review sessions that may be in my local area.
One of the other areas that was talked about today was the number of parents who are looking at alternate schooling for their children as they begin their years of education. Some are now reverting, or are using a combination of home-schooling, and entering public schooling at a later time. I'm just wondering if the Department of Education has reviewed or is reviewing the kinds of supports that may be available to those who are home-schooled. I know other provinces have recognized there are very legitimate reasons, there are sometimes medical reasons as to why a child will not attend public school. Since there's no $5,280 a year that will go to that family, as it will go to a school board, to educate a child, the mainstay of funding is still on a per-pupil basis, there are no benefits to that family that will come currently if somebody is home-schooled.
[Page 238]
I think it's an area that here in the province we need to take a look at. Even if we look at a number of children who have allergies, for example, and that going to a public school certainly is a strong endangerment to their health, even with precautions being taken, we know there have been fatalities associated with severe allergies within the public school systems across the country. I'm wondering, are there, in fact, here in Nova Scotia, any plans to expand and support and help those who are home-schooled?
[4:00 p.m.]
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We work with parents who are doing home-schooling, in particular in providing them with curriculum- related guides and materials so those students, when they have their re-entry back into our public school system, have been exposed to the same curriculum as those they'll be joining up with at that re-entry time. However, we have not been providing any kind of financial support to those parents. At this point in time, we have no plan to do that, but we will continue to provide the other supports.
MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, one of my favourite topics since I came to the House has been the date of school entry. It's one that I will probably continue to labour over because it's one that inevitably, every year - and I've already had my first calls to my MLA office, where a new parent in the area, who had their first child enter school in B.C., or Alberta, is one that I get fairly often, as well as Ontario, and their second child has a birthday in October or November, and their child cannot enter school. So it is quite a discovery for them when they come to our area, at 14 Wing Greenwood, where we have a lot of turnover, a lot of transition of families, therefore, they're in that conundrum of what to do, and some do make some changes for a period of time to get their child in school at some point in the school year.
It's one that I feel the former Minister of Education was starting to respond to and I'm wondering, is the new minister seeing that there may be a possible change in the Department of Education by joining eight other provinces who have the cut-off date for being five years of age to enter the school system at December 31st?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, that cut-off date has been an issue as long as I've been involved in education and I think we have to consider a couple of things. One of the things is that we know many students are ready for a structured environment earlier now than they were in the past and one of our ways of addressing that is to look at the Pre-Primary Pilot Program we have in place. That may capture students at an earlier age and bring them into our schools when they're four years old. We also look at the flexibility and the ability of students to transfer from other provinces and we know that some of our parents are very much aware of that practice and do take advantage of that, but any student who transfers here at the age of four, even after the October date, is admitted to our public school system.
[Page 239]
We can look at that file, I'm sure it has been opened in the past, I'm sure it will be opened again. It is a costly venture, that's not to say that costs should prohibit it, but I think we do have to consider the cost, we have to look at the facilities, we have to accommodate them. We would be looking at about 2,500 new students if we should open that up for next year, so we have to look at the impact that would have on facilities, staffing and costs. We are aware of it, we recognize that we are not in the majority across Canada, but it will be a file that we will open.
MR. GLAVINE: I have just a couple of comments, perhaps more than another question, on this area. One of the basic things that happens when you take a look at a September 30th deadline for school entry - I see the former Minister of Education over there reflecting on this since I had approached him on it - is that basically you have taken one whole age grouping out of nine months of a school year. When I inquired of other provinces about this in order to get the actual fact that there are eight provinces who currently have December 31st, they said it makes perfect sense to divide a school year, not have somebody from October, November, December, miss a whole year but if you divide it pretty well over four months, six months, in their view it makes a much more logical break for a particular age group. That was one of the points they made to me.
In terms of it's implementation, I would say that if we did one month at a time over a three-year period, we would certainly be much more cost effective in implementing it in that manner. The third point I was wanting to make is that we are at a significant time of declining enrolment and I think picking up those children sort of cushions some of the enormous numbers that we are going down by. I think over a decade our student enrolment will have declined by 30,000. I think this is another little way of at least getting our students in school a little earlier and joining the rest of the country in terms of a pretty basic standard.
I just have time for perhaps one last question. In regard to the testing program that we currently have in the elementary school - Grades 3 and 6, I believe, are the grades. The last time that I looked at the Grade 6 testing on the literacy side, one of the things that disturbed me at that time was that certainly some of the results were quite good, however, only about 11 of the stated goals and requirements at the school level, for Grade 5, were actually being measured in that test. I'm wondering if it is now more reflective of all of the skills that should be addressed at that particular age group. Again, you question the value of a test if it's very, very minimalist in what it is testing. So I'm wondering, have there been any changes over the last couple of years and is the department moving towards perhaps a stronger test of our children?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The tests that are administered at Grades 3, 6 and 9 are developed by our own teachers, and what they have done is to take what they deem, as a group of teachers, professionals, who are delivering that curriculum, to be the most important, perhaps the most critical, benchmarks to be
[Page 240]
measured, and so that's why you may have only seen, I think you're saying, perhaps 11, but they would have been the ones that they identified as being the most critical for students to have a good grasp of as they move forward - but each year at Grades 3 and 6, and then we'll be introducing it at Grade 9. When we go back to do the Grade 3s, they will review the assessment and there's a possibility and probability that there will be some refreshed, some changes made at that point.
So it is reviewed constantly and as teachers work through the curriculum collectively they may determine that something else needs to be added to that. So it's open for review and it's open for adjustment.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time has expired for the member.
The honourable member for Halifax Citadel.
MR. LEONARD PREYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's a real pleasure to be standing here to question the minister and ask the minister for her thoughts on policies and procedures that are going to govern education, particularly post-secondary education.
I welcome her to her new post. I've listened very carefully to what she has said over the last week and I understand that she is in the process of reviewing a number of the fundamental assumptions that support our education policy. I take her at her word when she says that she is looking carefully at a number of policies that we have drawn attention to and I'm looking forward to seeing some concrete measures that will flow from those reviews.
I also want to say that as a faculty member at Saint Mary's and a former Chairman of the Department of Political Science, and President of the Faculty Union and a member of the Canadian Association of University Teachers and other groups, that I spent a lot of time in the trenches, fighting for greater access to post-secondary education. It's a real pleasure to be here. It's another forum for me, but I've always engaged the deputy minister in a very constructive and frank discussion of post-secondary education - so I welcome this opportunity to take this discussion to this new forum, and I expect that we'll have just as constructive a discussion as we did in those other fora.
Speaking of the trenches, I really would like to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Danielle Sampson - I don't know what her new title is, but she has been very active as a vice-president of the Canadian Federation of Students in promoting the cause of post-secondary education, particularly access to post-secondary education. I'm delighted to see her and see that she is still fighting the good fight. Welcome to the gallery. I don't know how many of these debates you've been present at, but I'm sure far more than I.
[Page 241]
Post-secondary education is also important to me, personally. I have a daughter who's entering university this September. We know that post-secondary education is important to Nova Scotia, it's important to individuals for their personal growth and development, for social growth, for our economic development as a province; not to mention, my own constituency of Halifax Citadel has four of the best universities in the country.
Also, just to cite the memorandum of understanding, it says that universities are a vitally important engine for the economy of the province, representing a billion dollar industry, providing 750,000 direct, high quality, well-paying jobs, and 17,500 indirect jobs. These are the government's own figures. So, clearly, post-secondary education is very important for a wide variety of reasons.
I also welcome the minister's and the government's statement on access to post-secondary education, particularly tuition. I believe it is a departure for the government to spend as much time as it has in the last several months talking about access and talking about tuition. We believe that tuition provides the greatest barrier to education. We know that from the last study we did, almost 40 per cent of our undergraduates or potential undergraduates who don't go to university, don't go because they can't afford to go to university. In other words, they are otherwise qualified but they don't go because of the cost of education. It's a great loss to their families and it's a great loss to Nova Scotia.
We know also that many who do go to universities, graduate with huge debt loads. The average debt load in Nova Scotia, over the next few years, will be around $30,000, and it will be about $100,000 to $120,000 for those in professional programs like medicine. The impact of that is a two-barrelled restriction on access. One, it restricts access to those who are going into university, but it also restricts Nova Scotians in the future from getting access to doctors and nurses and other professionals who leave the province because they can't afford to pay for post-secondary education and the debt that flows from it. So I welcome the government's commitment to addressing tuition.
The government has taken a long, meandering road to dealing with tuition. The last Speech from the Throne said - it's not very different from the current one, I notice the copy of the address I have has Nova Scotia Budget 2004 underneath it as the footer. I'm glad to see the government believes in recycling, not just in paper, but also its promises. What the government says here is, ". . . this government understands the value of post-secondary education. We also know that the cost of a university education is difficult for many families. That is why we will take every step to make the cost of a typical undergraduate degree in Nova Scotia comparable to the national average within the next five years."
[Page 242]
[4:15 p.m.]
My first question is, what does this mean? What does it mean when the government says that we will take steps to make the cost of a typical undergraduate degree in Nova Scotia comparable to the national average within the next five years?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I believe you're referring to the initiative to bring tuitions more in line with the national average. That was a platform commitment made during the election and one that we will be honouring, and that was to begin in 2007, a reduction over five years so that, at the end of the five years, the tuition in Nova Scotia for university students going into an undergraduate program would be in line with the national average over a five-year period. That is the plan.
MR. PREYRA: Madam Minister, I did understand that to be the plan. I wanted to know if the minister was in a position to breathe some life into that promise and say exactly what the strategy is. I know subsequent to that, the government goes on to say, "We will be re-opening negotiations with universities and looking to the federal government to discuss a collaborative approach to reaching this goal."
Now, I'm wondering, when the government says it's going to re-open negotiations, what is going to be the government's starting positions? What is it going to put on the table? What policy implements, what tools does it plan on using to bringing tuition fees down to this comparable level?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the whole tuition reduction plan has been costed and we will be looking in the year 2007-08, which would be the first year to begin the implementation of that at a $36.5 million investment of dollars in order for that to happen. So we're planning for that infusion of money in 2007-08, and we are also looking at going back to renegotiate the memorandum of understanding with our universities in 2007-08, those are the timelines that I have.
MR. PREYRA: So is the minister saying that the $36 million is designed to address this shortfall and to help close the gap, given that the MOU, itself, has allowed tuition fees to rise at a far higher rate, and that ancillary and auxiliary fees, which I'm going to look at later, have risen at the same time? I'm wondering, can you give us some more detail on that?
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the member, the $36.5 million is with the understanding that we are able to keep the 3.9 per cent cap with the MOU. If that changes, then so does the $36.5 million.
[Page 243]
MR. PREYRA: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I don't understand. Is the minister saying that tuition fees will rise by 3.9 per cent and fall, at the same time, to bring it into line with the national average?
MS. CASEY: The 3.9 per cent will be something that has to be negotiated when we sit down with the universities.
MR. PREYRA: This really is voodoo economics, Mr. Chairman, I don't understand, but I'll pass. I don't understand how tuition fees can be allowed to rise by 3.9 per cent and, at the same time, be brought into line with the national average, unless one assumes that the national average is going to rise by double that amount.
Just trying to close the gap between the rhetoric and the reality of post-secondary education funding, I see in the estimates that the government says they are going to spend $227 million for universities, but I also notice in the MOU, which was signed earlier, that they had committed to $235 million for 2006-07. In other words, there is about an $8 million shortfall in what the government said they would do at this stage, and what they are in fact doing. How do they account for the $8 million shortfall? If we can't believe their commitment on the MOU, why should we believe them when they say they're going to reduce tuition fees to comparable levels?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the $227 million you see in the budget would have been increased by $11.7 million, but that was paid out to universities late in the fiscal year last year, so that's why it's kept at $227 million. If that had not been paid, it would have been $227 million plus $11.7 million.
MR. PREYRA: I have a question about the way in which that funding was allotted. I'm not an accountant, but I don't understand why you would backload something like that and provide money in a previous year for the next year. Is there a sound accounting reason for that?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, my staff is advising me that that $11.7 million was able to be paid out at the end of the fiscal year because of additional resources at the provincial level. In discussion with the universities, they were quite happy to get that advance. So that gave them the $238.7 million with the $11.7 million coming early.
MR. PREYRA: But that still leaves them with a shortfall of $8 million for this year. So I'm not sure how that addresses the initial university demand for stable funding, but I will pass on that and ask about the memorandum of understanding because, as you know, it has caused a great deal of trouble at least as far as students and faculty goes. We know that the 3.9 per cent has become the base increase for almost every post-secondary institution in Nova Scotia. We know that the exemption from the MOU for foreign
[Page 244]
students and professionals - doctors, nurses, et cetera - has meant that any shortfall in revenues at that level has been made up by tremendous increases in the cost of education for those in professional schools, further driving the access and the willingness of doctors and nurses to stay in Nova Scotia. So the cost of education itself has gone high.
My question is, does the government intend, when it renegotiates the MOU, to close this loophole as far as it relates to the professions and to foreign students because we know that it has become a crushing burden for many of them, and it reinforces what we had talked about earlier about access that people might have to becoming doctors, for example, and to keeping doctors in the province. Does the minister intend, Mr. Chairman, through you, to close this gap?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. I think our government has demonstrated that they understand the need to work toward tuitions and lowering tuitions for students. When we sit down to renegotiate the memorandum of understanding, we have a concern about that 3.9 per cent as well and we will be looking to address that in those negotiations.
MR. PREYRA: I also had a question for the minister relating to auxiliary and ancillary fees, residential fees. Generally it was the understanding in the memorandum of understanding that those would not rise to make up for any shortfall. Section 14 says that the universities agree that they will not increase auxiliary fees or ancillary fees within their control to compensate for an inability to raise tuition fees above the agreed upon ceiling, yet at my university, at Saint Mary's for example, the administration has imposed a $62 per-course fee on students enrolling - it's not optional - and the student union as well in its generosity has tagged on an additional fee for students as part of its fees.
I'm wondering if the government plans on looking at these, really, violations of the spirit of the agreement, which says that 3.9 per cent is going to be the net amount - and I can understand why the universities would be doing that, because they're labouring with huge infrastructure costs and recruitment and retention costs, and they're trying to find money anywhere they can. But I'm wondering if the minister plans on dealing with these fees, because it does add to the cost of education and it gets in the way of her government's promise to make fees comparable to the national average, and I assume when that promise was made that it was anticipated it would include tuitions and ancillary and auxiliary fees as well.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The reference to the $62, my understanding is that was there with Saint Mary's prior to the memorandum of understanding being signed, but as far as increases in ancillary costs, they are not allowed to increase ancillary costs in order to cover reduced tuition costs.
[Page 245]
MR. PREYRA: I may misunderstand this, but this was a fee that was imposed this year.
The memorandum of understanding also requires the universities to impose a 1 per cent saving, and I'm wondering - the universities agree that this three-year funding commitment enhances business planning, making more productive use of resources and consequently agree to a productivity factor being applied to reduce the annual expenditure by the following percentages, 1 per cent - given the tough times that the universities went through in the 1990s, is expecting further cuts in fact realistic given that the universities are facing huge recruitment and retention problems and infrastructure problems?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. It is my understanding that in the memorandum of understanding with the universities they had agreed to the 1 per cent of the previous year's expenditures for 2005-06; 2006-07, 1 per cent; and 2007-08, 1.25 per cent - that that was part of the agreement and, in return, the 3.9 per cent cap.
MR. PREYRA: I know that the MOU was renegotiated in the Spring - I'm not exactly sure why it was renegotiated, given that it hadn't come due at the time - I would like to ask the minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, about the new round of negotiations that are coming up in the Spring of 2008. Does the minister intend to introduce any new issues or remove particular clauses from this agreement that the government finds particularly offensive? The minister earlier referred to new measures that might be in there to help the government accomplish its goal of making tuition fees comparable, is there going to be anything new in this MOU in 2008?
[4:30 p.m.]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I'm not into negotiations yet. However, we will certainly be working with the universities around the commitment that our government has made to lower those tuition costs, so that will be something that is a priority to us, to stick to that.
MR. PREYRA: So to summarize the minister's comments on MOUs then, her government does intend to revise down the 3.9 per cent cap to exclude foreign students and professional schools from that, or to include them and bring them in under the cap, and to deal with ancillary and auxiliary fees. Is there a commitment there to remove those loopholes, to bring them more in line with the spirit of the agreement to keep tuition fees under control?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The commitment that I can make to you now is that we will be discussing the fees issue and we will also be
[Page 246]
discussing the international students and the other students who are excluded from that understanding.
MR. PREYRA: I have a final question on the MOU process as well. As the deputy minister well knows, there has been a great deal of anger and resentment, among students in particular, about the way in which this MOU has been negotiated and renegotiated, that essentially, regardless of what the intent of the MOU was, the process that led to its arrangement was flawed, that students really didn't get an opportunity to weigh in, to comment on it, and one suspects that it's because students were not allowed to participate in this. In the first round, it's understandable that they were not included, but certainly in the next round they were deliberately excluded. I'm wondering, why do the government and the minister persist in excluding students in an issue that's so vital to their well-being, and not even go through the pretense of consultation?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. It's my understanding that the commitment has already been made to include those students or representatives of the student body at the next round of negotiations.
MR. PREYRA: I'm not sure why it has taken two rounds to reach this stage. It always seems to be a promise that the government will do it tomorrow, but not today. It's very much like the promise to reduce tuition fees - tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow, but never now.
I did want to move on to another element of this government's so-called strategy, and that's the graduate tax credit. The government has committed to providing tax credits to students, $1,000 over three years, and the estimated cost of that will be approximately $9.2 million a year. We know that students will only claim a fraction of that $9.2 million, because in order to get that credit they have to live and work in Nova Scotia which, as I said earlier, is a real challenge, given the debt loads they're graduating with, and they must also earn a significant income. We know that living in Nova Scotia doesn't provide one with the highest levels of income in the country. They cannot carry it forward. I'm wondering, why didn't the government use that $9.2 million, if we can use that figure, to establish a needs-based grant program?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. It's my understanding the graduate tax credit came out of the Minister of Finance's office, so I would not want to speak on his behalf.
MR. PREYRA: I have a question for the minister about the needs-based grant program. Why is it so difficult for the government to establish a needs-based grant program, given that we know that front-loading support for students, in terms of reducing tuition fees and making needs-based grants available to students who merit it, is the best way to promote access, especially to students from a certain class, low income
[Page 247]
and working poor? I'm wondering, is the Department of Education going to make some kind of commitment to establishing a needs-based grant program and bring us in line with most of the provinces across the rest of the country?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. As far as needs-based initiatives, we recognize that the Student Loan Program and grants that we offer, the millennium grants, are geared to the needs-based and the students who have needs for our support for tuition. So we haven't initiated any kind of a needs-based program.
MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, quite the contrary, we know that when those millennium grants were established, that the Nova Scotia Government took explicit steps to reduce its commitment by an equivalent amount and completely undermined the spirit of that millennium grant. So in fact, rather than promoting the needs of students, the Nova Scotia Government essentially abandoned them and handed it over to the federal government. So the net gain to students in that exchange was zero. I wonder, can the minister confirm that?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. If there's documentation on that that I can provide for you, I'd be glad to do that.
MR. PREYRA: I would like to move on to another topic, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to talk a bit about the loans program. We know that students in Nova Scotia face a myriad of processes and structures and requirements and various criteria for getting the loans. This government, over the years, has made pretty firm commitments to reducing bureaucracy and streamlining the process for getting a student loan both within the federal and the provincial areas. I'm wondering, could the minister tell us what steps her department has taken recently, and intends to take, to deal with this bureaucratic nightmare?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. I believe your question was assistance for students who are making application for loans, and we recognize that sometimes forms can be challenging, but we do have a Web site service available for students who need assistance with that application process.
MR. PREYRA: I know the minister is new and can't be expected to change things overnight, but certainly the students are looking for more than a Web site - I was thinking more in line with revising the criteria so they can go to one office and make the loan, that they can essentially face the lowest interest rate payments, criteria for things like parental contributions and arrangements for deferral of interest and all those other things can be made in a one-stop way. I think students are quite capable of going to a Web site and finding out what's available, the problem is they're intimidated by what they see there. They understand the process, it's just the process doesn't work for them
[Page 248]
and they're wondering how the government intends to go towards streamlining the process, not just describing the process but actually streamlining it.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We have looked at introducing a direct loan process which, when that is finalized, we hope it will be user-friendly, and the other is the graduate repayment process. With any of those new programs we would keep in mind the need for user-friendly format.
MR. PREYRA: I'm glad to hear that the province is moving to direct lending. Is there an intention there to merge that with the federal program, and is there an intention there also to harmonize the criteria? For example, the question of deferral of interest on the six-month waiting period.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. Discussions with the federal government have already started looking at blending those and combining those processes.
MR. PREYRA: I'm glad to hear that, Madam Minister.
I had a question about the Association of Universities and Colleges data recently released. Certainly one gets a sense that at universities this is happening right along the board, that enrolment has declined quite precipitously this year, in the 2006-07 year for first- year students, and universities are facing huge shortfalls. I'm wondering, could the minister confirm this and tell us what steps the department is thinking of taking to address this crisis?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. I don't have the figures here for enrolment decline, but I would hope that our addressing the cost of tuition might alleviate some of that decline.
MR. PREYRA: Is the minister saying that the government is willing to make up for the shortfall?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, that's not what I said.
MR. PREYRA: If I can pass to another topic - the social transfer. The social transfer lists $267.919 million as money coming from the federal government. I wonder, is the minister in a position to tell us how much of that money will be devoted to post-secondary education?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. If you're referring to federal money, I would be the first to be looking for Education's fair share of that money at the Cabinet Table.
[Page 249]
MR. PREYRA: Well, my question was a little different. I was asking the minister, is she in a position to tell us how much of that money that has come here has actually been devoted to post-secondary education? In other words, what programs and what share of that money is being used for post-secondary education and is the minister in a position to identify and itemize that?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. I do not have those figures. I could certainly go to Finance to achieve those.
MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, as the minister knows, students, faculty and administrations are very concerned that a lot of this money that comes through the social transfer is just rolled into a general revenue and there's no real accounting for that money as a result of it. I know that the minister was implying earlier that she was looking for a dedicated transfer of post-secondary education money, but I'm wondering if a good start might be to start itemizing - at least on our home front, that's something we have control over - to see exactly what it is that we're getting out of that $268 million.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. Perhaps if I can get some additional information as to what the federal money is and the breakup of that money in the past year, I would be prepared to provide that for you.
MR. PREYRA: Madam Minister, I think that would be very helpful because if we are going to go into negotiations with the federal government to ask for a dedicated transfer for post-secondary education, we should at least know how much we're getting now and how much we're spending now so that we would be able to make a strong case if something is adequate or inadequate.
On a related question - I know that the numbers show that we're expecting about a $45 million shortfall in funding for students who come from away, in other words we're not getting money for the students who are coming from other provinces. What is the minister doing to address this and is there any sense of the federal government willing to concede on this point?
[4:45 p.m.]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We want as much federal money as we can get and so our Premier and the Prime Minister will be looking at our fair share of dollars that can come to Nova Scotia and help cover that shortfall of $45 million you've suggested.
MR. PREYRA: If I could pass to another subject, the memorandum of understanding makes reference that the province agrees to allocate funding according to existing shares determined by the university funding formulas. Now, the minister
[Page 250]
probably knows that those funding formulas haven't been changed since the 1970s and many small universities and new programs are complaining that the funding formula needs to be modernized and it needs to reflect the reality of what our priorities are as a province. Is the minister in a position to make a commitment that she will revisit this funding formula, or explain exactly where she is in terms of her thinking about the funding formula?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We would like to have agreement amongst the universities as to what that is, but we certainly want to sit down and discuss that with them.
MR. PREYRA: Does the minister have any broad principles or policies that she had in mind in terms of using these principles to guide in those discussions?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We would like to sit down with the universities and have that discussion about what they see as fair and equitable, and try to work out some funding arrangement that meets their need and satisfies our budget.
MR. PREYRA: Just in terms of an overall question, I have looked at the Speech from the Throne and the budget, and I don't see any larger vision for post-secondary education, particularly for universities. I know as far as colleges go, the government has made it very clear that it is willing to spend large amounts of money on the skills trades, and we support that, in questions of apprenticeship and all that. I'm wondering, does the government have any larger vision of what the role of post-secondary institutions is, and where it fits into the larger strategy? There is no vision here, other than just numbers that sometimes are confusing and contradictory.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The only commitment I can make to you at this time is that we are committed to work with the universities to look at a review of what they are doing now, what their needs are, and how we might work with them to continue our support. No further comment on that.
MR. PREYRA: My question was a little bit different, Mr. Chairman. I was really asking whether the government was going to go into these discussions with a larger plan. Does it have a sense of what its role is in post-secondary education and how it intends to use post-secondary education to promote the larger aims and objectives of the government and the Province of Nova Scotia itself?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We know that universities play an important role both economically and socially in our province, and within those two parameters, we would be interested in working to develop a long-range plan.
[Page 251]
MR. PREYRA: Well, I'm disappointed. I have a lot of respect for the minister. I know she has a great background in education and a lot of expertise. I'm hoping that over the next year or so, we'll see some kind of larger statement from the government as to what its objectives are. It seems like governments are really just tinkering with historic and traditional agreements, and not really doing much more than tinkering. There doesn't seem to be any larger vision, no sense of transformation or change, no real sense that the system, as it stands, is not working. It's not working for students and it's not working for recruitment of faculty, and it doesn't seem to be working for Nova Scotia students.
We have this appalling retention rate for our students where 40 per cent of our local students are leaving the province to go to other pastures. It seems to me that it's a waste of our resources to be dealing with post-secondary education in this way, to not have a system, to not have a plan for keeping students here in Nova Scotia. I know the former Premier said he wanted to build a wall and punish students for leaving, but we have to do better than that. I am wondering if the government has gone beyond that stage.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. I think as Nova Scotians we should be very proud of the universities we have, the quality education they deliver, and the respect and the pride that our students from Nova Scotia have when they can say they graduated from a college in Nova Scotia, or from university. I continue to be proud of that, and recognize that those who graduate are equally proud.
MR. PREYRA: Certainly as a faculty member, I, too, am very proud of the universities and I am proud of our students, but you can't be proud of the fact that so many of our students are leaving and succeeding in other provinces. I know the minister can't take responsibility for it, but my earlier comments were really aimed at doing something about that. It is, as I was saying earlier, posing a huge burden on the taxpayers of Nova Scotia, to be providing that education. Certainly we're finding that provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador have started to leave us behind. In part, the out-migration of students - and the minister may have data to support this - is being driven by many students who are now opting to go to Newfoundland and Labrador, and Quebec. The enrolment drop for this year may, in part, be a reflection of the high cost of tuition and the fact that a university education is getting out of reach to so many native Nova Scotian students.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, I would ask for the question to be repeated, please.
MR. PREYRA: It wasn't a question, it was more of a comment, but it looked like you were getting ready to respond - sorry, Madam Minister. I was asking, are you aware that many of the students are leaving for Newfoundland and Labrador, which is a change in the direction of students from Newfoundland and Labrador to Nova Scotia? I think it illustrates that we might be looking at the beginning of a problem, where students start leaving at the beginning.
[Page 252]
If I can just summarize in the time I have remaining. Access to education remains a real problem for our Party, because we know that a post-secondary education is now so vital for individual growth, for families, for our communities, and that denying access to post-secondary education means that we're sentencing many of these students and their families to a lifetime of poverty, and in fact it will eventually become a burden on Nova Scotia itself. We know that money invested up front in post-secondary education is repaid later on down the road, that students who aren't educated and students who have a basic high school education really don't earn as much and are not as successful down the road, and eventually are more likely to become a burden on society. So if only for self-interested reasons, we have to deal with this problem of access.
It's a crime in the way that students are being denied an access to education, and being admitted to university based really more on what they have in their wallets than what they have in their heads, and I think for a social democratic Party we have to be concerned about it - I know that even for Conservatives this might be a challenge.
And professionals leaving, doctors leaving the province, and in particular health care professionals leaving - many are leaving largely because of the debt burden. They couldn't afford to pay off their debts here. We need to provide debt relief to those students that's meaningful. In a way, the best debt relief, really, is lower tuition and a needs-based grant system, because we can't have them going off into the work world, raising families with these huge burdens.
I believe that the best way for the government to address these issues revolving around access is to bring ourselves more in line with other provinces; to treat post-secondary education as vital, both for personal and economic development; to establish a needs-based grant system similar in principle to what's being offered in almost all of the other provinces; to come up with a more streamlined loans program with better terms; to dealing with the transfer of funds in a more transparent and meaningful way; and to revisit the Maritime Provinces Higher Education funding formula for various programs. There are lots of things the government can do. I'm wondering, can the minister tell us, during her term, what one or two or three things she intends to address, and in what order?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. I guess being new in this capacity, the first thing I would want to do is sit down and talk with the universities and listen to what they are identifying as their needs, and where there might be some way that we can work together to resolve some of the issues that face our students.
MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, if I can move on from post-secondary education, just to another issue dear to the voters in Halifax Citadel. I want to come back to this question of school closures because I know in responding to questions from the Liberal critic, the minister said that she was reviewing the whole school closure policy and that
[Page 253]
the boards were reviewing them as well. I'm wondering, is she satisfied with the process that led to the previous decisions to close schools in Halifax Citadel?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, the situation with respect to schools closures, as my member opposite would know, is the responsibility of school boards. School boards go through the process of identifying their needs, identifying their capacities and their student enrolments and program delivery, safety of schools, condition of schools and whole number of factors. That is the responsibility of the boards, and once they identify the areas that they believe need to have replacement, renovation or additions, they submit that to the department. That process is what is under review, and as I mentioned earlier, the committee that will do that review has already been struck and the report will be coming back. So, the point, I think that the member opposite is asking is, am I satisfied with the process? It's my understanding that the process that was used, was the process as per department and board criteria, and that is the process that is now being reviewed.
MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, my question then is, if the minister reached the conclusion that that process is flawed, and that that process needed review and that process wasn't working, wouldn't it be fair to say that the decisions that were taken as a result of that process are also not legitimate and need to be reviewed?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. It's my understanding that there were questions raised about the whole school closure, school consolidation process across the province and that three boards were asked to put the process on hold until a review had been undertaken. I'm not hearing that that was because people believed the process had been flawed, they believed it was time for a review of that process.
[5:00 p.m.]
MR. PREYRA: Certainly, Mr. Chairman, that was not the conclusion that was reached in Halifax Citadel. The board members there didn't know that the decision was taken. Most parents and communities had no idea that a consultative process had been completed, and I'm not sure how one determines when there was consultation or not, but certainly if the participants in the process didn't know that consultation had taken place, one would suspect that there was no consultation.
I know the minister says that this is a decision for the board, but the department has not shown any great reluctance in the past in other cases. The Halifax Regional School Board, in particular, essentially functioned as a dysfunctional organization and the minister stepped in there. Certainly the imposition of a moratorium itself is an indication that the minister does have some discretion in going in; after all, these boards and municipalities are creatures of the provincial government and the Department of Education by extension.
[Page 254]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. I did go back and review the file and it's my understanding, based on the file, that the file does include a petition from parents in the South End, who back in 2002-03 petitioned to the board. As a result of that another review was done by the board, they did submit a list of priorities to the department, and the South End elementary school was on that list of priorities. That is certainly part of the file.
MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, with that I'm going to conclude my remarks. I really thank the minister for her comments. As I said when I began, I'm really looking forward to the various reviews and consultations that she is embarking on and I look forward to seeing some progress. With that, I'll turn the time I have remaining over to my colleague, the member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank.
MR. CHAIRMAN: At this moment I have a request for a five-minute recess, if it's agreeable to both sides.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
We'll reconvene in five minutes.
[5:02 p.m. The committee recessed.]
[5:10 p.m. The committee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank.
MR. PERCY PARIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wish to acknowledge that I will be sharing my time this afternoon. I know the time is going to be broken up and that there will be other people speaking after me and, when I come back, it will be a shared process.
I want to start my preamble by saying, for Black learners, there has been an African presence in the Province of Nova Scotia, indeed in Canada, for some 500 years. I can remember reading, and certainly we learn through history, that when Africans first came to Nova Scotia that education was denied. Mr. Chairman, I also remember from my own personal history a very well-respected and dignified individual in the Town of Windsor who was politically advocating for fairness in the public school system in Nova Scotia throughout the 1950s and 1960s.
[Page 255]
It would appear, again, that as we progress through life - and in the 1960s most notable was the Transition Year Program that was implemented at Dalhousie University. The Transition Year Program, known as the TYP, was implemented to assist African Nova Scotians and individuals from the Mi'kmaq community to further their education into post-secondary education.
This is of particular note, because I make reference to, more recently, there was an announcement by a well-known administrator in the City of Halifax who advocated for separate schools for Black learners. I can remember listening to that announcement, it was an announcement on the radio, my first response was one of, well, I'm glad somebody has raised the issue because at least it ignites the debate.
I bring this up, it's sort of a brief walk in history, because 500 years ago, education was denied to Black learners. It would appear that here we are, 2006, and we're still discussing some of the same things when it comes to denial of education in our public school system. At one time, what we did in the Province of Nova Scotia, we had separate schools for African Nova Scotians. The inequality of that, the unfairness of that, what it resulted in was that schools then received an allowance based on taxes.
In those years, of course if unemployment and discrimination was set in the Province of Nova Scotia and the public school system of Nova Scotia, the Black schools had little money, therefore resulting in a low return on their tax dollars, Mr. Chairman. So the end result would be an inequality in education.
In my voice, it's one of passion and somewhat frustration that I would stand before you today discussing some of the same things that my father discussed with school boards across the Province of Nova Scotia when he was active with the Nova Scotia Association for the Advancement of Coloured People back in the 1950s. Sometimes that frustration and that passion that I speak about when I speak about Black learners, maybe with respect to African Nova Scotians, in general, is sometimes misinterpreted as what is anger. Although sometimes I think one could argue that the anger may be justified, trust me, I wouldn't want anyone to misinterpret that other than just frustration and passion.
[5:15 p.m.]
I can also remember in my years in the public school system in Windsor, Nova Scotia, and even when I visit Windsor today, when I think of Windsor, it has a very significant African Nova Scotian population. It's disheartening to see, certainly in my time and even today, the number of individuals of African descent who enter a school at the Grade 7 entry level and the number who are not graduating at the Grade 12 level. It's indeed disheartening.
[Page 256]
I recall a number of years ago in the Town of Windsor, they were having a celebration about their basketball program, a very, very good basketball program. A number of the individuals who were involved with that program went on to play university ball. Of course, on that team were a number of African Nova Scotians, and unfortunately the number of African Nova Scotians who were going on to university was practically nil, yet they were holding a celebration. My argument at that time was, how can we celebrate something that, in my interpretation, was a failure?
So with that bit of a preamble, I think my first question to the minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, is, with the denial of education to Black learners, I'm curious, what is the Department of Education going to do, has planned, and what is the strategy to remedy that?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. Public school programs in Nova Scotia as per the Education Act are designed for all students, ages five to twenty-one, and that is our goal, to provide that education to all students. We recognize that there are some students, whether it's our special needs students, whether it's students who need time to transition, or whatever, that sometimes there are special programs that have to be implemented in order to meet a need or close a gap and, if you recall, closing a gap was one of the themes within our strategic plan.
So we do pay strict attention to data and information, scores and assessment results that we get which will help us to develop programs to meet some of those needs. I'm pleased to report in one respect that we have addressed what had been identified as a need in some of the literacy projects that we will be implementing in five schools in the Halifax Regional School Board and, in particular, to close that gap that has been identified as existing between African Nova Scotian students in their literacy skills as compared to other students in our schools. So getting the data is one thing, but responding to it is the most important step, and I'm proud to say that we've taken that step in this budget to try to close that gap for those students.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The member's time has expired.
The honourable member for Preston.
MR. KEITH COLWELL: Mr. Chairman, I have only a short list of questions here for now, and then I'm going to share the rest of my time with the member for Annapolis.
I've talked to many teachers and they tell me that between Grade 7 and Grade 12 there's a policy in the Halifax Regional School Board - and I don't know if it's driven by the Department of Education or not - that individuals can only fail one time during that whole period of time between Grade 7 and Grade 12, whether they meet any kind of academic standards or not, and when I talk to employers who are employing people
[Page 257]
and are seeing some students who come out who can neither read nor write after Grade 12, I would just like to know, is that indeed the policy of the Department of Education or is that a policy of the Halifax Regional School Board?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. If that policy does exist, it would be a board policy, not a department policy.
MR. COLWELL: Well, according to the teachers I talk to in the system, it does exist. The question then I have to the minister is, why doesn't the Department of Education maintain a minimum standard for children graduating from Grade 12 or from Grade 7 to Grade 8, or as it goes on through the whole system, to ensure they have the skills necessary to enter the workforce?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. When we develop our curriculum we also develop student curriculum outcomes that we expect all students to meet before they move on to the next level. Those are developed at the provincial level; those are guides and are to be used by teachers as they assess student performance, and they are expected to meet those outcomes before they move on.
MR. COLWELL: If I'm hearing the minister right, I think that's a good approach, but at the same time I'm hearing employers who are saying they're getting students who can't read or write. So does the Department of Education indicate that the outcomes are okay if a student in Grade 12 can't read or write and work in the workforce?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, when students are progressing through the curriculum, if there are areas that are deemed to be in need of support, parents, teachers - and sometimes at the high school level, students - sit down to develop an individual program which meets the needs of those students, and the outcomes of those programs vary, depending on the needs of the student.
MR. COLWELL: Well, two or three examples, and I'll talk in general terms as I don't want to identify anybody or any particular school. I'll use one case to start with as an example: a student who went into Grade 7 and found that they couldn't keep up, and when they were assessed by an independent training facility it was found that their reading and literacy skills were at Grade 3. They've since enrolled and the parents paid for some upgrades, and this year the student is going into Grade 9 and they're assessed at a Grade 5 level in reading. They're in the resource program at the school, which doesn't seem to be helping at all, and if this continues, without correction, they'll graduate from Grade 12 probably with a Grade 7 or Grade 8 reading ability. What does the department do in that case?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. We will not discuss individuals, but we certainly have staff available through our boards to do assessments and students are
[Page 258]
often referred for assessment if teachers and/or parents believe that they are not achieving at the rate at which they should be and, when that happens, the individual program, the planning team sits down to develop that plan. Supports that we have put in place are resource teachers who can provide support in a pullout or in-class setting, and every effort would be made to help those students and help them raise their level of performance to an acceptable level so they could meet the outcomes.
The individual programs that I've mentioned, the outcomes for that particular student, as identified in their individual program, in most cases would not be consistent with Grade 12 outcomes, they would be consistent with the student's ability to perform and to achieve those, and so when you have students who are graduating from an individual program the outcomes that they have achieved would not always be the same as the outcomes for others - they are individual to that particular person's needs and abilities.
MR. COLWELL: I truly hope I didn't hear the minister correctly. In other words you're saying there are different levels of standards for different students. If a student comes out with Grade 12, it's exactly as I said, they can't read or write, but that's okay because he went in a resource program - is that what the minister said?
MS. CASEY: No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that we have the resources in our schools to identify students and to help students who have individual and specific learning needs, and the program that's developed so that those students can achieve a level of success, the individual programs would be different and the outcomes would be different than they would be for a lot of other students in this school - and those are in consultation with the parents and they're developed. Hopefully the gap can be closed and those students can be reintegrated into a regular program, but the supports are there to help them along.
MR. COLWELL: Well, I'm just using one student, but this is not a one-student problem. I have people coming to my office continuously, from all the communities in my community, with this sort of issue. The problem is, again, what I heard the minister say - and again I hope I'm wrong - that some students can graduate from Grade 12 with a lower standard than others, but they've still got a Grade 12 certificate. Is that what you said? That's what I interpreted from what you said.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. When a student is on an individual program and when they have achieved the outcomes as outlined in that program, the transcript that they would receive would clearly have marked or identified that it was a modified or an individual program that that student had been on and that they had been successful with the expectations and the outcomes as in that particular individual program, and that would be marked on their transcript.
[Page 259]
MR. COLWELL: That's a bit clearer, but will they still get a Grade 12 certificate?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. Yes, they would, with that indication on it.
MR. COLWELL: Well, it goes back to two levels of education, or more than two levels because each one that comes out would have a different degree of knowledge when they graduated from Grade 12, which is very, very concerning. There should be a minimum standard for Grade 12 and it should be insisted upon that the student meets that, whatever resources are needed by the Department of Education or the school board that that gives that individual the opportunity to move forward with a meaning in life and ensure they can hold a position in society.
I'm not talking in this case about mentally-challenged children, that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about children who have done everything they possibly can to succeed and have the ability, but probably have some small learning disability that really holds them back. It horrifies me to think that there are several different levels of certificate. I can tell you that as an employer, which I was for many years, when someone comes with a Grade 12 certificate, I assume they can do some basic math, read some manuals and do some other things that are needed to employ them as an employee in my business. Oftentimes I found out that they could do neither, and it was very unfortunate that happened and you had to let these individuals go because they didn't have the abilities to hold a job, which was very expensive for me. It must have been very frustrating for the individuals and, indeed, not good for our Nova Scotia economy.
I'm going to ask the question again, are there different standards for different people graduating from Grade 12 in this province, outside of anyone who is mentally challenged?
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the member I will repeat that we would like every student who goes through our public school system to have success. About 4 per cent of our student population will be involved in some kind of an individual planning program, based on their needs, and we will use the resources we have to try to help them, give them the supports if, for some reason, they are not able to perform with those grade- appropriate outcomes. But the bottom line is that not all students are able to achieve all of the outcomes that we expect for all students at the end of Grade 12. Those who cannot, do have success and we do acknowledge and support that they have achieved the outcomes that are specific to their learning program.
[Page 260]
[5:30 p.m.]
MR. COLWELL: Well, I'm going to ask a little bit different question, along the same lines though. When you're faced, as I am, on a too-regular basis - and I mean a too-regular basis - and the 4 per cent is probably accurate because you would see probably everybody in that category in your office when they are desperately trying to get their children educated to the best of their ability.
I will go back to the example I started with. In this case a family invested in extracurricular training by an outside agency, which has been a tremendous help to the student. The problem now is that the student is learning and moving forward and doing very, very well, but again, there is a long spread between the actual grade level that they have achieved in reading and some other areas, as compared to where they should be at the grade level they are in.
Unfortunately, the parents can no longer afford to pay for this extra activity and there has been a resource program set up for the student which is not doing the job. It's simply not doing the job, not bringing the student up fast enough to catch up and close that gap before they go into high school. The parent believes that if the gap was closed before Grade 10, there would not be a problem because she has already seen major improvements in the student. It is a very good student, a hard-working student, that's not an issue, well behaved, everything that you want to see in a student except for this one learning disability.
Are there any programs through the department that the department has to help a parent in this situation? We're not talking thousands of dollars, we're talking only probably about $2,000 to $4,000 maximum to bring the student up to where they should be, or a program that could be put in place by the school board to work with the student over the summer, something that can help this student and move the student to make sure that they can graduate, and hopefully someday go on to university?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. You know, the sooner that gap can be closed, the better. That is the goal of all educators, is when that gap is identified, that all of the resources at the disposal of the school or the school board are put in gear to try to close that gap. We have recognized through our literacy assessment that some students going out of Grade 6 are having some difficulties, and so we've put an extra $2.9 million into a type of resource and support at the junior high. Again, the sooner we can close that gap, the better. With respect to the situation, the specifics, I would be glad to talk to you about that specific situation, not in the House obviously, but I would be glad to do that because I recognize the frustration and the anxiety of families when they're experiencing that.
[Page 261]
MR. COLWELL: Thank you very much. I will, indeed, take you up on that. I can tell you, with a mother coming in with tears in her eyes and saying I want my child to have the best education they could probably have, they're serious. They really want to have their family looked after because they know that education today is gold. If you have a good education today, you can do many of the things that we've been privileged in this House to do.
The other thing is, there's a program that I talked to the deputy minister about before. The two-year limit that you put in place on special-needs children who would have to go to Sylvan or to any of the other specialty training facilities. Again, I have some families in my riding who have taken advantage of that. It has worked very well. Unfortunately, they're at the end of the two years and they desperately need another one or two years until the student can be integrated back into the system. The parents definitely want the child back in the system as quickly as possible, but they don't want the child to go through the frustration and aggravation of trying to keep up when they know they can't. Again, it's a possibility of giving a lifelong learning capability to a student who can move forward. This is a program that has been greatly applauded, and I applaud the department for putting it in place, but I think the two-year term is too short.
In some cases, it's satisfactory; in some cases, one year is probably enough. But there are cases I have in my area where the two years are just definitely not acceptable, and they have evaluations to prove that. The evaluations also show a huge, huge improvement. It's day and night improvement. If that just can be brought up a little bit further, the students will excel and probably go back in the system, and then probably even be able to go to university or technical school if they so desire. So I would like to know, does the department have any plans of extending that program longer?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. You're referring to the tuition support program. Initially, that was a two-year program and was designed to take students who were not able to have their needs met in the public school system and give them an intense training program hoping, again, to close that gap and allow them to re-enter public schools. We have noted a lot of success with that, just like the successes you're talking about, and as a result of that, and recognizing that for some students six months, a year, two, it varies depending on the student need, but recognizing that at the end of two years there are still needs for that support, this budget does have the third year of that transition program funded. The parents, I would hope, would be aware of that by now but, if not, that is in the budget and, pending the approval of the budget, that will be available.
MR. COLWELL: I am, indeed, glad to hear that, because there are a lot of students out there who will be able to utilize that. It's going to be money well invested when you consider the alternative if we turn someone out into the real world who doesn't have an education, can't get a meaningful job. It usually results in some activities that
[Page 262]
aren't too desirable for any of us, and it's unfortunate those things happen. So I want to commend the government on doing that because that is long overdue. I know we pushed the department, before you came, very hard for that very thing, and it's good to see that in place. I'm going to turn the rest of my time over to my colleague, the member for Annapolis.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Annapolis.
MR. STEPHEN MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the minister on her election and her appointment to Cabinet, and her swearing in as the Education Minister. I don't know if they told you on the 13th day that thou shalt have to answer these questions. As I look at the former minister over there, he's never looked so relaxed. So I'm not sure whether I should be congratulating you or - they probably also didn't tell you that it's incumbent on all new Education Ministers to have a positive announcement about the riding of Annapolis sometime in the first 30 days of being sworn in. (Laughter)
On that note, I'll ask about the positive announcement that the former minister made in the riding of Annapolis, and that was around the renovations to a gymnasium and music room at Middleton Regional High School. I just want an update on that project, and where it's at.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the honourable member opposite, the previous minister did leave something special for me to announce. It's my understanding that the $1.2 million commitment to that project is in our budget, and recognizing that there have been significant contributions made by the community and by the administration at the school and so on, it's my understanding that the dollars have been allocated to bring that project forward.
MR. MCNEIL: I just wanted to say to the minister that re-announcing an old announcement doesn't get you off the hook, so you have 17 days left. Part of that announcement was in two phases, and one of them was actually supposed to have been implemented at this point. There was an understanding going out to architectural firms to be hired, and that hasn't happened. I'm just wondering, when can we expect that?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, some of our capital projects are now being administered by the boards. It's my understanding that the initial $300,000 to get that particular project started has been allocated to the board and that they will be looking to go out for preparing the tender documents for that. That was a commitment for 2006-07.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, one of the things that the board is suggesting, or is being led to believe, is that there's such a thing called a charter letter, which defines the responsibilities of this project and who pays what. I'm sure the deputy will remember, the community has agreed to expand this project and has agreed to bear some
[Page 263]
of the cost of the expansion of the gymnasium. It's my understanding that the board is not prepared, or will not send out that letter of intent looking for an architectural firm to submit drawings without that letter, called the charter letter. I'm wondering, can they expect that in the near future?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, I will check with the staff at Facilities Planning to see if in fact that letter has gone out. If it has not, it will.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, when the Health Estimates were going on today, we talked about the early intervention program around autism, which the Department of Health is funding for children who are not in school. It is in the process of being unfolded as we speak. It was a $4 million commitment, I believe. I'm wondering, what relationship has your department had in this project, not in terms of funding but in terms of beginning to work the early intervention program, to ensure that when the children reach the age of five and come into the school system, that we're prepared to handle them so that they are in a position to achieve their very best?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the whole issue of autism and support for autistic children crosses over both Education and Health, and our department has hired an autism consultant. She is in place now, and we'll be working along with Health to make sure that we tap the same resources, or have access to the same resources, but our focus will be on autistic students in our schools. There may well be something we can learn from working closely with the Department of Health. That person has been hired; they are in place.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, where I was going to lead with this question is unfortunately we failed a generation of our students, at this point, by not having in place this program around autism. There are a tremendous number of students, particularly in the Valley, in the Middleton area, the Kingston-Greenwood area, who are going into our high school system with autism. I'm wondering, is there anything specific in place in the budget or that your department will be moving forward with to ensure that those children get the best quality of education that we can provide them?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The whole question of autism, as I said, is long overdue - recognition and support. What we'll be looking at, and I'm not sure what is happening in your particular board, but boards do have some flexibility in staffing and they may have identified a need within their own board. I don't know that for sure, but I know that we have recognized a need provincially, and would be encouraging boards to look at their resources so there could be some on-site support for students. We're looking at the strategies that are best defined now as to how to deal with autistic children and, once those strategies are identified and appear to be the most recent research as to what's best for autistic kids, the two departments will be working together in consultation with the boards and eventually the parents.
[Page 264]
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I look forward to discussing this with the school board in my area, as we continue to move forward. I want to commend the government for the work they've done so far on autism. On this side of the House, we often criticize what government has done, but I think that in this case we should recognize the work that the government has done on autism to this point, and also be willing to say that there is more to do as we come forward.
[5:45 p.m.]
One of the things that is brought to my office on an ongoing basis is the issue around EA support. Often parents are coming into my office, suggesting to me that their child may have a problem with mathematics, the child may have a problem with a particular subject, but to find that support in the school system is virtually non-existent. I'm wondering, if your child is a very high-needs child there seems to be EA support, but if your child requires some basic EA help it's not there. I'm wondering, do you agree with that assessment, and whether or not you see, under your leadership, us dealing with and addressing that problem?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. One of the things I think we have to be cautious of is who delivers the support to our students. We would like to believe that students who have a specific need can get the support and the extra help they need from the teachers in the school, whether that's a resource teacher or a classroom teacher, but we also recognize that educational assistants are there to support in the delivery in the whole class. So if there are students who have a need to close that gap, so to speak, we would be looking at teachers identifying that and looking at the best resource person in the school to deliver that. That may not be within the classroom, that may be a pullout for a specific short-term, intense kind of instruction. It may not necessarily be the educational assistant who would deliver that support, so I don't want to get confused on who delivers that support in that direction.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure who would provide that, unless you mean the teacher may provide that support. One of the challenges - and I'm sure you're well aware of this with your background - that is brought to my attention is EAs do not have the extra time to provide it to the other students in the classroom. The EA is assigned to a specific student, and they are taking their full time, their full attention. What's happening, though, is there are students in our system who are falling through the cracks and actually being delayed because we have not been able to provide them with the support early enough to overcome these challenges and provide them with the confidence that they need to move forward.
Unfortunately, by not dealing with this issue early enough, we're creating a huge backlog in the system the further up the grades you go. I guess I want to go back to you and ask whether you agree with that assessment, and is there a willingness on the part of
[Page 265]
the department to say, yes, we see that's happening and we're going to take every measure we can to move forward to ensure that the problem gets solved to be the best interests of those students?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, when we look at the special needs of a student, and that does not mean a special needs student, but the areas where they are experiencing some difficulty, we have professionals, hired at the board level, to go in and determine exactly what that need is and who best can respond to that. I think what I'm suggesting to you is that if it is a curriculum-based academic need, it would be best delivered by a teacher, and that may not be the classroom teacher because they may not have the time to give that student the individual attention. But there would certainly be a process in place where that student would have access to and supports from another professional, perhaps a resource teacher.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I guess I would close on this saying to you, and I don't know how many students across the district have EA support, but I can tell you that for every one in my constituency who has EA support, there's probably another half-dozen looking for it. Maybe not the same level of support, but looking for support on a short-term basis to help that student overcome the difficulty they are having in a particular subject. I think it is something, from a departmental perspective, that needs to be addressed, and the sooner the better, if we're talking about providing a quality education for all students.
I want to move on to the new provincial food policy, and a letter that was sent to my office that was addressed, actually, to the secretary of the Bridgetown Regional High School SAC. Their concern was around the fact that the new school food policy would lead to the closure of their cafeteria. I'm sure you're well aware that the school board operates on a break-even basis. Wages, all the things that deal with the cafeteria, they have to earn enough money to cover the costs of operating that cafeteria. I'll just read a little part of this.
It says: The new food policy does create challenges, but it is a reality that we must face head-on as it is the future of what we will have to deliver as food to our students. We value our cafeterias and the employees and the volunteers who operate them. It goes on to say: We are hopeful that the province will recognize the need for financial support to school boards to support the implementation of this healthy food policy, but at present we are not aware of any direct support for cafeteria operations. That was on May 2nd.
One of the challenges under the new program in my constituency - and I want to be very clear, nobody is opposed to healthy eating - is that what cafeterias are being asked or are being told to provide is forcing them to close. Quite frankly, in many of those schools, students, especially at the junior high and high school level, can walk out the door and across the street to buy what we're telling them they can't eat in the school.
[Page 266]
I just want to ask your opinion on that. Is there funding coming to help support cafeteria workers and the implementation of that program? Have other areas suggested to you, without funding coming, that their cafeteria may close?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, the new policy on food is designed to make students more aware of healthy eating, healthy lifestyles, and part of the way we can do that is in our schools through education and through raising the awareness amongst our students. They will still have to make some difficult decisions and choices, but we're hoping that they will make informed choices and that that choice will be something that will lead to a better and more healthy lifestyle for them.
So on that basis, and in co-operation and consultation with the Department of Health, the food policy was drafted and it has gone out to schools for input. It was never designed to shut down a cafeteria. What it is designed to do is to have the food choices and the selections that are offered in the cafeteria's healthy ones and so it's on that basis. Again, it goes to students making healthy, wise decisions about the foods they eat. The question, do we have anything in our budget to subsidize cafeterias that feel that it may not be profitable following the implementation of this policy, we do not have anything in our budget to that effect.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I believe it was the intent of government to provide that healthy eating choice to the students of Nova Scotia. I believe that was the intent of it. In my constituency, and I'll just use the example of my own children, what you have said to the cafeteria operators, not only do you have to provide a healthy choice but you will not offer this as well, to be correct. In our case, our children would have the treat of buying lunch one day at school, at the school that they attend and, quite frankly, we chose pizza day which unfortunately by government standards we weren't providing our children with a healthy meal unless it was a vegetarian pizza.
So what we've said now to the cafeterias and to parents across the province is, we're not going to provide you with that option that you want to provide as a "treat" for your children, we're going to say that will not be an option. Here are the healthy choices and the only healthy choices that we believe should be offered in schools and, in essence, what you're going to do is close cafeterias unless you're prepared to subsidize them. So as a parent, I'm asking myself, how are you helping my child?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, I think if you look at the menu changes that have taken place at some of our fast food outlets over the last five years, you'll see an effort on their part to offer healthy choices on their menu, perhaps a different menu than we would have looked at 10 years ago ourselves. So I think this whole notion of promoting healthy foods is in keeping with what's happening and schools should be taking a lead on helping students with those options. We've had nutritionists who worked with us to help develop some options, some choices, and as I
[Page 267]
said, we have not considered that this would close cafeterias. What we're hoping it will do is that they will change their offerings, their menus, and that that whole notion of awareness and good choices will become a way of life for our young people.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, those fast food outlets you were talking about over the last 10 years are providing a multiple of options. One of them today happens to be a healthier choice. They're still providing the choice of 10 years ago. What you've done, in essence, is said to school boards that have been operating, there is no phase-in here, here it is. This is not on the menu, we will tell you what those children will be able to buy. As a parent who out of the five meals that they actually eat at school, provided them with four, we think, healthy well-rounded balanced meals and diets, decided on the day that it would be pizza day that they would eat at school. You have said to that cafeteria operator, that is not an option. So all you have done to us is we will say, okay, our children will take their fifth lunch from home as well or there will be no buying a lunch at school because they will not eat what's there.
I guess what I'm asking you is, why was there not the healthy choice provided, but allow the cafeteria to provide the meals that they wanted to?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, I'm not aware of the menu choices in the school in question, but I know that cafeterias have been encouraged and many of them have made changes to their menus, whether on their own initiative or by encouragement by parents or whatever, they have made some changes to move away from the so-called junk foods to more healthy foods. I think where that has happened, this policy will be a much easier implementation process than where they haven't.
MR. MCNEIL: I think you have proved my point. In schools where the leadership was shown and they had the opportunity to phase-in this implementation and say to the student body, we're going to show you the leadership, we're going to provide you a healthy choice, and not eliminate the menu that you presently have seen for the last five years, that parents have been using, we're going to phase this in. Those schools have implemented this program fairly well because they have done it over a period of time.
The schools that haven't are having difficulty with it and, quite frankly, there are some in my riding, and it's not just isolated to my riding. The very things that you are suggesting should not be for sale in schools, you walk across the street and you buy at a store. There was no implementation phase, there was no opportunity for the educational process that's required in this. That's the inequity in that, and that's the unfairness of that policy.
That's why I'm suggesting to you that if we had provided and said, let's do a phased - here are the healthy choices you must provide, they have to be on your menu, what else you put there is up to you, but in the next five years this will be your menu, I
[Page 268]
think would have allowed that to have been phased-in much easier, would have allowed, quite frankly, those private operators who are looking after canteens - and they are not conglomerates, they are community people who are turning around with every cent they make over and above what they do to cover their costs and pouring it back into those existing schools. It would have allowed them to adopt this policy and allowed to be phased-in without the pain that schools are suffering now.
[6:00 p.m.]
So I would encourage you to have a look at that. You don't need to respond, but I would encourage you to have a look at that and see where we could go with that - and I will again add - in the best interests of the student body of not only my constituency, but across Nova Scotia where they are having some of those issues.
You had mentioned in your opening remarks around the healthy, active learning and living policy that you have. I wonder if you could explain that to me.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, you didn't ask for a response to your last question but I want to make a comment if I could. The draft policy on foods was out in the schools during the past year. It was circulated to teachers and school advisory councils and principals, and so on, for their reaction, so I think there was a bit of forewarning that something was coming and people did submit some responses and reactions and it was modified in some ways.
It will be going back out in September of this year when schools start up again and we'll be looking for the beginning of the implementation in January 2007. So the gradual implementation may not be as you have defined and designed it, but it certainly was out there for input. The word was out that this was what the policy was going to look like and the implementation will begin in January 2007.
The real question with respect to healthy, active learning and lifestyle policy is a combination of things, but one of them is a healthy foods policy. It's also encouraging more physical activity, and in the election the Premier made a commitment to hiring additional phys. ed. teachers in our schools to make physical education a compulsory course in high school. So there are a number of activities that we're looking at that will try to address the concern about inactivity and encourage students to become more active and to become healthier.
MR. MCNEIL: What are the initiatives that are going to encourage more activity in schools? You made reference to the phys. ed. credit at the senior high level - I'm wondering, is that it or is there something else coming?
[Page 269]
MS. CASEY: This begins at elementary and it's a period of compulsory physical activity for students: 20 minutes a day of physical education for Primary, Grades 1 and 2; 25 to 35 minutes for Grades 3 to 6; and Grades 7 to 9, 30 minutes of instruction per day. This is all part of making that physical activity a component and a requirement of the curriculum. The elective course which would not be elective now at the high school level is the physical education.
MR. MCNEIL: What is the implementation date of that? Is it this year or three years from now?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. In this current budget we have allocated money - we will phase it in gradually, but we have put in money to hire 10 phys. ed. teachers. We have to look in particular at the high school for their programming concerns and the facilities that they need in order to deliver that and how they can schedule that. So it will be gradual, but that first commitment of $500,000 has already been made and that is to be earmarked for physical education teachers.
MR. MCNEIL: I think you said $500,000 for 10 new phys. ed. teachers? So when will the implementation happen at the elementary level?
I find it rather interesting that we have put through a food policy that in my riding would actually close cafeterias if there's not something that doesn't change it. To deal with five of the 21 meals a child would eat - quite frankly in most cases in my riding would deal with one, because most of them would buy a lunch at school one day a week. The very thing that I think we could be doing in terms of improving the health of our students, their ability to learn, is in the activity component of your program which, if I heard you correctly, will be phased in and the 10 will be dealing with the senior high. So really we don't have a drop-dead date of when that will start taking place at the elementary level.
I think if we're actually truly concerned about the health of our children in school then that should be where we're starting, at the elementary level, not at the senior high level. Quite frankly, many of those kids have already developed their physical activity patterns and we're now allowing another generation to move through the system before we start getting to the point of developing this at an early age. I'm wondering, have you any idea when we may begin to see the implementation at the elementary level?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, if I could, to the member - and I'm just reading this here - we have $520,000 new funding for 2005-06, which is to hire additional physical education teachers for Grades 3 to 6, in 2005-06 that was a commitment, and an additional $560,000 is to be used in 2006-07 for 10 additional phys. ed. teachers. So elementary, Grades 3 to 6, would have been monies in the 2005-06 budget and the $500,000, 2006-07, is for 10 additional phys. ed. teachers.
[Page 270]
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, so to implement this province-wide program we're going to hire 10 teachers - that's about a half of one per county, I guess, if you went across using the 18 counties - how's that going to work?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, if I could, this is in addition to the staff that we currently have, so we have phys. ed. teachers who are already employed in our schools. This is in addition; we're looking at a total of 60 new positions. We're beginning to phase them in and so it's not that 10 teachers are going to have to take on the responsibility for implementing all of the phys. ed. programs, but it's to build on the staff that we currently have and it is phased in and the total number that we're targeting that we believe we need in order to provide that service and that support is 60 staff positions.
MR. MCNEIL: So the phys. ed. teachers that you currently have in the system - and I'll use Annapolis County - who are not full-time phys. ed. teachers and who cover other curriculum aspects, I assume you'll be hiring more teachers to replace the role that they're doing and they will become full-time phys. ed. teachers to implement this policy?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, if I could, the allocation of funding is to the boards and the boards are responsible for doing their staffing, but we have an expectation that that is what will be delivered. If they decide to take somebody who is 0.5 phys. ed. and make them full-time phys. ed., that's a board-based decision, but the expectation is that the students will receive that allocation of physically active time in their daily instructional time.
MR. MCNEIL: It's the board's responsibility to allocate the time, to implement your policy, right? I assume this is a new policy. You wouldn't be suggesting that you would be implementing a policy and saying to school boards, here's a fraction of what you may require to provide this policy, to implement this program, but you're going to do it anyway and it's going to be your responsibility to find somewhere in your system to make it happen. How can that happen without other things suffering? There's only so much money the school board has. This is a new policy - how are they going to implement it without the proper funding?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. This initiative is not done in isolation. It's done in consultation with school boards. The school boards know that they will get additional funding. They know what the department is expecting that they will do with that funding and they know that, at the end of the implementation period, we're looking at approximately 60 FTEs in order to deliver that. It's in consultation with them, but they do know our expectation.
MR. MCNEIL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To the minister, I look forward to going to the elementary school in my constituency in the Fall and seeing physical activity happening, in every one of them. It will be a welcome sight and I will congratulate you
[Page 271]
if that happens. On a personal note, I believe it's long overdue. We can spend all the time we like talking about the healthy food initiative but, if you are truly concerned about the health and well-being of the children, there is nothing better you can do for them than to implement this program. But you need to be prepared to fund it, and I'll be looking forward to attending those schools to ensure that they have the same access to physical activity as every other child does in Nova Scotia. So I welcome that.
One of the other issues that I want to touch on is the tuition support program, which you also mentioned in your opening, and that you had extended it to three years from a two-year program. I'm wondering, do you see that program being extended beyond that three-year period?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. I think if you recall my earlier comments, we'll recognize that there are sometimes situations where the needs cannot be met in the school, and we are very much in support of the tuition support program. We have extended that to the third year. Our intent is to consult with the parents and those people who are providing the support during that third year to determine what the needs still may be at that time, and to look at ways that we might be able to provide support. We have not yet said how that's going to happen, but we have said that we will do that during that third year, because we do not want students who come to the end of that and are not able to be re-entered back into the public school system. So that consultation with parents and with the educators providing that support will take place during that third year.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, so will the consultation be with the parents on how their child is doing, how the child is doing in this program, or will the consultation be on how you are going to integrate that child back into the public education system?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. Whenever there are decisions made that are in the best interests of students, we want and we encourage parental participation in those decisions. So we would be sitting down with the parents not to have the parents tell us what the academic successes have been, that's where the educators who have been delivering those supports to the students would be part of the consultation, but the parents would certainly be there, because they are the people with a vested interest here.
MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, if the educational providers - experts, I think you called them - say to you that this child is not able to be integrated back into the public education system, are you prepared to fund that child or any number of children for four years?
[Page 272]
[6:15 p.m.]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, that decision would be part of the discussion/ consultation at that time as to what is the next best step for that child.
MR. MCNEIL: I take it from that answer that you're saying that's a possibility, that will be one of the options that will be on the table as we assess all the information that's provided around those children?
MS. CASEY: The answer to the question is that when students are pulled out for that tuition support program, the ultimate goal is that they do re-enter public schools, and so we will all be working towards that. However, if during the third year there seem to be issues or concerns as to whether that would be in the best interests of students, then those will be discussed in those consultations with parents and the educators.
MR. MCNEIL: Thank you for that, Madam Minister. In your opening, you also mentioned 321 new seats at the NSCC, that you are, I assume, claiming credit, and I'm just wondering, what is the relationship between you and the NSCC?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, the community colleges do fall under my jurisdiction as Department of Education, and we do fund their programs.
MR. MCNEIL: I guess what I would say to you around the 321 new seats, are they actually new seats, and your government - and I'll say your government, because this a $123 million centralization of the NSCC that took place - removed 150 seats out of the constituency that I represent. I have two community colleges in my riding: the Centre of Geographic Sciences, which is known around the world and students come from all over the world to attend that college, and the Annapolis Campus of the NSCC - and 150 of those students and those programs and those seats were moved to Kentville where they added on. Just so you're clear, they added more bricks and mortar to a community college in Kentville while they were pulling the seats out of Annapolis, and that's why I call it a $123 million centralization of the NSCC.
If you're claiming credit for the 321 seats, I assume you're also taking credit for the 150 lost seats in the riding of Annapolis. Are they 321 new seats or are they just pulled in from everywhere else?
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. Our plan is to look at 2,500 new seats implemented over a period of time to help meet the needs that the community college staff and administration do identify. The location of those seats and where they deliver their particular programs are the responsibility of the community college, but overall it is looking at 2,500 new seats and the location of those is determined by the community college.
[Page 273]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time has expired for the member.
The honourable member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank.
MR. PERCY PARIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to revisit - in my last question I asked the minister, through the chairman, what specific initiatives or strategies the Department of Education was going to implement to address the imbalance or the inequities or the inequalities respecting Black learners. I think - and please correct me if I'm wrong - the response I heard was that education in Nova Scotia from P to 12 is designed for all students and an amendment to that is that they had special needs programs. Is that correct, Madam Minister?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We have committed $4.1 million over four years to address and implement some of the recommendations in the BLAC Report. The member would be well aware, the Council on African Canadian Education, the CACE advisory group meets with the minister regularly and we would be looking for their input and advice and support before we proceed with a lot of changes in our Public School Program, but I did want to highlight for you something that is really, we believe, positive in that we are taking some steps initially in those five schools in this school year to help close that gap and perhaps address the inequities.
MR. PARIS: I want to reiterate that for 500 years now we have identified that something is wrong with the public school system in Nova Scotia for Black learners. The BLAC Report has been out now for several years, CACE has been around now for a number of years, so again I ask the minister, could she be more specific with what those strategies are that are going to be implemented?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The recommendations from the BLAC Report, we have a progress report on where we are with the implementation of those. I can also provide for the member opposite a list of the initiatives that the CACE advisory group has submitted for our consideration and implementation, but I think the progress report on the recommendations in the BLAC Report are clear evidence that this government has taken positive steps to implement those and to address the concerns that exist with the disadvantaged students.
MR. PARIS: I guess my comment is that we've identified that the system is broken and still remains broken today. I don't think I'm going to go any further on that point. Over the course of the last number of years, one of the catch words that I've been hearing - and I certainly heard it in the Throne Speech - I hear the word "diversity" being thrown around quite frequently. I've also heard some discussion here today relating to special needs, students with disabilities. It has been recognized, certainly in the community I come from, bullying and name -calling in the public school system has long been recognized as an issue and a concern from where I come from.
[Page 274]
One of the problems that I see in the public school system is we take action, we implement a strategy, and the strategy would be, well, this is the rule that we have whether it be zero tolerance or whatever the case may be. We won't tolerate bullying and name-calling, but it could end up in an automatic suspension regardless of whatever.
My question to the minister is, through the chairman, what strategies does the Department of Education have in place, if any, to make diversity a larger part of the education of all Nova Scotians? I think when I talk about education, I'm not talking about just the students, I'm talking about administration, and educators.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. The whole issue of diversity and the Department of Education and the Province of Nova Scotia trying to meet the needs of all of our learners is a challenge, and we continue to work with those people who can best advise us on strategies that we should look at and implement in order to help meet those needs. In particular, in this particular situation, I've identified the advisory group that does sit with me, and we respond and respect the initiatives and the concerns that they put forward and the suggestions as to how we might overcome the diversity issue that exists.
MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, I'm feeling somewhat at a loss here, because I feel like I have to ask the question again. What I'm requesting from the Department of Education, through the minister and through you, Mr. Chairman, is, again, what specifically is on the table or is coming down the tubes to address the diversity issues in the public school systems of Nova Scotia?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, as a department, and also at the board level, we recognize the need to have qualified teachers in our schools who can be and will be role models and who will help boards address the diversity issue and concern. Although the hiring of staff is the responsibility of the board, we are working with encouraging, through training and through scholarships, to have African Nova Scotian students who are interested in becoming teachers to have the opportunities to get educated and trained and encourage the boards, when those qualified people are available, to do the hiring. We believe that is one step that can help address the diversity issue and support our African Nova Scotian students.
MR. PARIS: Well, I heard a response, Mr. Chairman. For me, the question still remains unanswered. I think I have asked it twice, so I don't know if there's any point in asking it a third time, and I say that not to be disrespectful.
I have to make a comment because when we talk about the hiring of African-Canadian educators, my question was around the issue of diversity itself and diversity just doesn't pertain to one particular segment of the population. Diversity is about all of us and it is all-inclusive. I do appreciate the response and I guess it's somewhat
[Page 275]
refreshing, although it's not the solution. It may be a small part of the solution, but it certainly is not the solution.
If we have a public education system that is broken and not addressing the needs of Black learners, then another question would arise, where the educator is going to come from when you're hiring Black educators. So that's certainly a question for another day but it's something we should think about. I have to reiterate here, we have already determined that the wheel is broken, there is no argument there. What I wanted to hear today were some of those remedies. So the questions I'm asking are about, what are those remedies, and thus far I haven't heard them.
I want to go on to the curriculum. Certainly one of the problems in the public school system in Nova Scotia is one of inclusiveness when it comes to the public school system and the curriculum. I know certainly if I open up a textbook, I don't think it does justice to the Mi'kmaq population of Nova Scotia or, indeed, First Nations in Canada, and I certainly know it doesn't do justice to persons of African descent.
[6:30 p.m.]
My next question would be to the minister through you, Mr. Chairman, is there a strategy or will there be a strategy to address some of the curriculum imbalances and lacking pages?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, from the curriculum department we are currently in the process of developing two new courses: one is a Grade 8 Mi'kmaq course and the second one is Grade 12, it's English African-Canadian studies. Those two are being developed as we speak and they are the beginning of addressing, I believe, the concern that has been raised.
MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, my question to the minister would be, are those courses mandatory courses? Will they be by choice? Could she elaborate more about those courses and if students have an option to either take or not to take? I would hate to see those courses just spurred up in schools where there is a predominantly Mi'kmaq population or a predominantly African Nova Scotian population.
MS. CASEY: If I could, Mr. Chairman, to the speaker. The Grade 12 course, the English African-Canadian studies, will be a mandatory course. It can count as a mandatory course, if students wish to use it as one of their total number of credits, and there is no course selection at Grade 8, but the Grade 12 one is an option.
MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, at this time I'd like to turn the floor over to my colleague.
[Page 276]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.
MR. TREVOR ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, at this point I'd like to take the opportunity to thank the minister for focusing in on all of our questions during the Supply debate, and to congratulate her on taking this ministerial position. It is a challenging one, but it also is an important one to the future of this province's success.
The first part of my questions. I just want to basically run a scenario by you, a situation that's taking place in my constituency right now. I have two feeder elementary schools that feed into a junior high by the name of John Martin. Harbour View Elementary School and John MacNeil Elementary School both feed into John Martin Junior High School. The situation that we have here is that I have parents who are approaching me from the John MacNeil school who have told me that they're in fear of their children going on to the junior high level. In particular, to the John Martin school. This is due to the fact that some of the "tougher children" come out of the Harbour View school area. My first question to the minister is, in this situation, what kind of answers can I take back to my community and to those parents who are in fear of their children going to this school, to deal with these bullies?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I guess perhaps a question, is this the first time that these two feeder schools have fed into this junior high? If it is not, then I would expect that if there are concerns that parents have, that they would be based on some history. If they are concerns that they would be meeting with their board staff, principals, administration, to make that transition easy and safe, but it certainly should be addressed at the boa rd level.
MR. ZINCK: I want to reiterate a point that was made this afternoon by my honourable colleague, the member for Timberlea-Prospect. He had spoken earlier about the number of suspensions throughout the province in the schools and some of the highest numbers come out of the Dartmouth North area. Dartmouth High School in particular, which has its feeder schools that come out of Harbour View, John Martin, John MacNeil and Bicentennial. One of the things that was mentioned was setting up a tracking system for the province, to centralize this and to come up with some sort of statistic that will allow a school board to order the education department to monitor the amount of the suspensions.
My question to the minister through you, Mr. Chairman, would be, what kind of information from those stats would the minister be able to take in setting up some sort of programs that they might be able to implement, to deal with bullying situations or violence? Would they actually be able to use those numbers or are they planning on using those numbers in that way?
[Page 277]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, obviously the intent of any initiative like that is to try to identify and respond to, and reduce, if they do exist, patterns of behaviour that are inappropriate and so we would be monitoring that very carefully and if that pattern develops, then there would be supports that would be put in place to help those students with inappropriate behavior change that behavior.
MR. ZINCK: I can only say that a lot of it is - it's pretty much a social situation and I think, hopefully, not just in Dartmouth North that these problems have arrived and will be addressed.
I want to move on to a situation with a constituent, April Lahey, who I was approached by during the election and again had the opportunity to meet with her several nights ago. April is a university student, she has a Bachelor of Arts at Dalhousie in two different departments: in the classics department, linguistics, and ancient history; and in the soc. department, which is sociology, and social anthropology. She's a young lady whose mother has taken it upon herself to mortgage her home three times to be able to afford tuition.
Last year, April visited an area of Europe, went to York University in England, which was also financed by her mother, and from York University she received nine credits towards her master's degree.
The question that April proposed to me is the fact that she's unable to get financing to further her education to enable her to get this master's degree right now. She has shown initiative, she's trying to work part-time hours being a full-time student. Her mother has taken it upon herself to mortgage her home. She is a single mother who works full-time, as well. She's frustrated that she has been told she cannot continue with any further funding due to the amount of funding she has already received. My question with regard to this is, what is the department of student loans' policy on student loan accessibility for post-graduate degrees?
MS. CASEY: The short answer to the question is, they are eligible, but the bigger question, and something I would want to review with you would be the specifics of that case, because, if there's a file there, I would like to review it, and perhaps we could discuss that further, but the short answer is, she should be eligible.
MR. ZINCK: Thank you, Madam Minister. I will definitely take you up on that offer. I would like to revisit it. I do want to make one more point that is of query to both parties, myself and April Lahey in this case. We had approached the Student Loans Program in the last couple of days and she was told that she can, indeed, receive funding only if she becomes a part-time student and finishes her degree over two years, which she had a problem understanding, because why wouldn't they allow her to finish it in a one-year course. If she does do it part-time, she will end up having to pay a registration fee
[Page 278]
next year, which will end up costing more money. She is inquiring about that, as well. The other thing, of course, is if she's a full-time student, it also enables her to keep her university pass, which, for a young student, is very important. So I look forward to visiting this case with you.
I'll move on to a recent topic. Throughout the sitting of the House and the election there has been talk about the closure of schools. With regard to that, I want to say that in the particular area of Dartmouth North, our greatest concern is updating our schools, not necessarily closures. We've dealt with some of those in the past.
I have a high school, Dartmouth High School, which is a very traditional school. I have a lot of successful graduates come out of Dartmouth High. I had an opportunity before the election to go in and take a tour, requested by some of the students on student council. I've done work with a teacher by the name of Mr. McCormick through the co-op program, filtering students into the community for jobs. There is a major concern here with this school and the comfort level of the students there. They have a problem with the suspensions and violence in the school, but more so, the biggest concern for this student council, the students who go there, and some of the teachers, is the amount of funding to update the school.
I'm just wondering, if now or in the near future, can the honourable minister enlighten me as to potential spending in the area of Dartmouth North to refurbish this school and bring it up to code? There are poor air-conditioning qualities, there are bathroom stall doors missing, the school is in dire need of paint. I must tell you, they are definitely interested in furthering their education, but in a more comfortable way. If you could enlighten me as to when potential funding might come in that direction, I would appreciate it.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. As I have spoken to earlier, boards do submit their list of priorities to the department, the priorities for upgrading additions, renovations, or new school construction. It is my understanding that that particular school is on the list that came in from the board, so now our Capital Construction Committee will be looking at those from all across the boards and identifying priorities. The first hurdle has been reached in that it is on the list that your board did send in and, once the Capital Construction Committee has completed their work, they will be in contact with the boards as to the status of those projects.
MR. ZINCK: Before I pass the rest of my time to my honourable colleague, the member for Dartmouth East, I want to make a comment as to some of the things that were discussed here today in and around elementary school-aged children, potential guidance counsellors.
[Page 279]
My honourable colleague, the member for Timberlea-Prospect, had made mention of the importance of junior high school-aged development. I just want to say how important, when we look at the health issues we are dealing with today, a lot of the talk is around preventive medicine. I look at the Department of Education as having a responsibility to those school-aged children and, as far as building a community and building families, we allow our children to go to school and we entrust them into the hands of our teachers - if we don't give our teachers the right tools and the right mechanisms, our children kind of fall by the wayside.
I have to say that a lot of the issues we deal with in Dartmouth North are social issues. There is a lot of evidence of mental illness and mental questions that young students come upon and I think it's important that we consider putting guidance counsellors at the earliest levels possible in the education system. It is better to deal with it at that stage, to raise our children the right way and we don't have that problem.
I will go back to the Harbour View-John MacNeil situation. I look at that situation and say if we have a guidance counsellor who can deal with those anger issues that some of those children are facing, we no longer need a police presence that is currently in our junior high at John Martin. We want our children to be comfortable. You take them and go to John Martin and they are uncomfortable, and then they go to the high school level and the ability to learn in comfort is just not there.
I just want to reiterate some of the points made today to impress upon the department and the minister that it is crucial that, again, we attack it like the health issue, preventive, start it early, start it often. We spoke about physical education - start it at the elementary age, it is crucial. Thank you.
[6:45 p.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth South-Portland Valley.
MS. MARILYN MORE: Just before I start my questioning, I wonder if I could make an introduction?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MS. MORE: Thank you. In the west gallery we have visiting us this evening Sandra Whitehead and Rene Quigley from the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union. We are very pleased to have them with us, and I ask everyone to join me in welcoming them. (Applause)
[Page 280]
Mr. Chairman, the one area I want to talk about this evening is the critical gap in programming and services for young adults with disabilities. Certainly there has always been an under-supply of community-based programming for individuals with disabilities when they leave the Public School Program. This issue has really been brought to a head lately by the new trend among regional school boards to actually, as some people put it, push out youth with disabilities much earlier in their school career than they had in the past.
I just wonder if - Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister - we can ask the minister to respond to the issue that has come to light with the Halifax Regional School Board. I'm not sure how widespread that new interpretation of responsibilities to youth in the province is among the regional school boards. I would just be interested to start off my questioning to get some reaction from the department on how they view that situation.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I think this question, or one similar to it, was raised in Question Period. I have received correspondence specific to some students who are in that unfortunate situation, and I say unfortunate because these students have special needs. They have, under the Education Act, a right to be in our schools until age 21. If they have completed the outcomes expected for them at the public schools, then there is a gap. Let's say that happens when they are 18 or 19, they're not eligible to go into some of our Community Services programs until they're age 21 and we do not want those students falling through the cracks.
I believe that the situation you're speaking about, and the ones I've heard about, appear to be specific to Halifax Regional School Board. I know the board that I'm most familiar with does have programs in place for students in that age range or in that gap. So I would certainly be working with the Halifax Regional School Board to look at what programs might be in place or should be in place; also working with Community Services. My colleague and I have talked about that because if there needs to be some adjustment on one end or the other so that those students are eligible to be involved in a particular program, whether it's through Education or Community Services, we want to make sure that we address that. So as I said, I believe at this point it is specific to Halifax Regional School Board, or perhaps more prominent in Halifax Regional School Board, but all across the province we would want to treat all students the same. So that's the progress report to date.
MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the minister's offer to follow up on this issue. I think it's a very dangerous and slippery slope because certainly reports and studies in Nova Scotia indicate that persons with disabilities seem to have a lower rate of participation in the workforce as it is, and they also tend to have lower levels of educational achievement. I would be very nervous about seeing school boards not recognizing that they have a responsibility to allow students with disabilities to reinforce
[Page 281]
their learning, to continue with their life skills, and be as ready as possible to be productive and to have a life of independence when they actually graduate from the public school system.
I know from my own experience that many students in Nova Scotia continued beyond graduation. They went back and they took other programs and courses to get higher marks. Perhaps they weren't eligible for community college or university, so they had to go back and take other programs. I can see a problem here that if students have graduated and yet they need to continue with the Public School Program to get necessary credits or to be better prepared to enter into post-secondary education, that it would be very important for them to be able to stay within the school system until the age of 21.
So guess I want to ask a couple questions. If the minister hasn't been in touch with the Halifax Regional School Board, has anyone in the department followed up on the information that came to light, I think through the media? If so, what concrete steps will the minister and her department be taking besides meeting to make sure that the students currently enrolled are not prematurely pushed out of the Public School Program, at least in the metro area if that's the only region where this is happening?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, the answer is yes, we have been talking with and working with the Halifax board. On June 27th, a meeting took place and there was a commitment at that time that the parties would work together to bring a resolution to the specific situation that they were discussing at that time. There was an understanding from the board that there would be something ready for September of this school year. The second thing that we're continuing to work on is that's the short-term solution but we also have to look at the long-term solution, and again work with Community Services to see if we can bridge that gap. The short answer is yes, the meetings have begun, the communication has started, and at the meeting on June 27th there was an agreement and an understanding that all parties would work toward a solution for September.
MS. MORE: It's encouraging to hear that and I'm just wondering, would the minister state on the floor that any student who has been prematurely told, or family, that they are not eligible to return to the school system, if that will be retroactive and that they can continue on with their individual program plans, their IPPs this Fall?
MS. CASEY: My response to that would be we would be looking at them on an individual basis, I think that's to respect confidentiality and to look at each individual's needs, we would want to assess them on an individual basis.
MS. MORE: I just want to reinforce what the minister has said, that there is also that huge gap in community-based programming and opportunities for pre-employment transitional programs and also skill development for youth with disabilities. As she has
[Page 282]
already mentioned, many of the programs offered through the Department of Community Services begin at age 21, so there's a huge gap there between those youth who are 18 years of age and 21. In addition, and I realize there's a shared responsibility here, I'm not talking just about the Department of Education, but the wait lists for youth with disabilities trying to get into the Department of Community Services programs is quite long. So we have a significant number of young Nova Scotians who are losing their knowledge, their motivation, their sense of independence in that age group because they're waiting too long to get into productive training and transitional programs.
I'm concerned that some of the action and interpretation taken by the Halifax Regional School Board is the result of shortage of funds. I'd like to hear from the minister, to what extent will the new funding formula and the recommended increases in funding through the Hogg report be in effect this year through this budget?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, our funding per pupil stays with the student and goes to the board as long as that student is enrolled in a program with the board. If those particular students were back there at age 8, 19 and again at age 20 and again at age 21, if they were in a Public School Program within the Halifax board, the per-student funding continues as long as they are there. Having them back as a returning grad or whatever you want to call them, as long as they are there, they're in the count for the funding. That would answer, I believe, the question about the funding. The second question was the distribution of funds to the boards and the $5 million out of one of the recommendations in the Hogg report, that is part of our budget for this year and that allocation has been included in our numbers.
MS. MORE: Thank you. I'm assuming, though, that the original funding for students with special needs was not adequate enough, according to the programming offered by the Halifax Regional School Board. It's my understanding that a significant amount of the supplementary funding also went to those programs and to assist those students. I'm sure that any increase that came to the board through the Hogg report recommendations would certainly make it much easier for the board to provide as positive a learning experience for the students with special needs as possible.
I just want to quickly go over to another area of interest. This is a follow-up question from last year's estimates debates. In terms of the amount of money being raised by schools across the province, in terms of their school fundraising, I was very reassured to hear earlier today that schools will not have to, or will not be allowed to, fund raise for students for that money to go to their mandatory program, their public school program.
But there's still a significant amount and about a year and a half ago, I had estimated, and the deputy minister did agree that I was probably in the right range, that $50 million was being raised by schools throughout this province in order to provide
[Page 283]
necessary funding for school programs as well as the extracurricular activities that are required. I understood that after that, the department had done a survey among superintendents across Nova Scotia, and I'm just curious, was the actual figure for fundraising totals ever derived from that survey of the superintendents?
MS. CASEY: My staff are giving me some information here, but I don't think there's any dispute that it's a significant amount of dollars that's raised. But what we're prepared to do is get the detail. The boards have been asked to report for the 2005-06 year and once we have that information available, we can share that. But we don't have it at our fingertips right now. It has been reported and it is available.
[7:00 p.m.]
MS. MORE: Just before I pass over my time to my colleague, the member for Hants East, I just want to remind the minister why that information is so significant. When I chaired a school board, many, many years ago, I became very aware within my own district of the significant amount of money that was raised by the schools through the home and school associations. At the time it raised questions in my mind that we like to provide as equal an opportunity to a positive learning situation as possible. There should be some way to rationalize the funding for programs across the system so that one neighbourhood school is not penalized because there might be a higher economic situation there. The parents would have more ability to raise money to supplement what was happening in the school.
That was never resolved at the time and I think the situation, the problem has grown through the years. I know Newfoundland and Labrador has done a study looking at the impact of unnecessary fundraising on lower economic level communities and students. It really does interfere with the quality of education that they get.
So I would like to recommend to the minister that we either do our own study on the impact of fundraising in our schools across the province or that we take the lessons learned from Newfoundland and Labrador's situation and apply them to our school boards across the province so that we can learn from another province and be able to better provide quality education in Nova Scotia.
It does cause a lot of inequalities and the problem is just getting worse and, certainly, one of the best ways to intervene and turn around some of our desperate poverty cycles in Nova Scotia is to allow the highest quality and highest level of education possible for children in lower socio-economic family situations. I'd be curious to know if the department would consider looking at the implications of the degree of fundraising that is taking place in Nova Scotia in our schools. Thank you.
[Page 284]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, socio-economic levels in communities certainly have an impact on the ability for fundraising to be effective. It does create an imbalance, there's no question.
From the department's perspective, we want to be able to provide adequate funding to deliver programs on an equitable basis. However, we've made a start, I think, by collecting the data so we know what is happening out there and we will know whether that $50 million is a real number or not. That is a good beginning because that will allow us - and I'll make a commitment that we will follow up on that to see what the implications of that may be, what the real issues are, what the history - and we're just starting our history - shows us and a commission review of that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Hants East.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister and her staff for an opportunity to ask some questions. I think, because of the minister's former life with the Chignecto-Central Regional School Board, I know that you won't need to depend on your deputy or staff to answer any of these questions. I really appreciate that.
I want to start with an issue, I'm basically going by constituency-driven questions. The first one is around the use of a small bus for transportation of challenged students - I'm not sure if all mentally challenged or some physically challenged, I suspect probably both. I know in the case of MacIsaac Ettinger in Milford is a Down's syndrome child and he travels on this bus. I guess the beauty of this for the family is that the bus is actually able to back in the driveway, it's one of the smaller school buses and I think the board is looking at replacing that bus with a larger bus. I've spoken to the supervisor for the Nova family of schools and she indicated it was a question of a larger load requiring a larger bus.
That wasn't what I found by talking to the bus driver. It seems the board is going to move to a larger bus, which is not as serviceable for this young little client. I'm just wondering if the minister could speak to that. What the family would like is, if the bus is going to be replaced, replace it with another small bus. As far as policy on that from the department level and particularly I know there's probably some leeway, that the boards are allowed some flexibility, but I just wondered, would you be able to address or enlighten me on what you know about that transportation issue?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, thank you for the question. The specifics of that, I can certainly talk to you outside the House on that. I do know that transportation is the responsibility of the boards and if there are safety concerns with respect to the vehicle and the transportation of that student, I would like to sit down and talk to you a little bit about that, but it is the boards' responsibility to provide
[Page 285]
transportation, I'm sure you're aware of that. If the mode of transportation is something that is deemed to be unsafe, there may be other means to transport that child.
MR. MACDONELL: I thank the minister for her answer. I think we all would be aware that we have large school buses every day that stop on the roads and flash a light and put out their sign. We know that all that is done in the interest and safety for students. For this young gentleman and for the family, I think the ability for that bus to actually back in the driveway off the road made it easier for loading him, they weren't holding up traffic - they live just if you come around a turn on the road and it seemed to work very well for him, but I would be glad to discuss this with you outside of estimates. Can you tell me what the accreditation process is, if I have the right term?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, you're talking about the school accreditation process. Two years ago the department began a pilot where they were looking at individual schools and looking at planning for improvements within each school. It has been called the accreditation process and it's not to be confused with the accreditation process we have in hospitals. Our hospitals are measured against a standard, this measurement is against the results at the school at any point in time. For example, there's a team that would look at all of the literacy and standardized assessment scores that exist in the school, parental involvement in the school, disciplinary measures in the school, suspensions and those kinds of things. They take a snapshot of the school as it now exists and that's part of the review that's done in consultation with parents.
There is a review committee that is put together and parents sit on that - whether it's the school advisory council or parent-teacher group - the school administration sits on that, a teacher representative, and someone outside the school comes in to facilitate that and that person is called an external facilitator. They sit down, collect the data and do a report which looks at the conditions in the school, the academic results of the school, the climate of the school, all of those things at that point in time, and then the onus on the team is to develop in consultation with teachers and community an improvement plan that will move them from that point to where they would like to be.
Once that school improvement plan is developed, it is evaluated and assessed by an external team that is completely foreign to even the school board. It would be principals or teachers from some other board across the province and they would come in and look at the data and determine if the goals that were set in the school improvement plan really addressed the evidence in the data that was there. For example, if your literacy scores are low, then the goals that are set in the school improvement plan should address that, and the strategies and objectives should help move the school forward with that particular goal.
There's a three-year period that's set aside for the school once their school improvement plan is approved, then they have three years and provincial money to
[Page 286]
support them working through that improvement plan to achieve those goals. At the end of that period, the same kind of assessment takes place and they look at where they were and where they are now and have they been successful, and if they have been successful then they're deemed to be accredited.
MR. MACDONELL: Thank you minister, I appreciate that. I raise, I think, as much in terms of the AIMS report, which usually has Hants North Rural High School at the bottom. Not that I'm saying I'm a big supporter of the AIMS report, I'm not struck on their criteria. Anyway, I think for some level of comfort for the community there, whose children go there, I think that this process, I think they would see as useful in setting their goals and trying to bring that school to a level that they would really appreciate. So I look forward to seeing how that moves on for the schools in my area.
I want to take a couple of minutes to address some issues. I met with a committee at Hants North actually, and I can't think of the gentleman who was from the Chignecto-Central Regional School Board who offered information, but we did a little tour of the school and we looked at the windows and was all around, as far as I could tell, the physical upgrades to the buildings, and I have here a letter that went into my local weekly press, and I can table it if the committee requires. It talks in terms of Hants East Rural High School. It talks about Hants East was originally built in 1957, with additions in 1968 and 1975. A capital project submission reported dated October 2000, indicated that HERH required significant upgrades and replacements to components such as roof, windows, doors, heating, plumbing, electrical and ventilation, estimated to be in the vicinity of $4.9 million.
It seems to me that the board allocates - if that is as it's indicated here, which I don't know that. I'm just going by what's in the paper. My understanding is that the board allocates $1 million, I think, in a year, to such upgrades and I'm thinking that's not just going to be Hants East. So I'm curious about a board's ability to address some of these issues, for what appears to me to be a small comparison to the need. Between your experience with the board and certainly now as your experience as minister, I'm just wondering, what avenues are available to schools in terms of funding? My impression of this government is it hasn't been overly generous. So can you let me know your thoughts in terms of what looks to be a significant need in one school, compared to the dollars available across the whole board, to address these issues in schools?
[7:15 p.m.]
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the member opposite. When we look at the needs for upgrading renovations, additions and so on, it would be staff from the board that would go out and do an assessment, and they would need to determine if the magnitude of those needs was greater than they could handle within their own board
[Page 287]
budget. If they believe that it was, then there's an opportunity for them to put that on a capital construction list, which the board submits annually to the department.
When that's in here at the department level, then a committee, either the facility's planning division, reviews that and looks at the needs and looks at the costs and they do that on a provincial level. They look at each list from each particular board and then based on the recommendation from the board, the board may put that particular school 9/10 on their list, or they may put it at 1/10. So once that list is here and reviewed, then consultation between the department staff here and board staff begins as to what is best for that school. Is it a renovation, is it something that can be handled in the board's budget, or is it new construction? That's the process, so something of that magnitude, if board staff identified that the needs in that school were in the $4.-something million, that would be well beyond what the board - that's not just paint and new roof, that's a major investment.
MR. MACDONELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the minister. That was my thought when I saw that number. I thought that's a big number. So I appreciate that because I'm going to pass your comments on and the same thing obviously applies in terms of Hants North, or any school. There did seem to be issues, definitely at both of them.
In my last minute, I think we have a problem in terms of vocational training in the province. I'm not sure if the community colleges - I think we have a problem in terms of vocational training. I talk to people in my constituency, in particular contractors. One of them told me five years ago that on any job that he's on, there are no skilled workers under the age of 40. So I think we're either not getting enough or attracting enough or the cost of the community college system is prohibitive. I just wonder if the department ever looks at some component that was similar to the old vocational system where students could go at an earlier grade level, complete their Grade 12 and pick up a trade. I wonder, is that one that the department has looked at? I thought it worked.
MS. CASEY: To the member opposite, I think we all recognize that that group of skilled labourers is aging, and we have not been keeping up with our training for their replacements. In recognition of that, the Options and Opportunities program that we have introduced in this budget is geared towards that particular population, students who cannot and should not be university-bound, but they do have an aptitude and an interest and an ability to be good skilled labourers. They need an opportunity to get some training.
So what we're doing is looking at providing something, I think perhaps it's 27 schools this year, throughout the province, that will have opportunities to offer courses. That doesn't mean that every school will have that, but within the family, I would expect - in your particular case - there would be opportunities for students to pick up some of
[Page 288]
that skilled training, a spinoff of the old vocational training program. We've begun that, and we do have the schools identified. I can share that with you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time for the member has expired.
The honourable member for Halifax Clayton Park.
MS. DIANA WHALEN: It's a pleasure to rise today and have a few questions in this estimates time with the new Minister of Education. Congratulations on your new appointment. Just going through this, I have a number of things that I wanted to touch on today, some of them in post-secondary and some in the other areas. I also welcome the staff today. It's nice to see, again, some of the staff that I dealt with when I was the Education Critic, which I am not any more, for the Liberal caucus.
In the first instance, I wanted to talk on public libraries. My question for the minister is really around the new consultation that has been going on across the province on public libraries. I think it was finished up just in the last couple of weeks. It was around the role that they play in communities, and what communities or individuals expect of libraries, but I'm very concerned about the funding, as well. So I wonder if you could give me some background to that consultation, and where you hope it will lead.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, our funding allocation for public libraries last year was a bit over $10 million, and at the end of the year we were able to give them an additional $1 million as support for the good work that they do in their communities.
MS. WHALEN: That begs two questions; $10 million was the annual allotment for the libraries, with $1 million additional provided at the end of the year. I wonder, could you tell me if that was the same case the year before, that there's a pattern of having additional funds at the end of the year rather than built into the core funding?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, figures that I'm seeing now, in 2004-05, it was $750,000 plus $350,000, so it was an increase in 2005-06 to $10.7 million, plus the additional $1 million for $11.7 million - so it was an increase from 2004-05.
MS. WHALEN: I wanted to go back to my original question that was not specifically on the funding but around the consultation that's taking place. There were consultations in many of our communities, certainly at the Keshen Goodman library in Clayton Park. The provincial librarian, I believe, is coordinating those consultations, and I wanted to ask specifically about the purpose and the intent of those consultations, and what you're hoping to learn from them and where you hope to go with the answers - I wanted to get more of the context around that consultation.
[Page 289]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the honourable member. At this point we're prepared to provide the terms of reference for that consultation process - that will outline the expectations. We can provide that for you, if that will help answer that question.
MS. WHALEN: Around the province the funding for most of the public libraries is predominantly provincial funding, but here in HRM it's pretty much the reverse. Rather than being 30 per cent municipal, it's 70 per cent municipal, 30 per cent provincial, as I understand it - so quite a different mechanism or funding formula here in HRM as opposed to the other smaller libraries that are found throughout the province. Some of the articles that I've been reading about the library funding refers to library cash woes, libraries making their case for more funding, and of course a lot of this is going on at the municipal level because they do not have enough funding to do the very valuable work that they're engaged in.
I would like to ask the minister, through the chairman, if she could refer to any work that they're looking at to increase funding to our HRM libraries that are extensive, they also serve rural communities, they also rely on bookmobiles, they have extensive ESL programming and programming around workshops for people re-entering the workforce - they do a tremendously wide range of activities to help foster an educated and well-informed literate community. I wonder, could you talk about any progress in improving the funding for HRM libraries?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, I've been advised that there was a study that was completed, and it was a costly venture to bring the level of funding for libraries up to the recommendation from that report. We are beginning that, but we have not been able to achieve the level that that report was recommending.
MS. WHALEN: Again, on the subject of our local libraries, I wonder if the minister could give a time frame or any kind of plan about moving towards the recommendations of that library committee report. As I understand it, that funding report came from all the library systems across Nova Scotia, that they worked collaboratively to come up with a process or a funding program that they felt would be reasonable. Is there now a proper response from the department that would say over what period of time you'd expect to get there?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. What I would be looking for would be the results of the consultation process that you referenced, and then use the results of that to help us sit down and look at developing a plan for continued support and increased support, but I would want the consultation results first.
MS. WHALEN: I'm sure the departmental staff will make that available to you. I just wanted to stress the point that it's extremely important here in HRM, as it is across
[Page 290]
the province, that those libraries receive adequate funding, because they're performing so many very important community-oriented tasks - and, again, I would point to literacy.
I, myself, some years ago, was a tutor for literacy. They have a lot of volunteers who come into the library and perform that. In my riding of Halifax Clayton Park, the work they do in ESL is also very important. They supplement the work that is available through other programs. These are all volunteer-driven, free programs to the community. We can't stress enough how important that is. Basic literacy is a real problem here in this province, and our libraries are probably the key to get there.
I would really urge the minister to have a look at the funding for public libraries as soon as possible. And while we're talking about libraries, I would like to move to school libraries. Through you, Mr. Chairman, I would like to just ask the minister about programs to strengthen school libraries. There has been a lot said about them not receiving funds directly for books and to improve resources. I wonder, could you outline any initiatives that are currently underway that would see a strengthening of school libraries?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, I did indicate in my introductory remarks that we had increased funding to school libraries, that it is targeted, and that we would be asking boards to use that increased funding to provide library technicians to be available in their libraries. With respect to the books and allocation of resources to the libraries, the boards are able and encouraged to use their textbook allocation, if there's money available in that, to buy resources for their library, whether that's hardcover books or software.
MS. WHALEN: Mr. Chairman, would the minister be able to give us some sort of dollar figure to correlate to school libraries to the targeted funding that you referred to? That is something that is an improvement, if you're actually targeting it to the libraries; however, I would like to get some sort of indication of the size of that allocation.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, our allocation to libraries is about $560,000, $570,000 per year, and that can go towards resources, supplies, materials that are needed, as I said the software or the hard text.
[7:30 p.m.]
MS. WHALEN: I wonder, through you, Mr. Chairman, if the minister could clarify whether any staffing is included in that. In her first response, she indicated that there would be targeted funding to increase library technicians in the schools.
[Page 291]
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, the targeted money was to provide staff, library technicians. Those numbers I gave you of $570,000 and $560,000, those are accumulative, so we're looking at a total of $1.13 million.
MS. WHALEN: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that, that actually clarifies that. I thought you were talking about a range rather than two separate numbers, so that actually makes it a little bit more significant. As we know, when you take an amount of money that's designed to purchase books and spread it across so many schools, the impact is really negligible, and that's unfortunate. We've seen that in the building of new schools. For example, a new school was opened in my area just in 2000, where only $10,000 was allocated to outfit a library in a Primary to Grade 9 school that included French immersion. It just shows how inadequate, often, our funding is to get a library up and running and to keep it properly stocked with books.
What I would like to stress here is a little bit about planning for the future of our school libraries, and there has been a lot said over the years about them being diminished. Certainly in the HRSB, the Halifax Regional School Board, we've had a lot of libraries in the past that were staffed with teacher-librarians, and the library was an area where students relied heavily on the librarians for resource and assistance in writing papers and studying and research. That has changed over the last few years. In fact, just in the last year, the association or organization of teacher-librarians was disbanded because there were so few left in the Halifax Regional School Board.
I understand now there is a different category and that we're looking more at the library supports. I had the correct name here, actually they don't call themselves technicians, library support specialists was the term that I was given. I'm wondering if, in introducing more library support specialists, we wouldn't be able to provide more staffing in our school libraries, because many of them are not staffed or not staffed the full day. These library support specialists may be going to different locations. Are there any statistics or any background that the minister could give me on that?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, with respect to the planning for school libraries, we do recognize, in fact when we do new school construction projects now, the library is very often the focal point of the school. So we're not diminishing, in any way, the importance of libraries.
With respect to the staffing for those libraries, we recognize that we are moving away from the traditional librarian and looking to the library technologists or technicians, and those people are readily available and participate in training programs at the community college. So we do have a good supply, and it's important that we have that supply available. It may not be so with the librarians, as to what the supply of trained librarians would be to fill those positions.
[Page 292]
MS. WHALEN: While we're on the theme of literacy, libraries and reading, I wanted to raise an issue with the minister today concerning a newspaper, and I can table a copy of it or leave it for the minister. It's called The East Coast Reader; the subtitle is a plain language newspaper. It's actually a publication that was done by a group in Nova Scotia, but it had funding from the Department of Education. Perhaps the former Minister of Education will recognize it. I think there has been some communication with the Department of Education around continuing the grant that might be available, or perhaps making up some federal grants that were lost. I think it's a combination of funding.
This newspaper hasn't been published since November 1, 2005. It was tremendously valuable to the groups that are studying literacy and learning to read. In fact each of the articles is sort of graded by what level of literacy you need in order to read the article. It's very helpful. I think other members of the Legislature may be interested as well, in seeing that. It's a great loss when resources like this are no longer available, especially when we've pioneered and done the work required to even envision a project like this and bring it forward over a period of years, and then to lose that resource is a great loss to the literacy programs that are operating across our province.
So I'm wondering, is the minister familiar with The East Coast Reader, or if the deputy minister is, perhaps he could brief her a little bit, and we could have a comment on providing these kinds of grants to support literacy at the grassroots level?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, we are going to look into the availability of funding in the form of a grant. If that was the funding source before, then we'll look at the availability of that to continue that production.
MS. WHALEN: I will say I think it would be a tremendously well-spent investment if we did provide that. I appreciate the minister's willingness to look into it for us. I wanted to ask a few questions around English as a Second Language. Again, this is a major issue in the Clayton Park area. It's a very important aspect of our schools, and without the provision of ESL programs and education, we wouldn't be able to service so many of the students who do come in the doors.
Last year, in talking to the principal at Halifax West High School, I was told they have 80 students who were exclusively in ESL studies and not able yet to integrate into the classroom and join the other classes because their English had not reached a level that was proficient enough. In a single school, 80 students is very significant and they don't really have the resources to do all that is necessary for those students. The classes are large, so there's less one-on-one because there are so many. Actually, every school in the Clayton Park riding has got one of the YMCA newcomer staff members in there working in the elementary, junior high and in the high school, and that helps as well in terms of the integration, but ESL is a huge issue, a challenge.
[Page 293]
I would like to ask the amount of money being spent this year on ESL. If you could, I would like you to break down Department of Education, perhaps you'll be including in that Department of Immigration or Office of Immigration funds. If you could break the two down for me that would be helpful, and just give me a background on your view.
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member, we recognize that ESL is an important program and that the need is greatest in the Halifax area. I think our funding reflects that. In 2005-06, there was a total of $350,000 that went towards that and $302,000 of that went to the Halifax Regional School Board. So I think that's a clear indication that we recognize that the greatest need is there and the greatest amount of funding has to follow. In 2006-07 we added an additional $200,000 to that. Out of our Department of Education budget, $100,000 of that came from our department and the $250,000, plus the $200,000 new money, came from Immigration.
MS. WHALEN: I think it's important for the minister to recognize as well that the supplementary funding which is a major source of funding, at least Halifax and Dartmouth schools, let's put it that way, not all HRM schools but Halifax and Dartmouth schools, has been picking up the slack on ESL for many years. In fact, when there was no funding whatsoever targeted to ESL from the Department of Education, it was supplementary funding, which is paid for by the property owners of Halifax and Dartmouth, that was really used to provide this very essential service.
As the minister would be aware, with the provincial initiative to encourage immigration, we have to start putting more resources in there so that we can balance those two initiatives, that you can't be on the one hand encouraging immigration and urging people to come here and then not providing this most basic service to the young people and the families that are there. So it's very important, I think, that we look at greater funding.
At the same time I'm sure the minister is aware that supplementary funding is always at risk in Halifax and having been a former councillor, and there are other former HRM councillors in this room on all sides of the House, I think we recognize that it's an annual exercise in angst to go through the debate on supplementary funding and try to protect those very necessary programs. As is often said at city council and around that table, the problem is that the Department of Education and the Government of Nova Scotia is not picking up their responsibilities, and that is why the provision of supplementary funding becomes so heated and so important.
ESL is a perfect example of one of those programs that, were I around the table at city council, I would be fighting vehemently for the retention of supplementary funding because it's so important that we not drop programs like ESL. So I'm wondering if the minister has plans to increase the funding again for ESL because the supplementary
[Page 294]
funding is still being required to supplement what you are providing, although I will give the government some credit for finally putting money towards ESL which was not being done before. So it is a positive step that you're now providing some ESL funding, I recognize that, but when will we get to the point where there's sufficient ESL funding so that we can support our immigration initiatives and provide the right level of support?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite, I just want to make a point clear that the funding that we are giving for ESL is on top of the per-student funding that goes to all boards anyway. So we recognize that it's an additional support and it is added on to that funding. We also recognize that up until last year, it was supplementary funding through the municipality that did the bulk of that. We recognize that, and thus the infusion of dollars in the last two years - and it's our intent to continue to make that contribution to support that program.
MS. WHALEN: I want to go on to the subject of the Pre-Primary Pilot Program that is ongoing right now - and I think was begun last year, so it has had, in some boards, less than a full year to be tried out. A number of boards didn't get it up and running until the new year, so it began in January rather than last Fall. My question to the minister, around the pre-Primary pilot, is what you are doing to look at targeting the area of greatest need?
In speaking to this when it was first introduced, I was very clear that starting education earlier and having a program for four-year olds is a good idea but the way it is structured now as a first-come, first-served program in every board means that I don't believe the children who need it the most are the ones getting access to this program. It is the parents who are most informed, the ones who are most connected in the community who know about it and line up and get their children into these programs. It also requires parents who are able to transport their children to and from the school so, in many boards where you are in a more rural setting, you have to have transportation in order to do that.
I'm questioning the value of the pre-Primary program if we aren't trying to target it to those of greatest need. I wonder, could you speak to that new pilot project please?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. We are piloting the pre-Primary program. We had that in place in 19 sites during this past year and we will be moving into the second year of that pilot in the same 19 sites. Recognizing that it is a pilot, we will be doing monitoring and assessment of the whole program, and part of that assessment will include the readiness state of these students when they move into Primary. It will also include the availability of such a program if it is deemed to be valuable for all students, and also the transportation issue. So all of those concerns will be part of the review process, but for the upcoming year it will be the second year in all of those 19 sites and, as I said, we will be monitoring the progress of these students and their readiness level when they're registered in Primary this year.
[Page 295]
MS. WHALEN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think what I'm hearing is it's going to be status quo until we finish the second year and then we'll have a look at it, but I do think there are some very plain shortcomings that are already visible and it might be prudent for the department to look at those now, and begin to think about ways to address it, because there's no point in waiting until the second year to just confirm what you know, that you're getting the best students already at the four-year-old age because they're the ones coming from the homes with the greatest advantages. I think that's important to note - sometimes you don't have to wait two full years to see that in its entirety.
[7:45 p.m.]
I would also like to ask the minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, about any analysis of a new start date for school. The deputy minister will be aware that we had a Private Member's Bill, in the previous session of government, asking that the start date for school be moved from a birth date of October 1st as the very latest, to December 31st, which is more in sync with the other provinces in Canada. It first came to light because of pressures in the Greenwood area, and actually here in Halifax, with a lot of the military families who are moved around the country, and moving into Nova Scotia they found that to be - they felt that was regressive and that their children, had they stayed in other provinces, would already have begun school and they asked that this be reviewed.
I think that there is a lot of merit in looking at standardization with other provinces so that we aren't out of sync. I think that December 31st is perfectly reasonable, so I would like to ask the minister, is she willing, or has already begun, to review that start date?
MS. CASEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the member opposite. We did have that question earlier, and the commitment we made was that we recognize that we are out of sync with the other provinces, we do recognize that transfer for students into our province does not present them with any difficulty, that we accept them at whatever age if they had started earlier in another province, but we have undertaken and made a commitment to review that and to look at the impact that would have on our system, on our facilities, and on our budget.
MS. WHALEN: Mr. Chairman, I would like to share with the minister that I've had many e-mails around that one Private Member's Bill. I've introduced quite a number of Private Member's Bills here in the last two or three years and that one did generate a lot of e-mails from parents, a lot of talk among parents themselves, asking me when it might come into play and how important it was to them. So I would like you to know there's a lot of support for that new idea. It's not a new idea, really, it has been around forever, and it would be wonderful if this minister would be the one to tackle it. Anyway, we'd love to see some movement on that.
[Page 296]
Mr. Chairman, could you tell me how much time I have left on my questioning?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Three minutes.
MS. WHALEN: I wanted to ask about the introduction of guidance teachers at an earlier age. During the election, we raised the issue about guidance teachers in elementary school. That is something that has been adopted in Newfoundland and Labrador to great success. They're finding it's addressing some of the problems with the children at a much earlier age, and helping to intervene earlier, which, of course, will divert problems later on. So could you tell me if you're looking at that please?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member. I think we all recognize, those of us in Education, that a lot of concerns and issues with respect to student behavior and student need for counselling begins at a very early age. It's not limited to junior/senior high school. So as a result of that, we have, for the first time, committed $500,000 which is to be used for guidance support in our schools at the Grades 3 through 6 level. So, hopefully, we can do what you have identified - and which is rightly so an issue - and that's being able to have intervention and provide supports for students at an early age, and hopefully that will translate into more success for those students as they move through junior/senior high.
MS. WHALEN: I realize there is very little time left. I'd like to ask the minister about the plan to deal with students who are suspended, and what's being planned in terms of creating a special program for those students who are on suspension. I think, particularly here in Halifax and the urban area, there's a lot of opportunity to create a program where students could be diverted into a separate area and do something constructive during that time. So could you elaborate on your plans?
MS. CASEY: Mr. Chairman, to the member opposite. We have identified that we need to provide learning opportunities for students during suspension, whether that's in-school suspension or out-of-school suspension, but we do have a responsibility and an obligation to provide that support and that service to them. What we're planning to do - and we've looked at setting up a tracking system where we can monitor, at a provincial level, the suspensions that come through the schools, looking at patterns of behavior, repeat suspensions, and so on. So once we have that information we'll be better able to develop programs that will respond to that but, at the current time, many boards do have their own suspension programs. They have teachers who work with students who are suspended, and boards are responding to that population now on an individual board basis, but we'll be looking at something provincially.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The time allotted for debate on the estimates in Committee on Supply today has expired.
[Page 297]
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. MICHAEL BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that the committee do now rise and report considerable progress.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The motion is carried.
[The committee rose at 7:51 p.m.]
