Manitoba Hansard — 62 Page 1211 (Sitting 47, 26th Legislature, 5th Session)

26-5-47

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

I I I Legislative Assembly Of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable A. W. Harrison Vol. VII No. 47 8:00 p.m. Thursday, .March 29, 1962. 5th Session, 26th Legislature Printed by R. S. Evans, Queen's Printer for the Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8:00 o'clock, Thursday, March 29th, 1962. :MR. CHAIRMAN: Department V, Resolution 22. :MR. DOW: Mr. Chairman, when you called it 5:30, I was developing the tax angle in regards to the percentage of taxes required for education within the province. I would now like to put some figures on record in regards to the percentage of tax that was imposed for educa tion in the various groups within the province and I brought it out to the even percentage point.

In 1958, the rural municipalities of Manitoba contributed 40% of their taxes towards education, and I would like to point out, Sir, that this percentage in the rural municipalities doesn't in clude any cost-sharing basis towards the roads that were required for school purposes. In 1959, their contributing cost was 43% and in 1960 was 44%. The villages of Manitoba in 1958 contributed 36% of their tax imposition for education; in 1959 it was 41%; and in 1960, 36%. li1 the towns of Manitoba, it was 36% in 158; 38% in 159; and 40% in 1960.

The cities of Manitoba contributed 40% of their realty property tax towards education. In 1959, it was 44% and in 1960 it was 47%. Now, Sir, if you wish to take it the other way, that in relation to the total figures, the total tax figures and the total monies received for educational purposes within the province, in 1958 the general and special tax produced $23 million from real property. The total tax im position in 1958 was $56 million and the school tax was approximately -- works out in percen tage approximately 40%.

In 1959, $26 million was produced from real property tax as against $60 million of total imposition, which was 43. 5%; and in 1960, the total monies received for schools was $30, 202, OOO as against $66 million total imposed, which was 45% for schools. So you can see· from those figures that the pattern is now showing that the increase on real proper ty is gradually increasing percentage-wise.

I believe, Sir, that the sooner the enquiry on the Committee of Municipal Investigation comes in with a direct recommendation charging the responsibilities of the municipalities and the provincial government in regards to taxation, the better it's going to be, because very definitely we are now minimizing the monies that can be used for general real property use in favour of education. As I said this afternoon, with the implication of the debenture tax and the other taxes going on, our increase -- I know in some municipalities it's rising as high as 50% -- but the general over-all province was 45% in 1960.

One other feature that I would like to produce, Mr. Chairman -- as you know in other sessions I have produced a resolution in regards to 75% construction costs over $15, OOO per room. This year I did not bring it in, but I still believe that the divisions that are building schools costing more than $15, OOO per room, as authorized by the department, they're being penalized.

In my particular constituency we have three new schools, and the percentage of grants that is being received by the school division from the province is approximately 60 to 62%, setting up a penalty in that particular area from 13% above what they pay in direct tax. I thi'!lk, Sir, that consideration of this government would go a long way to assisting and bringing the tax into a true perspective in regards to the general over-all picture in regards to the spending and collecting of taxes.

There's one other feature, Sir, that I would like you to take into consideration -- and I bring this out not as an alarm -- but the arrears in taxes have increased over $2 million in '58, 159 and 160 on real property in Manitoba. When you consider that 45% of this_ money is due to the schools, we're getting to a point that, as you ·au know, the municipalities must pay when the levy is assessed and it puts them in a borrowing position. Of interest to the committee, and possibly some of you read it and some of you didn't, but in tonight's Tribune, an

article given to the reporter by Mr. Mooney, the Executive Direc tor of Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities in Winnipeg, and he points this out: "that municipal governments have been borrowing at the rate of $250 million a year in Canada and they have only scratched the surface in the needs of civic improvements." Now, Sir, if this is true, these civic improvements are going to be lessened by the demand on education and real property. He goes on to say in his clipping that: "the heart of the municipal finance problem in Canada is the improvements that can be given to property, and unless a solution is March 29th, 1962 Page 1211 L 1 !- ! i I

(Mr. Dow, cont'd.) ...•. found, future urban growth and development will be jeopardized in Manitoba." Sir, I wish to close with that thought in mind, that if we, as a provincial government who are the fathers of imposition of the educational tax within the Province of Manitoba, it's their duty to find a solution to lessen the burden on real property tax with the idea that they can de velop in urban growth in a natural state of affairs. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to inform the Minister that after having had dinner with four of his curling colleagues, I find much of the edge taken off what I was going to have to say to him tonight. But I would like at the very outset to commend the Minister for the rather comprehensive report which he gave to us late this afternoon and, at the same time, to offer the same sort of feeling toward the members, the staff of his department.

After hav ing had the pleasure of touring the facilities that we have here in this province respecting technical and vocational education, l've·had an opportunity to get to know some of his senior staff assistants, and I cannot help but feel that Manitoba is fortunate in having people who take such a personal ..:_ as it were -- a personal interest in what is being done education-wise in this province. Everyone, Mr.

Chairman, expresses concern about education at some time or other and I don 1t think it can be disputed that this concern seems to be growing in the minds of most people in Canada and in most countries in the world today; and after hearing the Minister's report, I think we would have to conclude that we have gone a considerable way toward making progress in education in this province.

We have gone a long way, but I don't think that even the Minister would want to say that more enlightened, more progressive policies can be fol lowed, because we must always strive to meet the challenge of our times and we must always strive to innovate and get maximum value for our education dollar. It is unfortunate that education is very often a subject of platitudes, a matter of plati tudinous talk, and after the platitudes have been spoken we all too often fail to get down to the very concrete and specific matters that might be ailing in a given system of education.

Of course, perhaps the Minister has one crowning achievement which he can boast about, if he cares to boast from time to time, and that has to do with the implementation in this province of our secondary school division system. It is one major achievement, but if it is not followed up with other achievements just as important and just as clearly thought out, then. this crown ing achievement will be forgotten, and justly so, because the spending of money -- and Lord knows we are spending a lot of money these days -- the spending of money alone is not going to ensure success and no one will dispute that.

In the 19301s, Canadians spent about 4% of the GNP in education. In the early 501s,. in stead of spending more to meet the growing de1m nd we were spending less, and only in the last four years has there been any pronounced trend in this country toward bringing the level of spending as proportion of GNP back to where it was in the thirties. Of course this doesn't tell the whole story because our GNP was that much lower in the thirties.

The point I'm try ing to make is that if it seems· that we are spending so much, it's only because we weren't spending enough a few years ago -- not just in Manitoba but in most provinces. I think the important thing is to try and determine, not whether we are spending enough but whether the money we are spending is being spread equitably on the three levels of government; and, also, whether this money is being used to maximum effect. Now I'll try to avoid being nebulous any further, Mr. Speaker, because I do have some rather specific remarks to make.

The Minister quoted at length, in ringside voice this after noon, statistics outlining the increase in enrollment in our schools in Manitoba, and he laid · special emphasis on increase in enrollment at the secondary level. He went on by clever anti cipation to admit that there was a tremendous increase -- he didn't use the word "tremendous", but he admitted there was a substantial increase in the burden on real property as a result of rising educational costs. I would like to show to the Minister just how it has affectdd the area that I represent and the area just surrounding that.

In Brokenhead in 1958, $66, 000 on education; in 1961, $94, 000, for an increase of 40%. In St. Clements in 1958, school costs, $100, OOO; in 1961, $154, OOO - there again an increase of about close to 50%. Selkirk -- this isn't in my riding but nearby - in 1958, $155, OOO on education costs at the mµnicipal level; in 1961, $237, OOO - - an increase Page 1212 March 29th, 1962 I �

(Mr. Schreyer, cont'd) •••..•. of about 50%. In Springfield in 1958 --157, $120,000; in 1961, $160, OOO -- increase of about 35%. In Beausejour in 1957, $34, OOO; in 1961, $61, OOO -- an increase of about 80%. In North Kildonan in 1957, $113,000 for schools; in 1961, $246,000 - an increase of 110%. In East St. Paul in 1957, $58, OOO; in 1961, $135, OOO -- an increase of about 125%. That is in my area and vicinity. It could well be, and I have no reasons for doubt ing the Minister's figure which he used, that the increase on the average to municipalities across Manitoba was approximately 33 or 34%.

The point I want to make is much along the line that was made by the previous speaker. It is true, and no one can really argue with the Minister that the Province of Manitoba is assum ing a much more fair share cost of education than was the case several years ago, but lest this bit of knowledge should lull the Minister, should lull him I say, I want to point out to him that we still have room for assuming a somewhat larger share at the provincial level.

According to the Order for Return which I received from him a couple of weeks ago, it shows that of the total expenditures in the province for education, the provincial government, when everything was lumped in together and proportioned out, the province was assuming 51. 7% of the total education cost which includes higher education -- that is the university. It might interest the Minister to know that we should think in terms of moving at least another 10 percentage point towards easing the burden on real property at the municipal level.

I want to tell him that in Britain it has been for several years now a cost-split of 60% and 40% to the local education authorities. In British Columbia, according to the Tribune of March 27th, that province is assuming approximately 60%. I didn't have time to check the ratios for the otl:ier provinces, but on the basis of that, I would suggest that even if we are in the vanguard, let us attempt to completely ease the burden on real property as far as education costs are con cerned and move another 10 percentage points -- at least let us plan in that direction.

It could be, and I don't know whether the member for Turtle Mountain mentioned this specifically, but even if the province were to assume 60% of total education costs there could be other ways in which some savings could be affected as far as the local units were concern ed. l don't know how far-fetched or improbable or impossible this might be, but it seems con ceivable that school districts in municipalities could make significant enough savings if we did have in this province, or in this country, a municipal bank as was recommended or suggested by The Canadian Federation of Mayors and Reeves of Municipalities.

Because as I look in the Education Report I find that of all debentures that were issued, I believe it's on Page 19 and 20, we find that the school divisions and districts are paying between 5 1/2 and 7% interest on de bentures, and it seems possible that from 1 1/2 to 2% interest rate reduction and savings could be affected by having social capital available through a municipal fund or bank. As I say, I don't know how possible or how conceivable this is, but it seems like a worthwhile idea to in vestigate further.

It does seem a pity that if this could be brought about that it wasn't brought about two or three years ago, because we have had tremendous expenditures in school construc tion -- $29, OOO, OOO, Secondary; $17, OOO, OOO, Elementary. The Minister was telling us this afternoon -- $46, OOO, OOO for school construction. How much could have been saved if deben tures. could have been at a slightly lower rate of interest? I suggest to you it could mean as much as three or four hundred thousand dollars a year to the municipalities -- to all of them that is.

I would also suggest to the Minister that inasmuch as education costs are assuming a greater and greater share in the municipal budget and inasmuch as these costs are considered to be uncontrollable by the municipal councils, some merit there might be in trying to bring about -- I know there is a limit to how far you can try to use your influence in that regard -- to try to bring about a greater degree of liaison between school district boards, division boards and municipal councils.

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that we think about making school boards a Committee of Council, but I would suggest that it might be a good idea to make statu tory provision for the meeting of at least twice a year of school boards and councils so that progress reports -- so that school boards can inform council of future needs, because I'm given to understand that very often municipal councils are completely in the dark as to what school budgetary requirements might be until it's sprung on them all of a sudden, and there isn't even a thought given by school boards toward letting council know what might be the requirements 3, 4 or 5 years hence, if they know themselves.

March 29th, 1962 Page 1213

(Mr. Sc.hreyer, cont'

d) So. I suggest that perhaps it would be in the public interest for us to make some statutory provision for such liaison meetings. And this can be done Mr. Chairman, .without detracting from local authority, without detracting from it to any substantial degree. What is needed here is guidance perhaps; perhaps persuasion; I think it can rest there.

And without being too un- kind to the Minister I would suggest to him that sometimes local authorities do need guidance and council, and he is not above giving it to them because this summer I know that he took a personal interest in some of the difficulties that were going on in the local school boards in the Beausejour area -- he came out there and tried to get the opposing parties to reach some agree mel).t -- and while there is a case now before the Courts which prevents me from trying to deal · with the merits of the case, Gunson - vs - Agassiz, I would like to ask him only one question - why did he not allow that particular case to go to arbitration?

Why did he not allow it to go to arbitration? : He refused, and no one yet knows why he chose to make this sort of decision. It was rather amusing Mr. Chairman to see the way the Minister took a personal interest in that particular affair.

I don't know if honourable members remember the. story·of the Ancient Roman Cincinnatus who left his horse and plow in the field -- he was a farmer by vocation -- and hurried to the defence of Rome which was being attacked; and just iike Cincinnatus, the Min ister of Education left his offices in Winnipeg and went tearing out. to Beausejour on two or three . . occasions showing up at the most unexpected of time, trying to save the day -- but with less success than Cincinnatus. --(Interjection)-- I really didn't offer this in a spirit of criticism be cause these things can get pretty involved.

But I say again I would like to know why he prevent ed that case from going to arbitration •. This is the way you settle disputes in a democracy it would seem, and I really want an answer. Now reverting back to the main problem or question which I propose to deal with. Are we getting maximum value from our expenditures here in this province both provincial and lo cal? One of the, and I'm not suggesting that we have to spend more, this isn't the problem today, the main problem is value for money.

Now one of the greatest sources of frustration - and I know a lot of people are dissatisfied with our school system because of small incidents that may take ·place, failure rates--and one of the greatest sources of frustration in .. our present education al system has to do with the fact that we have a sillgle ladder as it's called, a single ladder or a unilateral system of education, and because of that fact teachers in the classroom teach to the slower ones, and that's why we!re not getting and we're not providing the best we could for the faster learners, and this is I feel the main source of criticism and frustration; Because of this fact, teachers are not giving enrichment to the faster learners.

This is why teachers often, instead of dealing with education in its broadest sense teach very narrowly for exams, all because of the single ladder system. · . Now we're getting away from it -- the general course, thti general course. It has tremen dous possibilities. On the other hand it's fraught with danger and what could very easily happen in Manitoba is just exactly what happened in Great Britain.

In the late 1920's they brought in their secondary modern schools -- the counterpart of our general course -- and I want to tell the Minister, and I don't know how much information he has on the British experience with the· secondary modern, but it has never yet achieved parity of esteem. Parents still have not · accepted it, and its results are many and varied--one of which is that children at the age of 10 and 11, that• s when the channellin g exams takes place, whether they go on to academic or channelled off into the general course. Parents push their children and strain them to the limit. Why?

Because the general course or secondary modern school has never, never been accepted. And one of the reasons has been that it has been treated as a terminal course and I'm afraid that's the way we' re headed here in Manitoba--a terminal course. I'm surprised to· find that there is no clear thinking in the department as to whether this general course shall serve as a prerequisite or a feeder for tech nical education--post-secondary--there'sno clear thinking on that point. And if we are going to go in the direction of Britain, we shall live to regret it. It would be unfortunate.

I agree with the Minister that the general course will be a means of providing for differ ences of aptitudes as between individual students. If we don't provide for this difference of apti tude we shall go� along as we have up to now with a single track academic system of education - and what's the result? The result is.not very gratifying because we have, out of 15, OOO students -- and I just took these on the basis of one class going up all the way -- 15, OOO starting grade 2 Page 1214 March 29th, 1962

(Mr. Schreyer, cont'd) ... in 1950, 4, 900 in grade 12 in 1960 -- a drop-out of about 10, OOO because we have made no provision, adequate provision for difference of aptitude. The general course will provide such an alternative, but it will only be accepted if it is not treated as strict ly a terminal course . It will be accepted if it is accepted as a feeder or prerequisite course for post-secondary technical or business vocational training and education. I would be very disturbed if rumours which I have been hearing -- namely that the general course gradua tes will be accepted into Teachers'College.

If this is going to apply carte bla nche I'll be very disappointed, and I wish the Minister would deal with that particular point. And despite the wholehearted co-operation of these part-time teachers, part-time research assis tants in the general cours·e who have been formulat ing the general course, despite their best of efforts, I'm wondering just how succes sful the setup of the curriculum will be.

I have heard on sub stantial authority that some phases of the general course, particularly mathematics, are re turning out to be more theoretically based or set than the academic course mathe matics and I don't think that this is what we're aiming at. I feel that we will be making a mistake -- not only in the general course but we will also be making a mistake as regards technical education, if we are going to set up at Brooklands the new Ins titute of Technology on a mixed basis such as it is. Partly it's a trade school. Fine. It will in that way replace MTI.

It's party supposed to be an Institute of Technology, but let's clear it up now and once and for all. Will it be a true Institute of Technology ? Since when is a two year post-secondary technical course at the Institute of Technology level? Ryerson Institute in Toronto, Massac husetts Institute of Technology in the US are based on three and four year courses. The old MTI was a misnomer -- it's not a technical institute, it's a trade school. The Institute of Tech11ology we.are now building will not be an Institute of Technology, it will be a technical institute, 'and let's not confuse the picture more than it is.

Because it is a confused situation, Mr. Chairman, and we have so far to go . Not just in providing the facilities but enrolment-wise. We have now approximately 40 , OOO students enrolled in our high schools and everybody agrees all these 40, OOO are not inclined or interested nor able to do well in an academic course of education. What have we done -- up to now at leas t? Out of these 40, OOO we have provided for 1, 200 taking 50-50 . That's the 50% academic, 50% industrial vocatfonal -- 1, 200 out of 40 , OOO.

We have provided for 2, 100 at the technical in stitute, but some of these are part-time, so we can't really count them as part of our high school enroll ment. We have, it is true, 12, OOO taking industrial arts, approximately -- but industrial arts are not really helpful so far as preparing young people for technical and highly skilled work when they leave -- so for all practical purposes, out of 40, OOO students in our high schools , we are preparing 1, 200 with technical skills .

And don't let anybody say that we are really over stating the case or the need for technically skilled people , because I want to read to you what was said by one of the directors of Canada1s National Employment Service, and he said this, having to do with unemployment and education. Mr. Thompson pointed out that 30% of the labour force is unskilled or semi-skilled, and yet only 12% of jobs fall into this category.

On the other hand, 12% of vacancies require highly skilled personnel while only 2% of our applic- ants meet these standars of technical skills , thus we have the paradox of a shortage and a · surplus at the same time. As jobs become more complex the situation will worsen and so we have the paradox of unemployment and jobs going begging for lack of properly skilled and com petent workmen. Not a very pleasant situation, and it would be, of course, the height of folly to sugg est that we aren't making some effort in that direction.

Obviously the Institute of Tech nology -- if we can be excused for calling it that -- will fill this gap somewhat; but unless we get down to serious business with the 50-501s in the senior part of our high schools, I'm afraid this gap is not going to close very quickly. And it's not going to be such an expensive proposi tion for Manitoba cost benefit-wise, if I could use that expression, because the federal govern ment has an agreement to pay 75% of the over-all cost, and I realize it terminates in 1963 but I don't think that it will not be renegotiated at that time.

And I want to tell the Minister that he has been losing out a little compared with the Pro vince of Ontario. What have they done in Ontari o? As a matter of fact, you have the situation -- queer situation, where Members of Parliament are complaining that their home province is getting too much from the federal government. You wouldn't think that ever happens but we have some Ontario MP's who are saying that Ontario is getting more than its fair share from the March 29th, 1962 Page 1215

(Mr. Schreyer, cont'd) .•.•. federal government so far as the building of technical institutes and institutes of technology are concerned -- and this is what they have done. They have built one new institute of technology , 18 new trade schools, 5 new combined trade schools and in stitutes of technology and 114 vocational high schools. They have received from the federal government the sum of $190 million, while we have received about -- what -, $2. 7 million for this Institute of Technology .

On a population ratio basis, they should have received - Ontario should have received about six times that of Manitoba, but in effect they've received 40 times as much in the way of grants for technical education in the past 12 month period as the Province of Manitoba -- and I could be a little out, but not enough to erase the complete disparity of the situation. Now just why? Why has this developed? Do we think that one insti tute, that a central locat ion with an enrolment capacity of about 3, OOO is going to suffice? I don't think we should feel that way. We're really falling behind, Mr.

Chairman, despite these glowing figures and statistics which the Minister has given us this afternoon. Relative to west ern European countries we're not really setting the world on fire . For the sake of brevity I'll simply state the ratio, but it might interest the Minister to knOIV that the Province of Norway with a population about three and a half times that of Manitoba, has a technical school enrol ment of about eight per thousand while we have about two -- four times as much effort into technical vacational education as Manitoba, and it's not as wealthy an area I don't think. Britain is doing more.

I realize that once you get into industrial vocational education you're getting into a pre tty relatively costly phase, aspect of education, but I think that in view of our mount ing unemployment problem, in view of increasing complexity in industry, in view of increased competition which we might have to reckon with in the Common Market, plus a host of other reasons, we must move more quickly still -- more quickly still, in providing more and better industrial vocational education opportunities.

Some of the arguments could be that it has a narrowing effect, it's better to give a child a broad education as a base, and one can't argue with that too much, but from about the Grade X level, the practice of other countries would indicate about the Grade X level, it would seem that here is the time to branch out to deal and to provide adequately for differences of aptitude.

And I would go so far as to say that even if it is .as narrowing as all that, technical education is still better than having them drop out and receive no trailling or education at all, and one cannot dispute the fact that our drop-out rate is still uncomfortably high. Thanks tq the initiative of the Minister, we now have secondary schools in Manitoba that are larger and more equipped and adapted to the providing of more varied courses of learning.

It doesn't seem inconceivable that even in rural areas we can at least begin to think about bringing in more of the 50-501s into the larger s.chools in the province, and each division I would hope has at least one school that can be considered as a central school.

Mind you, one can't go too far in voicing that hope be- ) cause I'm afraid that our Minister, despite his initiative and success in certain things he has undertaken, has not shouldered sufficient responsibility with regard to -- how shall I say -- see- ing to it that schools were built, or using his influence to see that schools. were built to a more optimum size.

In the Order for Return of March 6th we have here a list showing all those schools that were constructed last year and the size, number of classrooms and equivalents, and we find -- I don't know what the reason is -- but I daresay it isn't geogr aphy or population sparsity so much -- we find still all too many schools being built with five, six, seven and eight classro oms. When you consider that equivalents are included which means auditorium and library, I would assume that some of these schools have no more than three or four class- rooms.

If they're there well we can't do much about it, but it was not very prudent nor wise of the Minister to allow this sort of thing. I realize that his area of discretion here.was limited but I wonder how much he bothers himself with this. Did he really plead that this sort of thing not be done ? It's disturbing.

And when you have a ·six and seven room high school, two of which can be knocked off as auditorium or furnace room, you can't provide very much in the way of vocational education in those places and you are spending money and you wonder whether you . ara getting optimum -- the best value for it. ' I hope the :Minister doesn't sugge st that this amendment which case I pleaded so much two or three years ago is responsible for this, because at that time I made it very clear that maxi mum grants should be provided for less than 12 room high schools only in those cases where population pattern warranted, and it had to be jus tified first.

I don't know how many members Page 1216 March 29th, 1962

(Mr. Schreyer, cont'd) ...•. have this Order for Return but they should avail themselves of the chance to look at it. Let's just take one School Division as an example -- Turtle River school at Alonsa, 7 classrooms and equivalents; Amaranth, 7; Glenella, 6; Kelwood, 7; Laurier -- Not very encouraging. So with all that Mr. Chairman, I think that despite the en thusiasm with which the Minister gave his annual opening statement on education today, there is still quite a bit which he must attempt to explain and justify.

I don't think that we can be satisfied with our program regarding technical and vocational education until many of these things which I have outlined have been met and dealt with. Now I would like to spend just a few minutes on academic education proper because after all this is the area of education which still commands our greatest attention and our greatest expenditure of money. This is still the area of education where most people would like their children to enter into. I'm quite satisfied that in this area things are much, much better - much, much more settled.

We know where we're going to a greater extent than in the field of vocational education; but even here I have a few comments and criticisms pertaining to the classroom itself. I don't know just what the Minister can do about it but I think he would be interested in my observation that I feel many of our high schools, even with the new second ary division system, we really don't have adequate library facilities. Now I don't have any thing grand and magnificent in mind.

All I'm suggesting is that we have sufficient reference books so that when a teacher gives students an assignment to do they will have reference books in which to look up information. I've found that all too often the only place they can get information to answer an assigried question is by reverting to the text itself and you don't really broaden their outlook that way; you don't really give them enough sources of information; they don•t have anything to base, fro.m which to draw additional information about the particular subject matter being studied.

I' know that might be a little bit too cursory an explanation but I do feel rather strongly about this. After all, how many subjects do we have on the curriculum -- academic? -- six or seven subjects -- and if in each subject field we had no more than nine or ten reference books which students could use it would really serve a useful purpose. But it seems that -- at least the schools I've been in -- library facilities are not planned to cover that sort of need -- fiction, etcetera yes, but not that.

Another thing, I feel that if we want to get more out of a classroom we must -- and I'm no expert in this certainly and so many other things tonight -- but visual aid, especially in the slower -- not slower learning -- but with average students, visual aids are of immense help to a teacher and I -- to be quite honest and frank -- I just don't think they're being used to the extent which they should be.

And there a gain what can be done I don't know, but certainly the Minister with his staff, with his research facilities -- I don't know how good his research facilities are -- but assuming the department did have adequate research staff and facilities, this question should be looked into. Teaching of French -- teaching of foreign languages in our high schools, starting from Grade IV up, as far as French is concerned -- one can: only welcome this.

It's a pity that up to now we haven't moved this way -- we haven't moved this way previously, because starting a foreign language at the high school level should be avoided if at all possible. I realize we can•t start teaching German and Ukrainian at Grade IV, but let us just hope that before too long -- before three or four years have passed, the teaching of French will be taken up from Grade IV on and not just in a few places. I notice that again we have increased the amount for loans and bursaries.

According to my calculations, last year we offered $189, 000 in bursaries to various students and $10, OOO in scholarships. I don't know how much we loaned out -- I couldn't seem to get that informa tion -- but I would like to point out to the Minister that in the Province of Saskatchewan they have now increased the revolving loan fund from one million to three million dollars.

Now it's revolving, understand and that doesn't mean that that much goes out -- that is the fund it self -- out of which $2 00, OOO a year are loaned -- at least the provision is there -- it might not be loaned out or borrowed but it's there. Are we doing as much in that particular regard? I do not want to deal with teacher pensions because it might be thought that I have a sort of a vested.interest in it -- which I don't really because I'm not teaching. I would like to ask the Minister only one question. He might not like it, and if he doesn't it's up to him to deny it if it's not true.

But I have been given to understand that he has purposely moved slowly on teachers' pensions, the question of the whole problem, in the hope that a sort of a March 29th, 1962 Page 1217

(Mr. Schreyer, cont'd) ••• .••• rapprochemen1 and understanding could be made with some of the teachers that they would hold back in negotiating for salaries. Now this is a sort of sub rosa approach. I hardly think the Minister would indulge in, and he'll have an opportunity to dispute it and refute it no doubt if it's not true. In other words, what I'm trying to say is that teachers' pensions, fine -- we'll do something about it if you'll give us an understanding that you shan't negotiate too strenuously salary-wise in the next year or two. I'm not making it as a charge.

I am suggesting that if this is so it should be cleared up. . I think, Mr. Chairman, that I have dealt with most of the points which I wish to• deal with at this stage. I feel in concluding that talk as we will, procrastinate if we will, we cannot avoid the harsh -- to some people, harsh choice. We must make a decision if we want to get the most for ·our education dollar.

We have to make the decision whether we are going to provide alter native courses, put some substance into them: live up to them; try and inject into them some thing which will give them parity of esteem or whether we're going to continue along a single track system in the hope that everyone will have the chance to go to university and end up with having a large percent of our young people drop out. This is our choice. MR. JOHN P. TANCHAK (Emerson): Mr. Chairman, my remarks will be confined to about four points which I'm vitally interested in -- two more or less of a general nature and two more specific.

I may go a little further, something that may be discussed tomorrow, but if the weater permits I do not think I'll be present tomorrow at the session because I'm in vited out, so I may go a little further to some items which could be discussed later so I hope I'm excused on that part. . . I wish to congratulate the Minister on some of his achievements because I do know that there was some good progress made in this department although I'd have been happier if great er progress could have been claimed.

I also wish to associate myself with the remarks made by my colleague in regards to the staff of the Department of Education, inspectors :and so on. I really and truly believe that they're doing a very good job. But, as I said before, I wish to congratulate the Minister but I do not think that this is the time for us now to feel that we are in the position where we could claim complacency. I think we're far far from that. I think that the Minister was very lucky to take office at a t�me when he did. We all know that he took office at a time when the Royal Commission on Education presented a report.

And I truly be lieve that th.e Minister if he would have really taken more heed of this report and followed the report more carefully, took more time to study it that he would have ·gone down in history as the greatest Minister of Education ever. But I'm sorry to say that I think that the Minister missed the boat. As I said before, he was presented with this wonderful report -- I thought it was good, I agreed with it and I believed in the principle of it -- but again I say, he miss�d the boat. This report was made by the Royal Commission on Education and the Commissfon was appointed by the former government.

Why did they do it? Because in their wisdom they knew that not all was right with education and they wished to seek some improvement in this field. I'm sorry to say that the government after receiving or taking this report, in its haste, as I mentioned before, between two elections, proceeded to make great changes in education, but in some cases a very slight reference to the report. And I'm only going to dwell on one. I did mention it before in one of my speeches and the Honourable Member from Brokenhead did mention it too. And that is the basic principle, as I consider it, of this report.

And to me it seems that the basic principle in order to improve our education the principle was a great amount of centralization. And if you take the report, it definitely states in here that the div isions should so be formed that so far as possible be in each division but one high school unless there be in a division a sufficient number of high school pupils to warrant two or more high · schools with each of not less than 12 classrooms.

I would ask the Minister -- of course, he can say he's not responsible for the formation of the divisions -- but I think that the Minister is responsible for everything that goes on in his department. The commission was formed to form these divisions, these boundaries and I say that some of them were formed very un realistically. I don't know -- I wasn't in the department then and I'm not in now -- whether the Minister -- and I don't think he did, probably he shouldn't if he did -- gave them instruc tions as what actually should be done. But the report recommends 50 to 60 divisions. He did not adhere to that.

The Commission recommended less. It seems to me that if the Boundary Commission would have had more time to study Manitoba more carefully; if there wasn't a Page 1218 March 29th, 19�2

(Mr. Tanchak (cont'd) ••...• date set for the Commission to have Manitoba divided into boundar ies that they would have done a better job than what they did now. But they had a deadline to meet I imagine so those divisions were formed and I say that the principle of this report was scuttled. We have a further report here. In this report I didn't mark the page but it mentions that .there should be so many teachers to a division. In many cases that was not adhered to.

Now what do we have, as mentioned by the Honourable Member frJm Brokenhead -- he read a few divisions with so many classrooms and so many schools built. We've had schools spring up like elevators, as mentioned by the First Minister, almost in every town -- some towns only six, sevep miles apart and I do not think that was right. I don't think that was in the interests of better education. True, there might have been pressure put by the local i:esidents, but once they had accepted the division plan I think that the Minister could have stood his ground.

And since this is the report of the Royal Commission and I expect you to adhere to this report.:' I'm not asking him or telling him that he should have been a dictator, no, but he had this re port to base his decision on. But once the Minister gave in on one division and set a precedent, I think that that took hold and in many divisions, many divisions, there are more schools now than there should have been and he scuttled the basic principle of centralization. Now what happens in most of -- well I shouldn't say most, but in many of these divisions there are almost as many schools as there are towns.

We know these towns are jealous of one another, they want their schools there; but it wasn't the right thing to do. And I would hazard to say that in a number of years, some of thes·e schools have debentures for the next 30 years, that in a num ber of divisions some of these schools will be abandoned before they're actually paid for. Sure, the Minister or the First Minister or any of the government officials may say:"Well the govern ment is paying a greater share : of it. " I've heard in one instance when one of the Ministers of the Crown spoke to the people at the opening of a brand new school.

Now 1.'ll just use, I forget the exact ratio but we'll use this for example because it was better than this, he said: "You've got a school that cost "x" number of dollars, and just think of it, you yourselves are only paying 40% of the total cost of construc tion; and you're fellow citizens are paying 70% of the cost of construction, that's 30 to 70 or 40 to 60 whatever it was. And I don't think that statement is right. It may be true that the fellow citizens are paying the other 60% which the government claims the government contributes to wards the construction.

But at the same time, it's these same citizens who live in that particu lar district that contribute towards that other 60%. It isn't simply, you're fellow citizens ex cluding ourselves. We're also included in it. And I say that the number of schools, high schools we have is not according to the basic principle of this report and I feel that a lot of money is thus being wasted in this manner. Mr. Chairman, the Minister in his remarks just before the dinner hour made a state ment that he knows now that the real tax is up.

In fact, I think if I caught it right that the real tax has increased by something in the neighbourhood of 37% or 39 or something since the school divisions were introduced. I think I'm right in that. So now, at least, the Minister, and I give \lim credit for that as being honest with the people and himself, telling the people of the Province of Manitoba that the tax has gone up. But it's quite a different story to what we heard and what the people of Manitoba heard when the government officials were out in the country trying to get the people interested in the school divisions.

At that time they didn't say that, and I know that -- I mentioned it previously, some others mentioned it in this House -- that the government promised the people of Manitoba that the real tax will not rise. And I heard it. The Minister is shaking his head. I'm not going to accuse the Minis ter because I think I had the privilege of being with him at two meetings -- at one I spoke and another I didn't -- and I didn't hear him say that himself.

But there are other government --(interjection) -- yes, he said it here and I think in the House, that it will lessen the burden -- you could interpret that in many ways -- but I definitely heard at other places where such .statements were made as these, in answer to questions asked by the taxpayers. What about our taxes? Can you promise us that the taxes will not go up? The answers were such similar to these: "If any change in your tax, it will be down." Another quotation: "This system will relieve your tax burden, not in crease it." So how are the people to understand it -- that the tax will be less?

And in one, when I just previously mentioned that don it you believe when anybody tells you that your tax March 29th, 1962 Page 1219

(Mr. Tanchak, cont'd) •.•• .. will not go up, don't you believe the m. Your tax is bound to go up because you're going to have better services, more costly services -- it will be an improve ment, and who do you expect will pay for those better services ? I said: "You'll pay, and your tax will be up but I still consider it worthwhile ." And I think the Minister heard me make this statement, when I said it -- he acknowledges I did say that. I said I still think it's worthwhile, but don't listen to anybody telling you that your taxes won't be up.

I said that at another place, and.here's what one of the government officials did answer, and it wasn't the Minister -- another one: "It is hard to believe that anyone would be so naive as to even sugge st that the tax would rise." -- "To be so naive as to even sugge st." -- one of the officials that was sent out on those tour.a of speeches - (interjection) -- no, I won't say a civil servant, I said one of the officials. The people of Manitoba were promised something; that they believed him; and I say that the government has broken its promise .

Now the Minister comes up and tries to jus tify this increase in taxation by the fact that our education is improved -- and I agree with him. It has been im proved to a certain extent. It could have been improved much better than that, but the fact is that the promise was there and that promise was not kept. Now, I'm going to come -- oh there's something that really bothers me.

In the Dominion Bureau of Statistics -- and I have a notation here which I was going to use later, and I don't know if I'll have a chance -- the Dominion Bureau of Statistics for 1961, and in there it states that in that period nearly 1, OOO Manitoba teachers left the Province of Manitoba. I didn't make this up -- this is in the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. To be exact, it quotes the figure of 963 of our teachers trained in Manitoba are now teaching els ewhere.

And it goes further -- breaking it down -- gives an example: our loss to Ontario, for example , is 314; and our loss to Al berta is 204; to Saskatchewan 135; British Colum bia 296. Now I said I' m worried about it and I hope it isn't true. Perhaps the Minister will give me an answer to this because what worries me is this -- why are these teachers leaving? Is it because of insufficient salary ?

I can give the Minister credit for this, and the government, that the teachers'. salaries -- at least one thing that they succeeded in doing is increasing the teachers• salaries -- this increase was long over due and the teachers really merit that. I'm happy about that. So could it be the salaries; could it be the pension scheme that we have; or could it be both? I do not know. But they're satisfied with something.

Now further on it goes ahead and says that we did recuperate or we did get some teachers from other provinces, but the difference still was 70 more than ou;r total enrol ment in that particular year. ·I would like the Minister to give me an· answer to this. Now there is one other specific one that I'd like to refer to, and that is the one that we have already discussed in this House, and that's the matter of curriculum. !know it was discus s ed but I think that I can say a few words about it here.

I think that in the curriculum -- I .would like to know, and I think I'm right -- that in our Department of Ed ucation, we haven't got a stand ing committee on curriculum -- a standing committee on curriculum. I think that it's composed of part-time workers, tea.chers, probably working, to my understanding, working on Saturdays , weekends, Saturdays , after school hours. I think if we had a standing committee on curriculum, maybe the Minister -- I see him smiling, maybe he has one now -- and I hope he has -- I thmk they could do a better job, because it will be more incentive in research. I understand that Mr •.

MacDonald, years back, did try but I think he gave it up for reasons which, I was told, but I don't wish to bring them up at the present time. In the matter of setting school examinations, I think we should have a permanent body, staff, setting them. I think the present system is that the Department of Education asks a cer tain body of people to do it. They start about Christmas time. I think that these exams should be set by teachers given leave of absence for a certain period of time.

They would have more time to study it -- instead of teachers coming in -- I don't say they're not trying their best, but if they were full-t ime, occupied full-time, I thlllk they'd do a better job. With these remarks I think I'll close . I had one more, but probably we'll be in this department next week and I'll bring it up. MR. D. ORLIKOW (St. John's): Mr. Chairman, this is the largest spending department which this legislature has to deal with, and in view of the importance, I think that it is essent ial that we give the closest scrutiny to the proposals of the Minister and to the entire problem of education.

I want to begin by saying that I believe that in Canada we are doing a poor job of meeting the educational requirements of the people of this country. But l want to say this, Page 1220 March 29th, 1962

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd) .•.•..•.•. that I don't think that this provincial government or any other provincial government can solve the problem because , although the British North America Act leaves the responsibility of education to the provinces, they certainly could not have foreseen at that time that the growth of knowledge and the growth of techniques and the growth of technol ogy would make the cost of providing an education adequate to meet the needs of our people such that no provincial government can do the job which is required . And so if I am critical, Mr.

Chairman , I have tc be critical, not just of this government, but of all the governments of this country and of the people of this country for permitting this country to fall so far behind nearly every other country of the world. If one were to examine the amount of money which is spent in the Don;iiniOn of Canada by all levels of government for education, in terms of a percentage of the gross national product, if one were tc compare that with what is spent by other countries, and by most of the countries which are far poorer than Canada, one could only hang head in shame. Now Mr.

Chairman, a number of people, including the Ministers of Education and their Deputies , and key education people across the Dominion of Canada, have been giving a good deal of. study tc the problems of education in recent years . Conferences on education which have been held have charted tc a large extent the thing s which need tc be done, and they 've charted and listed how far we are from achieving those things. It has been proven conclusi vely that the economic well-bei ng of this country depends to a large extent on the education of our citizens.

Studies are shown that the size of income is directly related to the number of years of schooling which people have . One study shows that people with 13 or more years of schooling make 20% more than the average earnings of all the people in Canada; while people with less than 8 years of schooling make less than 80% of that average earning. In a survey conducted las t year , it was shown that in a recent year, over 70% of Canada's unemployed had no schooling beyond Grade vm. A third of Canada 's children are still leaving school with less than Grade vm edu cation.

Canada has only half as many skilled workers in proportion tc population as United States, and a recent national employment survey in Toronto showed over 19, OOO jobs for skill ed workers going unfilled while there were 23, OOO unplaced job applicants who could not qualify because of their lack of technical trainding. In 196 1, 9% of the people in Canada were unemploy ed. Only 3% of these were people who had completed secondary school, while 19% of those who were unemployed had not completed the primary school education. So, Mr. Chairman, we ought tc realize how important it is that we raise our sights .

Total education costs in Canada have almost doubled between 1955 and 1960, but in terms of the percentage of total personal income, the amount spent on education rose only from 4. 1% to 5. 4%. We can foresee, Mr.

Chairman, we can expect that as long as the Canadian birth rate continues at its present high level we will have to provide an increasing number of classro oms, of teachers and of schools , and so even if we merely maintain the present expenditure per pupil, the total educational bill will have to increase but even this is not enongh because our present system is not meeting our needs in a number of important fields.

We have a tremendous. rate of drop -out amongst our students -- a rate which is scandalou s, it's inexcusable -- of 100 students who enter Grade XI only 66 reach high school and only six go on to get a University degree. I don't thing , Mr. Chairman, that there is a country on either side of the iron curtain which can call itself a modern industrial country, which has the low rate which I have just men tioned. So, Mr. Chairman, we have nothing to be proud about in the field of education, and yet what are we doing about it?

Nothing is more important if we're going to have a good education al system than having competent teachers. Experts are agreed that these are most likely to be found in persons who have lengthy academic and professional trainiq; . In 1958 the Ca nadian Conference on Education strongly recommended that the minimum -- I want the Minister to note this -- that the minimum requirement for a fully qualified teacher should be four years of train ing above Grade XI.

Today the Minister tells us that he hopes -- he hopes -- now I don't want tc be critical but this is the same hope we heard last year -- he hopes that next year nobody will get into the teachers' training colleg e unless they have a full Grade XII. In 1958 -- four years ago -- the Canadian Conference on Education, of which the Minister, I think, is an hon orary or an actual well, -- let's just look at what his position is -- it's easy tc find out -- un fortunately we have -- the Minister is an honourary co-chairman.

In 1958 -- four years ago they were recommending that teachers , tc do a job, needed four years of University training, March 29th, 1962 Page 1221

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd) ...•.. and today the Minister tells us that next year he hopes that we will have teachers who have one year of University training. I'm sure that this isn't much to be proud about� But, Mr. Chairman, having said this, I want to revert for a moment to say again what I said before -- that I don't believe that education problems of this province can be solv ed unless we have a massive infusion of federal assis tance. So I don't want to discuss the theoretical objectives o� education tonight. I want to look at what we are doing in this province.

We are spending some $36 million and it is important that we look at this amount to see how we are spending it, but before we do it I want to point out one thing. The Minister mentioned this after noon how much we have increased, with some jus tification-- how we have gone up in the last four years. I want to point out to the members of this committee that despite our increases we still are down in the middle in terms of per student expenditure.

The last fig ures I have for student expenditure per annum are for 1959 and if you look at them here's what you find: In 1959 Al berta spent $367 per student; British Columbia spent $351 per student; Saskatchewan spent $300 a student; Ontario spent $299 a student and Manitoba spent $257 per student per years education.

Now I know that we've gone up since 1959 but we are spending $36 million this year; the Province of Saskatchewan is spending $41 million this year for education, so I suggest to the Minister that we are in fact probably still down about the middle in the per capita expenditure per student, so that we have not very much to be proud about. I want to sugg est also, Mr. Chairman, that to a large extent we are spending this money without sufficient thought, without suff icient consideration, without proper planning and there• fore, Mr.

Chairman, I have to assume that to a certain extent, if not to a large extent, we are misspending our money and wasting our money. And members may think that this is a queer tack for me to take because I believe in education and I will defend the expenditure of more money for education, but I believe that we have to get value for the money we spend. Now we on this side of the House have often been accused of being visionary, of being impractical, of not carying about -- - on that side of the House, of course, they are efficient, they are business men, they know how to run things . Well, Mr.

Chairman, what business, what industry in this province -- in this country -- would spend three and a half million dollars , let alone thirty-six million dollars , without having a research department of some considerable size? What busi ness spending one million dollars a year wouldn 't have a statistical department so they could assess what they're doing ?

They could know whether what they're doing is the proper thing; whether the things they're doing this year are comparable to the things they were doing last year ; whether the things they are doing this year are better than the things they were doing last year.

I challenge the Minister to show any business concern that would follow that kind of procedure, because it couldn't, it would go under. · But since.this is government and since this is education apparently we can get on with -- what have we got -- a one man department of re search -- and I'm told that he left in the middle of the year so we didn't even have a one man department of research. I'm not being -- and I want to make this very clear , Mr. Chairman - in the things I'm saying tonight I'm not being critical of the staff.

I think we've got excellent staff; I think we're getting a lot more than we deserve for the money we're paying, and if I'm critical tonight I'm critical of the government for spending money without taking the proper care· to see that the money is spent as it should be . Now, we are beginning a general course, Mr. Chairman, and let me make it clear -- we on this side are not opposed to a general course. Most of us in this group represent constituen cies, represent people who are in the lower income groups .

The percentage of our constituents who send their children to the Universities is much lower than the percentage in the .constituen cies in the upper income groups . So we have known for years, Mr. Chairman, that the emphasis on matriculation course -- the single minded feeling that if you don't take matriculation you just don't rate -- that this is all wrong. Only six out of 100 students go to University, or graduate from University.

The people we represent, if we want to be parochial -- if we want to think . only in terms of our own interests -- they don't go to University so we know -- we've known for years that we needed something else. V{e welcomed -- we welcomed the approach of a general course. We worked for it for years; we proposed it many years ago. But, Mr. Chairman, a general course will be a failure unless the general course is as good in its field as the matricu lation course is, and I want to tell the Minister that if he thinks the public knows that this is so Page 1222 March 29th, 1962

(Mr. Orli.1<ow, cont'd) ...••. he is mistaken. If he thinks the teachers think this is so, he is mistaken. If he thinks the principals think this is so, he is mistaken, because, Mr. Chairma n, I talked to people -- I talked to educators who are int erested and they are concerned -- they are worried -- they think we are going into this without sufficient preparation and I'll tell the commi ttee some of the things which they are saying. What discussions , Mr. Chairman, l).ll;v� been held with business ? What discussions have been held with industry?

What di��i pn� have been held with comm erce to make sure that when we graduate people out of the general course two or three years from now, that they will be acceptable; because if they're not acceptable, Mr. Chairman, then I want to say that we are comp�etely wrong in recom mending to the children and to their parents that they go into the general course. I have been told that the people in charge of nurses' training have already said that graduates of the general course will not be acceptable in schools of nursing.

Now if this is so , it's a fine prospect we're holding ou_t for girl students when we recom mend to them that they go into the general course. We are building an institute of technology and I'll come to that a little later. I have been told -- and I would certainly like to find out that I am wrong -- I have been told that the director of curriculum told the teachers on one occasion that graduates of the general course would be acceptable, would be welcomed in the institute of technology. Sounds good. I have also been told that the director of vocational training, Mr.

Addy told the teachers that the graduates of the general course would not be acceptable in the institute of technology. Now, Mr. Chairman, if you have two people in the department telling diametrically opposed things -- making diametrically opposed statements -- is it any wonder that the teachers are confused. Is it any wonder that the principals are confused.

Is it any wonder that one of them said to me last night -- and I can tell the Minister that in my opinion he is one of the finest educators in this province -- that he is hesitating -- that he hasn't got the heart to advise his students to take the general course because he does not feel that he can guarantee them that they will be acceptable to industry and comm erce when they graduate out of the general course. And this is the course which we are telling the people of this province is something which they have been waiting for for 25 years . Well, Mr.

Chairman, if we had a department of research we would have answered some of these questions before we got into the position which we are now in. I think the honourable member who led off for the Liberals mentioned the fact that in yesterday's newspaper there was a report the Winnipeg School Board was discussing the perren nial question of examination results. Well, Mr.

Chairman, surely members of this com mittee don't believe that if this year the Grade XI students have 25 percent more failures in mathematics that they're 25 percent stupider than the Grade XI students last year; or if there's 50 percent more failures in history, as we have had on occasion, that they're 50 percent more stupid than they were in the year before. Surely that isn't a valid conclusion, yet that' s the conclusion which many people make, because they don't know the facts. I think the facts are obvious.

If you get a tremendous variation in the examination results there's only one conclusion one can draw, and that is that the examination content between one year and the other changed drastically, or else that the method of marking changed drastically. Now, if we had a statistical depart ment, . which was geared to evaluate the examination and to evaluate the marking, we might have some of the answers. But we don •t have -- we go blithely a long spending $36 million --, which reminds me of that famour phrase of Mr.

Howe1s : "What 's a million !" And yet this is the kind of program which this government is proposing for the people of this province. Now the Minister's talked about curriculum. Surely the curriculum is of the utmost ini-= portance in the kind of education we provide. And what do we do about curriculum -- and aga�n I don't want to be critical of the teachers.

I think it's tremendous that dozens, hun<:W�dc!> of teachers across the province who are carrying a full work load ..,_ and I'm no.t one of those people who believes that a teacher works from nhe to four because l know too many good teach ers and they put in long hours -- I think it's terrific that teachers will give their evenings ; will give their week-ends to help develop curriculum. Mr. Chairman, is that the way to get a curriculum ?

I wonder what we would have thought when we started to build the hydro power plant at Grand Rapids if the Hydro Board had gone to the engineers that they have working for them and said: "Here 's some pencils, here's some paper, on your free evenings and on your weekends get busy and sketch a plan for this $150 million .power plant. " We wouldn't even think about it, but we don't think anything· at all about saying to the teachers: "Come on do this work March 29th, 1962 Page 1223

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd) .••..•.• for nothing" -- and I'm not so concerned about the monetary re turn -- "but do it in your spare time, " And.when they do it in their spare time , when they do it on the basis of part-time, we get exactly what we ask for. We get a part-time, half-time job. I want to confirm what the Honourable Member from Brokenhead said.

One of the best teach ers in this city told me that in two course he knew of -- and I don't think he was talking about mathmatics -- that the curriculum proposed in the general course was more technical, more theoretical than the curriculum we already have in the same grade for the matric ulation course. And if this is true, then we have defeated the purpose of the general course before we even start, because a general course is for those people who are not going on to university and so don't need a theoretical course. But this is the kind of thing you get when you ask teachers to do it on a part-time basis.

I want to suggest to the Minister that it's time, and we're spending· enough money that we stop asking for volunteers to do things in their free time.

Not that I don't believe in volunteer work, but it's not at all impractical, and I think the expenditure would be well worthwhile, that if we want to revise the curriculum in its basic tenor that the Minister should call for the best teachers in the province, one in the fie ld of science, one'in .the field of mathematics, one in the field of history, one in the field of languages, to take a year off from their regular teaching work to be paid their regular salary by the department, and to work full-time until we develop the curriculum which we need.

We 're not going to get the kind of curriculum changes· we need with one director of curriculum, as competent as he may be, Mr. Chairman. This is asking just a little too much. And I think the Minister ought to give some very serious consideration to this. Now, what about this general course about which we've heard so much. As already said this curriculum has been and is being designed on a part-time basis. What are the objectives of the course? I've asked teachers . As ide from a little bit of vague generality, they haven't been able to tell me. Who evaluated the proposed courses ?

What objective tests for these courses were made and by whom were they made ? What special steps have been taken to make sure that the students and their parents know enough about the course? I repeat that many teachers are uncertain about this course -- and when I say that I'm putting it mildly. What dis cussions have been held with business, with commerce, with industry, to make sure that the graduates of this course are acceptable?

I know that when i hapl?ened to be on the Winnipeg School Board in the years just before we es tablished the Technical Vocational School and for three or four years before that school opened we had advisory commi ttees of industry, of lab our, of commerce, working to make sure that they knew what we were doing and that they would accept the people who come out of that. Mr. Chairman, we cannot expect the public to accept this course . We have no right to insist that childre.n attend this course, make this choice. unless we have answered some of these questions. And I want to say, Mr .

Chair man, that thes13 questions have not been answered, although the Min ister seems to think they have, because the questions I have raised are the questions which were brought to my attention by some of the most competent people in the field of education. Now what about this Institute of Technology, Mr. Chairman? We certainly go along with . the idea that we need an Institute of Technology. In theory this is a tremendous development, and long overdue.

All the studies that have been made would indicate that there's a tremendous shortage of technically qualified people in Canada, so we ougl_it to be able to greet this proposed institute with unreserved praise. Well what are the facts ? I want to tell the Minister th at some of the most prominent educators in this city are bewildered, puzzled, befuddled and an xious about this Institute of Technology. And I want to tell the Minister why. I know that two years before the Technical Vocational School in Winnipeg was opened they had already picked a principal.

Now they weren't charting a new field; they were doing something which had been done in many places. We're opening something which is new. I asked the Minister I think sometime ago: "Have we picked a pri ncipal yet?" The Minister said, "No" -- (interjec tion) - Well, I think I asked it a little while ago and got the same answer. Without a principal, Mr. Chairman, I suggest to you that there's not much that can be done in this field. It's easy to say we're going to have a technological institute but what kind of technological institute will it be ?

The departm ent gave us a four-page pamphlet which listed the curriculum. I hope the Minister is not fooling himself. He may think that we are fooled; he may think that the public is fooled; but if the Minister thinks that a four-page pamphlet is a curriculum, he's got another think Page 1224 March 29th, 1962

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd) ....••.• coming. MR. McLEAN: I didn't make any such statement. MR. ORLIKOW: Well I know. That's just the point I'm getting at. The Minister has made no statement , and the result is that not only the members of the legislature but teachers and principals all across this province are very concerned about what kind of institute this is going to be.

If you're going to open this school a year from September, the teachers ought to know now what the curriculum will be, because unless the teachers understand the curriculum, unless the teachers understand the objective of this school, unless the teachers are sold on this school, how are they going to sell the students who are now in Grades X or XI who have to attend this institute, .how· are they going to sell this institute to them? And I want to tell the Minister that they know as little about this institute as we in this House -- and that is a big fat zero.

Now we ought to know now -- some members say , "Hear, Hear" they have a good deal more faith in the Minister and his department than the teachers and principals of the Greater Winnipeg area. And I make that statement with some knowledge of what I'm talking about. The teachers of this province ought to know what the curriculum will be, and they don't know that. The teachers of this province, and the students ought to know whether this is a post-secondary school project, a junior college type of operation or a mixture of technical vocational and junior college.

These things the Minister hasn't told us -- and, more important, he hasn't told the people who, as I say, have to sell the technological institute to the students. What consultations have there been with the teachers ? Where is the staff for this technological institute coming from? Are they going to be graduates of university with teaching experience? If they are, I suggest that the Minister better not wait 1til 1963 to try and hire them because he certainly won't get them if he waits 'til a month before the sc:tiool opens. Are they going to be practical people without teach ing experience?

Are they going to be practical people with teaching experience? I want to tell the Minister that there are a number of people who have a good deal more responsibility for tech nical education that I have, who are worried that the technological institute is suddenly going to depend on the few technical schools that we have and take a good part of their staff,in which case you will be robbing Peter to pay Paul, because where are they going to replace the teach ers that you take. And these are things which are worrying the people who have to administer the school system of this province.

Now what consultation has there been with labour and industry about the technological in stitute? What steps have been taken to acquaint teachers, and particularly guidance teachers, with what the objectives of the institute will be and what the institute will be offering so that they can really explain and sell the course to the students who we hope will go to the institute? If these things have been done, Mr.

Chairman, -- and I want to tell the Minister that a large percentage of the best teachers in the Greater Winnipeg area are completely unacquainted with the answers to the questions which I have raised tonight and which I think are the key to the success or failure of this technological institute. Mr. Chairman, I would hate to think that we l are going into this tremendously new, tremendously important and tremendously exciting field without proper preparation simply because we want to get the 75% grant which the federal gov ernment is allocating for this, and which has a cut-off date sometime in 1963.

I'm just as in- · terested as the Minister in getting any share of the money which the federal government pro vides for this or any other service but surely the whole question is too important to be dealt with simply on this basis. continued on next page March 29th, 196 2 Page 1225

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd.) .• •• Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to deal with just two other matters . First of all I want to deal again, as I have in the past, _with teacher training and teacher qualifications . Some time ago the Manitoba Teachers' Society and the two trustee organizations urged the Minister to in crease the qualifications necessary for teacher training. They suggested that as of September 1961 a complete Grade XII be required for entrance to the Teachers 1 College. Well the Minis ter .announced today.that. this will be done this year .

I su ppose that a one-year delay over this request is not too serious . Better late than never I suppose . But I want to mention to the mem bers of this committee, because these are. not my suggestions--these are the suggestions of both the trustees and the Teac:he.rs' SOc_hlty, and I think that between them they have the know ledge of what is required which sonw: of us in this committee may not have. They went on to suggest that by September of 1963, a complete matriculation Grade XII be required before people can enter into the Teachers• College.

I think the Minister ought to give this committee and give the Teachers' Society and the trustees' organizations, ought to give them that commit ment now. I don •t think that this is being at all idealistic . I think that we are only following in the footsteps of jurisdictions which are way ahead of us in the field of education. This unit- and, Mr.

Chairman, .when I say "this", I'm not even discussing tonight with the Minister im plementing the recommendations with regard to teacher qualifications which the Royal Commis sion mentions, so that we're certainly not being very aggressive, very progressive, very rush ing, because it's now some years since the Royal Commission made its recommendations. Now, Mr. Chairman,. this year, out of 540 students at the Teachers' College, 143 or 27% have less than a complete Grade XII. If these figures.are wrong, Mr .

Chairman, and I think the Minister on one occasion said that figures similar to this are wrong, then I think the Minister owes it to this committee to give what the actual figures are. If the teacher shortage is really easing up as has been suggested on that side of the House on a number of occasions, --!, for one, question it because Winnipeg, for example, has empty classrooms, --supply teachers, which they ought to have, they have not been able to hire.

Butifthe teacher shortage is really easing up, surely now is the time to r.aise the standard, because if not now when the supply of teach ers is easing up, when will we do it, if ever? ';['here are 580 teachers in the Province of Mani toba, according to information which I have, who hold conditional certificates. These are sup posed to be for one year only, but they are often extended. Can the Minister tell us how many of these there really are; how many of them have been extended for more than one year and for how long they have been extended?

When is the Minister going to end these conditional certifi cates, as he ought to? MR . McLEAN: Mr . Chairman, in 196 4--you heard my speech this afternoon. . MR. ORLlKOW: I heard it, but the Minister has made other speeches and other commit ments which didn't quite come through, and if he now .says 1964, on the basis of past perform ance, maybe by 1966 or 167 we'll have it. That still will be better than we have today but al ong way from what we ought to have . Now the Manitoba Teachers 1 Society recommended that after 1961 teachers be required to remove conditions by September of the year concerned.

The Minister should tell these teach ers who have conditions that if they don't remove the conditions that they will not be permitted · to teach. If he doesn't do this , Mr .

Chairman, I want to suggest to him that the people who are going to suffer, the people who are going to be shortchanged in the kind of education that they get. are the students in the 580 classrooms which these teachers with conditional certificates are teacbiulh a#li �· only person who will be responsible for shortchanging the education of those s:tuden.ts will be- tOO Minist.e'I:, because the Minister has it in his power to tell these people that they've got to go tG �rk :md clean up their conditions or they might as well quit teaching . He won't let them teach. It's as simple as that.

The Minister can do it if he wants to do it, and other jurisdictions, as the Minister knows, have done it. I am told, Mr . Chairman--! find it hard to believe; I find it incredible; but I think my source of information was pretty reliable- I am told that the Teachers' College is still accepting as students , people who have failed two years in a row at university. I want the Minister to check this . I think it's important, because, Mr. Chairman, the university is now saying that if a person fails two years in a row at the university they've got to quit. They can't continue on.

In other words, they can't become doc tors; they can't become lawyers; they can't become social workers; so I guess the only thing Page 1226 March 29th, 1962

(Mr. Orlikow, cont' d.) •••• that's left for them to do is to go into the Teachers' College and become teacher s. This is a fine prospect for the students of the Province of Manitoba in the year 1962 . I hope I'm wrong. I hope the information I've been given is wrong . If the Minister didn 't know about this and if it's true, I hope that the Minister will come back tomorrow and tell us that he's going to take some action--going to take some action so this doesn't happen again next year, because if it's true , I think it's a disgra ce . I think it's inexcusab le . Mr.

Chairman, I want to speak just about one other matter which the Honourable Member from Erokenhead mentioned briefly. Maybe he was a little hesitant about raising it, first of all because he is himself a teacher, and secon dly because part of what I am going to say happen ed in or n,ear bis own constituency. It seems to me, Mr. Chairm an, that if we are going to es tablish an educational system which works and works efficiently, that teachers must have the feeling that they cann ot be dismissed wit'.liout adequate cause , and that they cannot be demoted without adequate cause .

I'm not suggesting for a moment that teachers, once being appointed, ought to hav� a lifetime tenure .

I spent six years on the Winnipeg School Board and I know from experience that teachers may have been good at one time and they may be getting old; they may be sick and they may not be able to do a job; and I want to agree .with suggestions that have been made,· that school districts ought to have the.power to dismiss or demote a teacher with cause , but surely if this system is to be equitable, surely if people are to work without fear, it must be only on the basis of justifiable cause that dismissal is permitted. Now how do you get this kind of a system ?

It seems to me that the only way you can get it is by establishing a system of arbitration which works both ways . Not a one-way street arbitration which we seem to have . And yet that is precis ely what we have . Let's look at a couple of cases which took place within the ·last year . I'm sorry I have to refer to them but as they've happened in the last year I think this is the place where we can :talk about it because it 's the Ministe r' s responsibility to do some thing about it .

Let's look at the case in Elkhorn where a teacher was dismissed; where an ar bitrator was appointed; where an arbitrator held hearings; where an arbitrator made a report; and what did the arbitrator say in his report? He said, in essence, "Yes, this teacher was dis missed; this teacher was dismissed unjustifiably; this teacher was dismissed because one of the school trustees took a dislike to her and.}:lounded the rest of the board until they dismissed her.

This teacher shouldn't have been dismissed, but I can't find anything in the laws of this province which permits me to order the school board to take that teacher back; which permits me to order this school district which unjustly dismissed that teacher to pay her her back sal ary ." But it happens that the school board had a change of heart, . aided by an election which eliminated the offensive school trustee , but the principle involved is important.

I don't know whether the Teachers ' Society made representations to the Minister, and I don't care, but may be the Teachers' Society thinks that the way to handle this is to go to court , I don't think so . If there's an inequity and if a coµipetent lawyer, acting as an arbitrator, says that the law is deficient, I suggest that the Minister doesn't have to wait for the Teachers ' Society to make representation. We ought to have an amendment to The Public Schools Act here right now today which we don't have . And that's the first case •.

And what about this case· which the Honourable Member from Brokenhead talks about? What about the case of the principal at Beausej our who was demoted? I'm not going to express an opinion, Mr . Chairman, about whether the division school board was right in demoting him or not . I don't know, but I do know that nothing could be more harmful to the morale of teach ers or any other employees than to have a situation where the employer can unilate rally, with out cause , or without stating the reason, demote an employee . And yet, this is precisel y what the school division board did.

Now the Honourable Member from Brokenhead tells us that the Minister was out there . I wonder what he was doing there . I wonder what he was doing there . I wonder why he didn't exercise his authority or his influence to see that an arbitration board was appointed. Surely that teacher, any teacher, has that elementary right--l'm not talking about a legal right; I'm talking about a moral right. We've heard members on that side talk very often and very eloquently about moral iss ues . Well there's a moral issue which I think needs to be settled right then, and it hasn't been settled .

And that principal has been put to the expense--c ornpletely unnecessa ry, completely unjusti fied, of fighting the case himself through the courts of Manitoba. And I think that the Minister was remiss in his responsibilitie s, if not legally, certainly morally. March 29th, 1962 Page 1227 1-- :-- '• ! -!-- 1-- - I_

(Mr . Orlikow, con t' d.) And then I want to deal with one other case which I must say I find completely incompre hensible, and the actions of the Minister, to me--1 just can't believe that they 're true, but pm going to tell the members of the commi ttee and tell the Minister the details of the case as they have been told to me, and if I'm wrong, then I think the Minister ought to say so because there are a lot of teachers who are wondering about what happened, or why the Minister took the ac tion which he did . I'm referring to the case of Mrs . Gunson, the wife of the principal to whom I just referred .

Mrs . Gunson, I am told, is a qualifited teacher . I'm told that she took a special course which qualifies her to teach at the sec ondary school level. As a condition of taking that course, I am told that she and all the other students who took that course, signed some kind of paper to the effect that they would only teach at the secondary school level. This ma kes sense in principle. After all if there 's a shortage of secondary school teach ers , particu larly in the rural areas, it doesn't make much sense for the province to bEl permitting them to teach at the elementary school level.

I'm not quarrelling with the principle. Mrs . Gunson applied for a job, I'm told, with the division board, as a sec ondary school teacher, and a division board said to Mrs . Gunson: "Look, we're in this dispute with your hus band; the relationship between the Gunson Family and the division board isn't very good; we don 1t think it would be very good for morale if we hired you. " And I think this is very under standable, given the •..••• case of Mr . Gunson. But the elementary school board in Beause jour had a need for a music teacher and Mrs . Guns on was very qualified to be a music teacher .

The elem entary school board hired Mrs . Gunson, at which point somebody--I'm not saying the Minister--but somebody in the Minister's department notified the elementary school board at Beausejour that Mrs . Gunson could not teach elementary school; she had to teach at the second ary school level. Well, Mr . Chairman, I ask the members of this comm ittee, what kind of thinking created this situation? Where is the justice of this ? Did the Department of Educa tion want Mrs . Gunson to leave her husband? Did they want Mrs . Gunson to move out ofBeausejour? It was one or the other and they succeeded, because Mrs .

Gunson is not living in Beausej our and she 's not teaching in Beausej our . I understand she 's teaching in Fort Garry, and I under stand, although I'm no expert and maybe the Me.mber from Springfield or the Member from Brokenhead can shed further light on this, but I understand that the attempts of the Beausejour school boar<;! to get a music teacher were fraught with a great deal of difficulty and they certain ly did not get a teacher of thei" quality of Mrs . Gunson. Now I just don't understand, Mr. Chair man, what the Minister or his department were doing in this case .

Now members may think that this isn't very important, but I want fo suggest to you that unless the teachers· of this prov ince have a feeling that they can teach without being interfered with unjustly, that they ar� not going to put in their best efforts. They're not going to feel that they have the confidence of the people of this province . They're not going to do the job as they ought to do it. Now, Mr . Chairman, there are other matters which I intend to deal with .

I want to tell the Minister that we are going to be--whether he likes it or not--when we get to the item on pensions in his estim ates we are going to discuss the items in some detail. I think it's unfor tunate that we are going to discuss it twice, once under the estim ates and once--1 think we're · going to have a bill although with the conflicting rumours and statements which one gets from that side I have to wonder, but it's announced in the Speech from the Throne, so I feel we'r e going to get some kind of bill at which time members on this side will have to discuss the ques tion of pensions again.

I'm sorry we have to discuss this twice and probably rehash the matter and thresh old straw, but we can't be blamed for it. The Minister knew--1 think he knew what he wanted to put in the bill, and I see no reason, the House having now been meeting for five weeks, why we couldn't--six weeks--why we couldn't have had that legislation here, but we haven't so we will be discussi ng it under the estimate s. ·M r. Chairman, I painted a gloomy picture . Naturally people on this side always paint the dark side just as people on that side always paint the bright side .

Not everything the Minister or his department does is bad . Occasio nally--very occas ionally--they do things which are right. The Minister is hard working. He's a good guy and all that , but I want to say to the me mbers of this committee that we've got a long way to go before the education of the young people of this province will reach the standard which it ought to and as long as we on this side of the House are here we certainly will not let the Minister forget what needs to be done. Page 1228 March 29th, 1962

MR . LAURENT DESJARDINS (St . Boniface) : Mr. Chairman, I have but three or four points to discuss tonight and I certainly intend to be brief. I had hoped that this year the Hon ourable Minister would deem the subject important enough to give some indication of his philos ophy regarding the education of 15, OOO or so children attending private schoo ls . Heaven knows that he has had ample time to arrive at some decision and to ma ke some policies. I am the first one to admit that politic ally he has a very difficult deci sion to make, but should we say this and then stop there? Should I be silent ?

I wonder--! know that me mbers of the govern ment would like it, and probably the mem bers of this Hou se , and maybe the mem bers of the Press and ma ny othe rs would like it much bette r, but would they admire me more ? We have tried--weµ, one of them said yes, and it might be possi ble--but I don't think so. I think that I have a voice here as much as anybody else, and I think that if I have convi ctions that I should express my thoughts here, especia lly when I feel so sure that there is somet hing wrong here .

In four years I haven't heard--! don't remember any case where any Minister or me mber re fused to at least ma ke an attempt to answer questi ons --not once in four years . Now when thi s subject is brought in, well we 're told and I'm told that I'm not fair; it's not right to embarrass anybody like this ; that this subject should not be mentio ned. Today, the last speaker told us about mo ral issu es; mo ral responsibilities . We have a mot ion in front of us for asking uniformity of curricula--trying to work on it--but anything about this subject is never answe red.

If we ask the Minister how ma ny teachers teaching in private schools are qua lified he doesn't know and he's all surprised that we should ask such a question . If we tell him why ther e's a certain book, written by the same perso n--his Depart ment insists it should be studied in different grades --why should some people of Manitoba pay for it and others have it free, they look at us with a hurt look. Why do we ask questions such as these? It's not fair. I have: said that--! know. I realize that politically this is a touchy question, only what are we here for?

Nobody is forcing any of us here to do this kind of work. Don't we have a respons ibility? Because it is difficult, does that mea n that we should forget about it? Does the Minister think that I relish standing up year after year with the same thing ? Is that what the members of this House feel? That I like it? I might say, Mr . Chairman, that I've been shaking and sweating here for an hour . Should I stand up again and say what I think and fight for what I think is right?

Do you think it's easy, when I get 'phone calls telling me that as long as there are certain people--this would be the words this person said--that as long as the re are people like me you can't lick so and so--we'll get nothing in Manitoba- -that this is a democra cy and major ity rules and you 're not entitled to anything--if you don't like it you can mo ve . Do you think that 's pleasant, Sir? Does the Minister think it's pleasant? Does he think it's pleas ant beca use of my nervousne ss- -because of my excitable nat ure, that it is so hard to be quoted right . I'll ma ke a spee ch .

I'll speak of the lack of leadership, the lack of courage of the government and I'll speak for forty minutes or so, and one sentence about schools, and the paper will quote : "Desj ardins Fights With Duff Again" or som ething like this . Why? When I ask these people thi s do you know what they tell me?

"Well this is the only colourful thing ." I am afraid--especial ly this Ses sion--l'm afraid to open my mouth because I'll hurt the cause that I think is so important , because my words will be changed or exaggerated but, Sir, does that me an that I should be silent, that I should not ask anything about these things? We have talked here--and the last speaker talked about teacher qualifications --you should be toughe r with them .

Would it be so difficult to bring in at least a bill to say som ething about this ques tion of this aid to private schools , som ething of this recomm endation of this Royal Commis sion ? Would it be so difficult to bring something--a direct grant or 'aid to qualify teachers only teach Lng in the se schools ? Why? Hav en't they got the· same right as othe r people ? What kind of schools are you going to have if you don't do this ? It's getting more and mo re difficult . The taxes are going higher all the time. Some people are asked to give but cannot share in this .

They haven 1t the right to share--they shouldn 't expect it b1:;cause in a democra cy ma jo rity rules and mino rity--any kind of minority--hasn 1t any right, or so we are led to believe . Now is thi s right, Sir? Is this why I'm accused every time I stand up, of being a fanat ic? Do you think it's easy for me? It is not any ea sier for me than any members of the government . I like to be a good fellow and to be friendly with everybody als o. I don't like to be branded a fanatic be cause I do believe in certain things.

Can anyone here stand up and tell me: "No, those teachers haven't any right to live like other people and those 11, OOO people do not count ." March 29th, 1962 Page 1229

(Mr. Desjardins, cont' d.) •••• Now here is a very good write-up that appeared in the Tribune on June 17th, 1961: "Rob lin Warns of Cost in Massive School Plan. Plea for Education Aid at Next Session. " From Neepawa: "Premier Duff Roblin wound up the history-m aking Cabinet meeting here Friday by warning Manitobans their sacrifices for education probably will be maintained with even higher government spending next year . The Premier was speaking at a town-sp onsored dinner after holding the first full-scale Cabinet meeting outside of Winnipeg. In one of his mo st stirring speeches in months Mr.

Roblin called on all citizens to support a massive education program- tremendous and imperative investment. 'I know the local °taxpayers have been called on to meet that need. Their contributions have almost doubled. I think that they will be asked to con- - tribute even more when the Legislature next meets. Must keep faith." He said the education of children was the foundation of society--an •••• •• towards peace in a free world._ "The whole world cries for better education. We of this country and province must keep pace with our tre mendous development.

Of all the unemployed today, ' he adds 170 percent were poorly educat ed or untrained in any skill. The people of Manitoba have been making tremendous sacrifices for education and we are getting tremendous results. More than 2, 600 new schoolrooms have been built at a cost of $39 million-- the greatest effort in the history of this province . The greatest domestic responsibility we share on three levels of government is concerned with edu cation. I beseech you to help school boards and other bodies of citizens concerned with this subject because they need your support .

Then you will get the best value from this tremendous and imperative investment.' " Well I can say that I beseech you also to help these schools-- to help these 11, OOO people and those that are trying to do a job with them, but if I say this I'm wrong--l'm unfair . Yester day, Sir, in front of approximately 2, 000 people, the Premier of this province stood up and spoke to the people assembled in a hall in st. Boniface--spo ke very good Fren ch . I was proud of being a Manitoban. I was proud of him.

I'v e watched him progress over the last three or four years that I've known him and he is progressing very rapidly, but Sir, why must this be tarnished? Why must I have this doubt of his sincerity if he cannot do anything about this at all? Now dozens of schools- -private schools have b�en opened. The Premier has been there and given words of encou ragement to these people and he's shovelled the first bit of dirt. Well, is he burying these private schools or what is he doing? Now it is true that this is a touchy ques tion but are. we going to achieve anything by waiting?

Are we. sincere--are we sincere when we're waiting? Are we waiting for those people that tell me that as long as they have people like them, themselves, the Catholics will get nothing in this province? Are they going to change their minds, Sir? I'm not mad at this statement--at people 'phoning me like this . I feel sorry for them.

One day watching the Premier of this province speaking French, making an attempt--reco gnizing French--and listening to the Minister of Education telling us that this French is going well in Grade IV and so on- -that they're progressing, and then some other day hear from some citizens of Manitoba that the people--a certain minority group of the people in the province should not expect anything, Now, Sir, what are we waiting for? Don't you think that it is 'well conceivable that some· day maybe there will be :more Catholics in Canada? Now what do we expect? Are we going to close all the other schools?

Is that what Quebec is doing? No, I don't think so and I'd hate to live in a country and I'd hate to call myself a Catholic and that's what I felt would happen if we ever became the majority and that I had to 'phone somebody or tell somebody, "As long as we're here, you Protestant so and so will get nothing." I'd hate to see that day. Well is that what we're waiting f6r? Are those people going to change their mind?

I said before, I'm not trying to shove anything down the throat of any of the members here, but I would like some in dication that something is being done, some indication that at least if we're afraid to bring this politically, if this is a political football, at least that we're worried about those children; they're not going to be sacrificed because this is a touchy question; that they're not going to be sacrificed because some people want power so much, and I'm not talking only about this side of the House . I'm talking about all the members here because we are afraid; we want to stay in power.

Does it mean that much? Is it that kind of power? Well I think this is enough on this subject. It probably won't do too much good. I'd like to bring in another few points that were mentioned here today, some of them in Page 1230 March 29th, 1962 I I

,, (Mr . Desjardins, cont'd.) .••• form of question and asking for more information . There is the question the Honourable Minister spoke about sports. I think that he should late r on maybe have a chance to elaborate a little more, what he me ans by encouraging sports at these schools, at the--I can't help but say this; it kind of hurts me that I see him now sitting up . We're fin ished about a certain subject; now he has pen in hand--he 's taking notes . I wish he would have taken a few notes and answer me some of my previous questions.

Well anyway, this sport business; is it going to be sponsored by the government, this question of inter schools? I think it's a very good thing but I hope that they will not forget this inter ...... question also. I hope that we will not--and coming from me, I coached football in different schools, high school tea ms, and I love the sport but I hope that we don't forget that everybody should participate . I hope that we will not put the emphasis that we have in certain large universities in the State s where the big thing is to win and win at all costs • Then there is the question of physical education .

I'm glad that this is mentioned but I'd like to know a little more about that . We're told that there will be a program . I don't know where the Honourable Minister feels that he's going to get his teach ers. I don't know where we have a department of physical education here . I know that we have large gyms. I've seen in certain towns they have two gyms side by side, one for primary school, one for secondary school, and I wonder if we're really using this.

I'm not condemning it; I'm not knocking these gyms but I think--it's too late to worry about it now--but I think that we should and I commend the government if they will go ahead and try to get ·a program going. And I hope that we will try and get physical educa tion established in this province, but I know that we'll need teachers if we want to do it right . We can't just talk about programs without teachers and I don't know where we are going to get the se qualified teache rs, because it's no good to start a program if it's not done right and if the teachers are not qualifie d. Then there 's another thought .

Maybe it's too early for this but I think that we should talk about this. I would like the government to think about the suggestion. I feel that certainly television is here to stay; people will spend even in Winnipeg here up to $200. 00 or very close to it a minute, for advertising, and those people know what they're doing.

They 're not spend ing this money for nothing and I think that we could think of having a TV station sponsored by the university, originating from the university ma ybe, on a modest scale at first, but giving education to the people of Manitoba, those that ma ybe are a little older to go back to school and ma ybe those that are a little too young to go to university, and I think that it would certainly help fulfill the needs of the people of Manitoba. I think it would be a step forwar d. It would have to be modest at first, no doubt, but I certainly would like to see it . I think that it will come to that .

I think that we 'll see this in future years and the government could be well advis ed to start thinking about this and maybe planning for the futu re . There's another question, the question of alcohol education . I was going to say when I was young and fooli sh four years ago, but I think that most of the members of this House fe el that I'm still as fool ish, but then I question the decision of this grant . It was always the same. To me it looked like if it was blackmail or trying to buy something, or it's a must. And I might say that on this instance the Honourable Minis.ter seemed to agree with me .

He kind of smiled a bit and told me that I probably would receive the letter on this occasion, the letter that he had received in the past, and I did receive these letters. I waited for a couple of years but it seem ed to be the same thing. Now reading some of these write-ups then we were told that some of this educ ation especially in school level wasn't doing too much good .

The Minister at the time was going to look into this--that •s three or four years ago--and then one of the members said that while he had been talking to one of the directors and they had accomplished something, they had stopped some of these New Year's

partie s. Well I don't know where they get the cred it for that . I think that some of the companies and some of the police have been instrumental in that , asking the people to co-operate because of so ma ny accidents and so on. I think it's a good thing, mind you, but I doubt if this grant is doing any good and I would like to see, in this case, the government take over this field. In the Tribune of March 13th, 1962, the man that is accused or praised for instituting this grant for alcohol education, Mr.

Bracken, was inter viewed, and I think that if we read this we'll see that he's disappointed himself and he says that he doesn't fe el that this is doing too much good, and may I quote, Mr . Chairm an. "'In a _world where a thousand diffe rent people are preaching a thousand diff erent philosophies and March 29th, 1962 Page 1231

(Mr . Desjardins, cont' d.) ••.• people have nothing to cling to, what do you expect? ' he said in an interview while visiting Winnipeg ." Later on here . "'Ed ucation is the only answer, 1 he said, 'and education has failed. We decided to let them vote if they wanted it or if they didn't. Two-thirds of the population wanted to drink more so it isn't surprising that giving them the right to drink mo re has resulted in a higher consumption level of alcohol, 1 he said. Figures recently released in the 1961 annual report of the Liquor Commis sion shows Manitobans con sumed 13% m6re' ltq\ioi' this year than last.

Per person they drank 13. 75 gallons of beer during the year· ending :M'ar"fh'31, 1961 compared with 13 .6 6 gallons the previous year and 12 .5 6 gal ions in 1956..:57 when t'iie recomm endations of the Bracken Comm issio n were put into effec t. 'F or: all the liquor legislation, alcoholism continues to mount every year, ' said Mr. Bracken. 'Willp ower is fading. Psychological pressures of a fast paced atomic world are only partially to blame' he said. 'The changing character of the people is the main cause. They are leaning more and suppor ting less. Individuality and individual willpower are fading.

It's an entirely different world you're living in today than it was 40 years ago. Now public sentiment is in fav our of what you call a welfare state. ' " This is very interesting, this part here : " 'Then in the old days people didn't lean on governm ent; in the last half century people have come along ex pecting government to solve all their problems for them . Now governments are more socialis tic than the socia lists were then.

And people drink more to drown. their troubles, 1 he added, 'Of course economic stress, the threat of war, the fact that •..... drink and soci al drinking is rampant are reason too, ' he said. But during the many years he was Premier of the province, people used to lead; now they follow." And I want to add this little paragraph here: "He doesn •t blamethe present governmentfor this softening trend but for the corres ponding rise in liquor consumption . " Now I don't think that this is actually that bad a sign.

I think there's mo re drinking be cause you can drink now in the proper place, in a restaurant where you are enjoying your meals . I've very seldom seen any people drunk in a restaurant. I think there's less people drunk these years and I think that this is a good thing. There's certainly nothing wrong with mo derate drink ing, anci. I'm supporting myself now, nobody else .

But I feel that there certainly should be cer tain educ ation of this great problem because it seems to be �e reason for so many troubles that we have here, and I think that let's not worry about receiving letters; let's get together on this and look into this and see that we can make every dollar spent--maybe we could spend a little more . I'm not saying that too much money is spent, but I don't .think .we're getting our value for alcohol education . MR. J. M. HAWRYLUK (Burrows) : Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to participate and make some suggestions, regarding some of my observations in.t he number of years that I have been priv ileged to teach school. All I intend to do is make some constructive suggestions in order. that the Minister could see the light and possi bly impress certain officials of the department that some of these things must be considered in the very, very near future . It has been my privi lege to suggest ideas in the past.

Particularly I think I feel that I take some pride in the fact that I have appealed for many, ·many years for a technological school to be built in Greater Winnipeg in order to meet the problems that we have had from time to time of the students , par-. ticularly those who could not attend the city vocational school. We are aware of the prohibitive cost of sending a student from any suburban area to the Technological School in Winnipeg for which the cost, I think, is around $390 . 00 per student . We are all aware, Mr.

Chairman, that we've heard this catch phrase from time to time about equal opportunity, and I believe that we are giving our boys and girls an opportunity to day . The Minister of Education gave us an interesting survey as to what has been done in the province in the past number of years . We're told that the budget today am ounts to around $36 million. We know that we have mo re students sta:Ying in the schools ; we have less drop-outs ; we know that we have wonderful facilities for our boys and girls today; we know that we are offering them every opportunity to stay in school, but we do have a problem .

For years we have attempted to teach for one purpose only and that is to prepare the student for university . And even today in 1962, it is a recognized fact in this day and age that only about 8% of our stu dents do attend university. So therefore, you could just im agine how many potential good stu dents lire not able to continue with their education because of financial resource s, and others who possi bly were not academic ally inclined that we have lost by the wayside in the past--well / Page 1232 March Z9th, 1962

(Mr . Hawryluk, cont' d.) ••• . ever since the war ended . I would say literally tens of thous ands of students have gone in other fields of labour who could have been trained in some vocation of which we could have reaped the benefits today. The fact that automation is moving in has de prived the people who used to leave at the Grade Vill level and were able to get any kind of a job.

Today we are faced with a serious problem , a problem where we have to train our young people, and not only our young people but some of the men who are married today, retrain them again in order to ea rn a living--to earn a living . Here we are setting up a technological school at Brooklands. Something that as I said, we've been waiting a long time . We are asking that the students who'll be allowe d to attend this sch ool wiil have to have ju nior ma triculation or Grade XIl standing in all course s. That's fine .

I'm worried about that particular student who cannot cope with the kind. of course that we're offering today, and that is the student that we have in Grade IX. In order for the student to get into high sch ool--and I'm speaking from experience and I'm very serious about the situa tion beca use I'm faced up with it and I have been for years and years--records have proved that we have Grade IX students who have , let's say, average ability or a little below average abil ity. We are asking them to pass in the four basic subject s.

They have to pass the four basic subjects before they can enter Grade X, and that is science, language , social studies and ma th ema tics . The rule says that if they fail in more than one basic subject they have to repeat the year. We have a turnover of failures in Grade IX for the past 16 years anywhere from 15 to 20%, and out of that 15 to 20% we lose at least 10% that cannot continue into Grade X. Why?

Why should those people be eliminated who have, let's say, average ability--who could and should be allowed to attend a vocational school or given a kind of a course that wi ll allow them to go into Grade X and then deviate into som ething that 's practical and something that will be beneficial to them ? And yet we are still sticking to this course for the past 25, 35 years that the students have to pass the basic subjects and we have to eliminate them because they are con tinually repeating, and as a result, when they get around 16 and 17 they more or less quit of their own accord.

All because they cannot pass two basic subjects . They could either fail in ma thematics or language or any other two subjects . They are the ones that I think that we have to consider . They're the ones that are walking the streets today . They 're the ones that I have seen from time to time, that have no means of getting any kind of work because they haven't even got a Grade VIII standing. I feel that something should be done about giving a more prac tical course to some of those students who cannot cope with that kind of a cour se .

And I think- I'm very serious about this , because it's bec oming a problem, and as the Minister has indicat ed, our Grade IXs have increased in the last three years from 9, 772 to 12, 17 9. Do the honour able members think that all those 12, OOO students are going to pass into Grade X? Well I' ll bet you differently, and yet we are not meeting the problem of those students who cannot cope with the academic work, and yet we state that in order to enter any techni cal-vo cational sch ool they've got to pass their Grade IX and get into Grade X and so on into a general course or .....

I would suggest we've got to start a course in Grade IX so we can deviate some of these stud ents from Grade Vill into a Grade IX course--a special course in which they are not compelled to write the kind of subjects that we do give the able student. They are entitled to the same privileges; they are entitled to the same conside ration as we are giving to the others who have possibly more ability that God has given them, and I think it's only fair and just that we should consider those too .

And we have them leaving us by the hundreds that do not even get a Grade IX education and yet I presume they're intelligent, they'll become law-abiding citizens if and when they take their place in our society, and I think some conside ration will have to be given that we can offer a course that will permit these students to go into Grade IX and not insist that they have to take these four basic courses or insist that they have to take a language . Tha t's my first criticism . · Now I come to the second point which I think is very serio us .

From time to time we get the reports, the resu lts of our Grade XI exami nation and Grade XII, and in spite of the fact that we do offer a variety of courses, the results are deplorable. We have as many as 25 and 35 such failu res in ce rtain subjects in Grades XI and XII. And yet it is with disma y and some in dignation that one reads about what is being done, and thi s is that there seems to be a policy, a policy by the high sc hool examination board which seems to have a policy in which they are permitting so ma ny students passing into the next grade and so ma ny students failing .

We have March 29 th, 1962 ·p age 1233

(Mr. Hawryluk, cont' d.) •••• a situation that one cannot understand. It seems that if too many students are too successful in writing their Grade XI and XII examinations, then they are mark ed down, and those obtaining marks just above passing level, are marked down to keep the t�tal of those passing within the prescribed percentage . On the other hand, if too many students fail, they get bonuses--extra marks in order for them to pass. Now this is a situation that's existed in this province for years and years, and it's deplorable.

We are actually defeating the purpose of giving these boys and girls a break--an honest break--all because the high and mighty group says that so many can pass and so many should fail. I don't think a select group of people have that authority. Who gave them that right? On whose conditions is it based- university authorities? And yet it's a true fact.

Here we have a situation where this was actu ally discussed with the Minister of Edu cation: "revealed in a three hour session of questions, in comments with the Manitoba Minister of Education, Honourable stewart McLea n, this unjust system of marking roused the farm women more than the economic injustice suffered by.the farmers as a whole .

This happened a few years ago back, and the exasperation of the farm women with the situation was expressed by the following resolution which passed unanimously, and.th is is the resolution: "Whereas we understand it is an established practice to limit to a certain percentage of tho se writing the number of students allowed to pass; and

whereas we con sider it· unfair that students' marks be arbitrarily raised or lowered in order to comply with this percentage ; therefore

be it resolved that we reque st the high school examination board to see this discrimination .•••.. " And I think it's about time that we look into this matter . I think we're being unfair and unjust to some of these people who could be failed because of the whims of a select few who .think that they haven't the right to continue on to high schools, and I think it's a matter that should be looked into &eriously and now. We've lost too many. We lose enough

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	26-5-47
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	26th 5th hansardpdf 47.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	087b5aba158d23b8e6ec6134dc8b8e8a302cdfee

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).