LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 28 July, 1986. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - EDUCATION MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: We are reconvening, Page 51 , Resolution 48, Item 3. Financial Support - Public Schools - the Member for Roblin-Russell . MR. L. DERKACH: With respect to the funding formula , Mr. Minister, can you explain or give some details with respect to whether there is a permanent list of supportable expenditures which is available to all school divisions, or is the list of supportable expenditures, one which varies from year to year? HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, there is an understandable base and it is based on the year's expenditures adjusted to reflect enrolment. MR. L. DERKACH: I'm talking about the list of supportable expenditures . What qualifies as a supportable expenditure? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, that is it. The net operating expenditures of the preceding year. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr. Chairman, there are certain elements of the operating, I guess, expenses which are now not counted or income . There's some other income which is used to offset supportable expenditures . Is there a list of those things which would . . . HON. J.

STORIE : Net means total minus less revenues from; institutional programs, Manitoba Government, except 3.(

a) which is the grants to public schools; Federal Government support; revenues from other school boards; private organizations and individuals; and opted-out Indian bands . MR. L. DERKACH: Would the Minister tell us whether or not the interest which is earned by its division on funds in the bank and interest which is used to offset perhaps interest which otherwise would be payable, is that counted into the net income which is then deducted from the supportable expenditures? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr. Chairperson . MR. L.

DERKACH: In cases where that has been deducted from the supportable expenditures, would that be reimbursed by the department then? HON. J. STORIE: Although one would never like to speak in categoricals, I understand that has never been the case. MR. L. DERKACH: Where a school division perhaps would lease the space or equipment or a school in another division or an organization . Does revenue from that source then become deducted from supportable HON. J. STORIE: I'm nodding in the affirmative . MR. L. DERKACH: Could you explain the rationale for that, please? HON. J.

STORIE: Basically, the explanation is that's considered revenue from outside sources . Obviously, equipment in schools that are rented or leased or whatever to an outside organization where funded by the public school system . I suppose that 's an explanation . MR. CHAIRMAN: The member is not sure. The Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. L. DERKACH: Thanks, Mr. Chairman . So does the department then set a fee

schedule for space or equipment that's to be leased, since that's to be deducted . HON. J. STORIE: No. MR. L. DERKACH: So if the school division then wished to donate space to another organization or another school division or anybody who wishes to use equipment without charging them for it, then there are no deductions. HON. J. STORIE: That's correct. I think that's quite a common practice throughout school divisions where they rent space to community clubs, community groups for that kind of purpose. MR. L.

DERKACH: I'd like to, just for a moment, move into the area of tax of the farm land, if I may, the education tax on farm land . In this area, I'm wondering whether the Minister has any considerations in dealing with the education tax on farm land. HON. J. STORIE: I'm sorry, I missed that question . MR. L. DERKACH: Well, does the Minister of Education have any intention of dealing with the education tax on farm land? HON. J. STORIE: Well, to the extent that since 1983 there has been no increase, in fact, in ESL levies. I guess the approach has been to try and minimize those increases .

I do recognize that there is a continuing concern about, particularly in rural Manitoba but I think throughout the province, on the reliance on property taxes to support education . I've indicated on a number of occasions that, although the freeze on increases in ESL mill rates may be a move in the right direction, there is an intention to move from that and a stated goal, on the part of the government, to move to 90 2306

Monday, 28 July, 1986 percent funding and, within that, to minimize the reliance on property taxes. MR. L. DERKACH: Can the Minister give us some indications as to when they intend to move in this direction and where are they going to start changing the tax system then? HON. J. STORIE: Well, I suppose that the most obvious and logical way to do that would be to tie any move away from property tax, to reduce the impact of the ESL, would have to be done in conjunction with the whole question of assess ment reform and probably other reven ue-generat ing possi bilities within government.

Because I think there's a recognition that it's easy to say, well, if we raise $19 0 million ESL, let's cut that out because it is, in some respects, certainly not progressive in many respect; and the question is, where do you find that additional revenue? lt has to come from somewhere, unless you plan on reducing expenditures in education by $19 0 million. So I think the solution to that problem obviously is mixed with assessment reform and with tapping some additional sources of revenue, making increased commitments from existing sources of revenue for educational purposes. MR. L.

DERKACH: Is there any intention on the Minister's part to start moving away from the property tax in the next year or two? HON. J. STORIE: I would hope so. MR. L. DERKACH: When I stopped my questioning last, I was talking about transportat ion, and if I could just go back to that and finish up a few questions I had.

With respect to diesel engines in school buses, according to some sources International Harvester apparently offered diesel engines to school buses at 50 percent of their cost, and they recommended a certain engine, a six litre engine, which was designed to create heat and was designed for vehicles the size of school buses. lt is my understan ding that there are several buses on trial right now which have diesel engines in them, but they have gone instead to a nine litre engine which is not designed for vehicles of that nature and is not .designed to create heat, which causes a heating problem in these large school buses.

Can the Minister elaborate what the policy of the department is with respect to moving to diesel engines in school buses? HON. J. STORIE: I am certainly not aware of that issue having been raised internally. I wasn't aware of the specific reference to that offer, but perhaps I can respond to that question tomorrow afte rnoon or evening when staff have had time to contact the manager of the Transportation Services. MR. L.

DERKACH: In doing that, I'm wondering if the Minister could then give us a few more details as to what their long-range plan for converting to perhaps diesel engines in their buses is and what in fact the trial program is running at right now? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Ho nourable Minister of Education is nodding assent. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, I will take those questions as well. MR. L. DERKACH: Okay, I wave to ? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Garry is next on my list. The Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me. Did the Member for Kirkfield Park have her hand up?

The Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Minister or his staff had provided information pertaining to the funding of independent schools and that sum is shown as a grant of some $752 with a gross sum of $6, 1 52,000 being involved. That portion of the grant, the $752, is it a grant or is it mandated by law, in legislation or in regulations, so that the independent schools can turn to some

section in the act or regulations and say we're entitled to X-amount of money? Is that available to them? HON. J. STORIE: Well, the $752 per full-time equivalent is in the regulations. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, when one looks at The Public Schools Act, in particular

Section 60, it says the Minister may pay to private schools. There's nothing in there that would appear to give the independent schools comfort if the Minister wanted to cancel these payments in any par ticular year . Is it pur ely a discretionary power? HON. J. STORIE: Well, given that it falls in the realm of regulation, obviously it can be changed by 0/C. MR. C. BIRT: So the Minister is stating that the grants to independent schools are purely discretionary, yet those to the public school system are mandatory and have strength and support in the statute, The Public Schools Act. HON. J.

STORIE: Well, I remind the member that in 1890, the Province of Manitoba and the Government of the Day determined that the es tablishment of public schools was in the interest of Manitobans; therefore, it follows logically that they would have statutes governing the funding of such schools. No such decision was ever made with respect to independent schools. MR. C. BIRT: Well, with respect, I think the Minister is discounting perhaps the last 20 years of history in this province. There is provision put into The Public Schools Act, that it says the grant may be made by the Minister.

So it seems to me the government has recognized the fact that they can give money to the independent school system. The question I have is why isn't it stronger legislation that, should the Minister of 2307

Monday, 28 July, 1986 the day or Cabinet of the day decide not to make any grants in any particular year, that they not have the same rights to those funds as the public school system does? HON. J. STORIE: Well, I can't identify from the top of my head when the provisions were put in The Schools Act to allow that to happen. I would indicate that's not an unusual provision. I'm sure virtually every act of every department authorizes the Minister to provide grants to independent groups, assoc iations, individuals, if need be, if it is deemed in the public interest.

All I can say is, and the member is quite right in reminding me of the history of funding to public schools over the past number of years, and certainly since 1973-74, I believe, that governments have provided by way of regulation a per-pupil grant to private schools. I don't want to alarm the member by acknowle dging the government's right to change the regulation. I simply indicate that it is a regulation that can be changed by OIC. We, at this point, have every intention of living up to our commitments to private schools and I expect they understand that. MR. C. BIRT: The

section that was put in, at least approved in the 1980 Session of the Legislature, I'm just wondering if the Minister is contemplating moving it from a discretionary power to a mandatory power such as the public schools have. HON. J. STORIE: I had not contempla ted it, certainly, for this Session. MR. C. BIRT: Will the Minister contemplate moving it from a discretionary power to a mandatory power? HON. J. STORIE: I suppose that's a matter that certainly could be reviewed and probably will be reviewed by the government over the next year or few years. MR. C.

BIRT: The sum of $752, now I understand there is other suppleme ntary or additional funding that is available, but how is the 750 figure derived? Why is it not 890 or 612? How do you get the figure of 752? HON. J. STORIE: Well, essentially, it represents the same dollar increase in 1986 as the per-pupil increase in the public school system. So the base in 1985 would be $130 roug hly less than the 752 the mem ber refere nced. MR. C. BIRT: Is there not a formula in place that the base grant is tied to?

Now, the Minister made refer ence to a cost-of-living increase, but there seems to be sort of a base figure that is used. I presume, from year to year, this figure will go up or down, presu mably up as long as we have inflation. But is there not a formula in place that can identify the base grant when this figure is established, so that you can add funds to it at a future time. HON. J. STORIE: Are you ref erring to the base grant for private schools? MR. C. BIRT: Yes. 2308 HON. J. STORIE: Well, the base grant obviously at this point is 752, so that any increases subsequently would be based on that. MR. C.

BIRT: So the policy then is merely to add to the figure of the preced ing year, providing the government decides to grant an increase to independent schools? Is that it? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: For the last two, possibly three years, the grants given to independent schools I think are almost identical, if not identical, to that given to the public schools. Does that mean that the government has now adopted a formula of every year the same grant given to the public schools will mean a corres ponding equal grant to the private schools? HON. J.

STORIE: Well, to the extent that a policy is reflected in past practice, I suppose that's the case. No decision, final decision on funding for the 19 87-88 school year has been made. By the same token, no decision with respect to the final funding levels for the public school system have been made either. MR. C. BIRT: But in the public school system there is at least a formula in place, whether it be base grant, supple mentary grants, how much should be raised at the local level.

This same guarante e of funds is not available, ac cording to the Minister or in the act, to the independent school, so there is no way of knowing what the base grant is and there is no way of knowing, from a year-to-year basis what the increased grant, if any, will be. What I would like to know, if the Minister has in place a formula, a regulation, or a policy that the amount of increase granted to independent schools will be the same amount as given on a per capita basis to the public school system? HON. J. STORIE: No. MR. C.

BIRT: Will the Minister contemplate putting such regulations or certainty into the system? HON. J. STORIE: I've indicated that we will be reviewing that issue and the question of, I guess, in the longer term, providing a more stable and understandable system, a framework within which private schools can operate. I think that's a reas onable request. However, at this point, I can't say that any specific policy may or may not be adopted. MR. C.

BIRT: One issue is the extreme financial plight of a number of the independent schools and real ly what they need, in addition to their argument for additional funds, is some certainty or some method whereby they can do some future planning and not rely on a year­ to-year basis. At least in the public system there is a base formula and how much it grows or doesn't grow is dependent on the amount of money available, allotted through the Estimates. But I think the important thing for the independent schools is to give them some formula or

Monday, 28 Ju ly, 1986 some certainty so that they can plan their program properly. I'm not sure whether the Minister indicated that he was hoping to go that far; or if so, I would like to applaud his approach if that is his intention, but perhaps the Minister could elaborate on his remarks of just a few moments ago. HON. J. STORIE: All I've indicated is that I think private schools can feel fairly secure that there is a base from which the government is operating and that base is the $752 FTE or the $40, basically the sh ared services that they have.

There's certainly no intention to withdraw any of the provisions that have been introduced to accommodate their needs over the next little while and I certainly see the likelihood of some enha ncement. Whether we will actually be able to offer them in the 1987 year a policy which essentially meets their needs in terms of longer-term planning and some stability has yet to be seen, but I see it as worthwhile and useful.

I point out that, while there are elements of the Government Support to Education Program which are fixed, school divisions nonetheless feel that there is more need for longer-term financial information from governments as well. In fact, they get their information too late, and I see that as something that we need to address over a five-year period as well. MR. C. BIRT: The figures would indicate, from the information given to us earlier, that approximately some 8,200 students, and I'm rounding now, received this per capita grant.

Yet, the annual report that was given to us made reference to some, I think, about 9,700 students. Why is there this discrepancy here? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, some private school students are not funded at all by the province. MR. C. BIRT: So the difference of whatever it may be, 800 or 1,200 students, are those by choice who have decided not to take any public funding? Is that correct? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, or are not eligible by virtue of the curriculum they're offe ring. MR. C.

BIRT: Dealing with the some 8,200 who are now receiving public funding in the independent schools and are under supervision or are meeting criteria and tests and everyt hing else like this laid down by the department, has the Minister or his staff done a study as to the impact on the public system if the independent system closed down and the students transferred over? Have they done any costing, any impact that it would have on particular school divisions? HON. J. STORIE: There have been some analyses, some reviews of this matter over a period of time. I think the response to that is quite obvious.

Of course, some private schools collect their students from an extremely large area. Some do not. Some are more representative of community schools. So it depends to a great extent on: (

a) where the students come from, where their home division would be; (

b) in those divisions where there may be a high private student population, it would depend on the division's current capacity. In fa ct, there may be very little additional cost to some divisions in the event that there were no private schools by virtue of the fact that there may be 30 or 40 Grade 9 classes in the division and 40 or 50 Grade 10 classes, so there would be one student or two students per grade level or per classroom. So it's not the case that it would impact directly in that respect . MR. C. BIRT: I would take it, though, the converse would be true.

In some areas, the impact might be fairly significant. I'm wondering if the Minister could share with us some of these studies that have been done. HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, I'm informed that the studies, the reviews that have been done have been more on the informal side. The major study that has been done was done by Winnipeg 1, and it dealt specifically with the potential impact of the Jewish schools becoming part of the public school system. MR. C. BIRT: Recently, the Catholic school trustees have launched a petition with the Federal Government.

Has the Minister or his government, since the filing of this petition with the Federal Government, had any meetings with the representatives of these Catholic school trustees on this issue? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr. Chairperson, not since the filing of the appeal. However, I believe a meeting is schedu led in the near future with the Ma nitoba Federation of Independent Schools. MR. C. BIRT: As I understand the thrust of their petition, at the time of Confedera tion, of coming into this province, they were given certain rights.

What they are looking for is 100 percent funding: Capital, opera ting, the whole gamut of building a dual sys tem. In talking with representatives of this organization, I believe it is their feel ing that they do not want to create a dual system like there is in other provinces. They would prefer merely to get some additional funding to help out their cause.

Has the Minister had a chance to study the possible cost implications if the Federal Government or the Supreme Court or whatever authority was to grant them their petition and say, yes, you are entitled to equal funding as it was back in 1820 or whenever the year was? HON. J. STORIE: I don't know that the department has undertaken a formal review of the costs although, again, informally we have looked at the possibility, I guess, the prospects of absorbing that number of students.

I can only say, in terms of their refer ence, their feel ing that the remedial order in some way is a means of redressing their concerns, may or may not be well founded. it's not clear to me that it is going to be a satisfactory means of reso lving that issue. MR. C. BIRT: Does the Minister agree that perhaps a negotiated solution to this particular problem would be better than any politically imposed or court-imposed solution? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, I suppose that one would like to think that might be a reaso nable solution. 2309

Monday, 28 July, 1986 Howe ver, I have indicated that I'm not opposed to the decision of the Catholic school trustees in seek ing redress through imposition of the remedial order. That, in fact, is their right. I've indicated as well that I don't believe their case is as clear-cut as the y bel ieve. In fact, even in comparison to other provinces, who obviously have a different historical base upon which to deal with the issue of separate school funding, we have been fairly reasonable and responsive over the last few years.

I believe that is, in effe ct, and has been, in effe ct, a political response to some legitimate concerns. lt would be my hope, and perhaps the subsequent meeting that we will have with MFIS, will lead to that understa nding. MR. C. BIRT: So I take it from the Minister's answer that the meeting proposed some time in the not too distant future over this issue is an attempt to try and resolve the issue here in Manitoba, rather than having it leave the province and have someone else solve the problem for us. HON. J. STORIE: In part, certainly.

I'm indicating that I don't believe that the issue can be resolved nearly as simply as people would like to believe in refer encing it to the Federal Government. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have to apologize to the Minister because I'm going to be all over the blocks since, after three hours of waiting to get my questions, some of them have been taken. But I will start with the whole concept of independent schools.

I think it's very clear from the figures presented today that with 98.3 percent of the money going to public school funding, that the public schools have very little to be concerned about in any thr eats from the independent school system which at the present time is receiving a mere 1.7 percent of all of the funding presently available to Education. But I would like to put on the record, and I think it's very important because during the election campaign the former Minister of this department implied that the private schools receiving funding were not responsible to the Department of Education.

I think it's important to clearly show tonight just how responsible they are. For example, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to have verified from the Minister that in order to teach in a school which receives independent school funding, the teacher must be fully certified. HON. J. STORIE: That's correct. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: And that the curriculum taught must meet the minimum requirements as set by the Department of Education. HON. J. STORIE: That's correct. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: And that the Department of Education does have the auth ority to send out inspectors into those schools to review curriculum and to inspect teachers, in the old sense of the word, in order to provide permanent certification in the same ways that they have within the public school system . HON. J. STORIE: Essen tially that's correct. The department no longer provides inspectors, but we don't provide inspectors per se within the public school system either. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: While that is somewhat true, if a teacher tea ching in an independent school wishes to have their certification made permanent and that needs to be inspected and there is nobody in that school who is certified to do that inspecting, then the Department of Education will send an inspector for that purpose. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, I unde rstand that the recommendations of the superintendents of particularly the Catholic schools and the Jewish schools are accepted, and that in other instances the departmental personnel do the referen cing. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: In terms of funding for the independent schools, is the department still funding all students who attend a school which is deemed as receiving funds, even if that student's residence is not in the province of Manitoba? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: So we are in fact funding children who do not live in this province. HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: In terms of res ponsibility for the receipt of funding, if a school receives funding from the Department of Educa tion, what proof, what documentation must it provide to the department in order to continue to receive funding? HON. J.

STORIE: We ll, I understand that the information we now accept has been recommended by the Provincial Auditor. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: In terms of the materials which are sent out by the Department of Education, I was quite dismayed to learn that the independent schools were not, for example, sent information with regard to the Ben Wicks Writing Contest, which is funded by the Royal Bank,

whereas all of the public schools in the province were sent that kind of information. Now I ask the question only because how many other things are our independent schools not sent? HON. J. STORIE: I'm not sure. The information that was sent out was sponsored by the Royal Bank? MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: The Royal Bank apparently sent all of the materials to the Department of Education for distribution to all schools in the Province of Manitoba. They were distributed to all public schools but they were not distributed to independent schools. 2310

Monday, 28 July, 1986 HON. J. STORIE: Again, recognizing that the Department of Education, when they are talking about all schools, deals essentially with public schools. The dissemination of information to private schools has not been a responsibility of the department regardless of the source of the information . However , I guess departmental materials, curriculum materials and so forth, and any area where we have direct responsibility for, would be shared with private schools. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: Could I recommend to the Minister that information like this which is easily disseminated would be in fact in the future sent out to independent schools so all Manitoba children will have the opportunity to avail themselves of that kind of contest participation? HON. J. STORIE: I don't think that's an unreasonable suggestion . MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: I'd like to now go into non­ resident funding, just so you know where I am in the material.

I am increasingly concerned about the lack of flexibility within the students being able to move from one district to another district, particularly when a program is offered only in a minimal number of school districts . In my beloved I.B. program, for examp le, there are only three school divisions which offer it and there are many children in the city, I feel, who cou ld take advantage of it. In this year in Kelvin High School , I know of several children who were lying about their residence in order to avail themselves of this particula r program .

I think that's a very unfair burden to place on a young person , t hat they are forced to manipulate the system at the ripe old age of 15 in order to get into an academic program of their choice . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, J. Cowan: Mr. Minister . HON. J. STORIE: Well, I recognize the point you 're raising .

I gather the limitations and I recognize that a battle has - I shouldn't use that word - but I understand there was the issue of expansion of the 1B program was raised recently and the school division made a decision not to expand the program, obviously thereby limiting it even further or maintaining whatever restrictions existed. Given that in most instances the programming is a result of a decision of the school board, it's difficult for the department to move in and say well, let's expand it because obviously it has to be the ir priority as well and not solely the priority of the government or the department .

MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Mr. Chairman, I'm not concerned about a division . I am concerned about children wanting to- cross divisions . There is an 1B program in the Winnipeg School Division No. 1 and all Winnipeg No. 1 children can avail themselves of that program. So there is accessibility if you live in Winnipeg No. 1. If, however, you live in the Fort Garry School Division and you would like to avail yourself of this opportunity, you cannot because Winnipeg No. 1 will not accept a student from the Fort Garry school division .

Since 80 2311 percent - we can fight about that figure - is, in fact, provincially funded , it seems to me a violation of that young person's rights to say you can 't attend a particular program which is not offered in your division . We certainly don't do that with French ; we certainly don't do it in industrial arts; we don 't do it in vocational ed , but we seem to be able to do it in other programs . HON. J. STORIE: Well, I think the logical extension of that is to say the local school divisions have no responsibility for providing a program that is deemed to be appropriate for students in the division.

The responsibility lies with the school division , if it deems there is a significant need for I.B., for immersion programs , for vocational education programs to offer them in the division but , again, it requires the involvement and the expression of interest , I suppose , on the part of parents to mobilize , if you will , school boards into providing those programs . I don 't think it's an example of denying anyone their rights . I think it's more an example of a school division exercising its sense of priorities within their domain.

Clearly , some school div isions offer extensive art and music programs; others provide virtually none . Again , it's not a reflection of trampling on anybody's individual rights as much as a setting of priorities by duly elected school boar d officials . MRS. S. CARSTAIRS : On th e other hand , Mr. Chairman , surely a young, artistic student shou ldn 't be denied the development of his or her talent because her school division , for whatever reason , has lacked the foresight or perhap s the numbers , or whatever , to develop that type of program .

It would seem to me to be the place where the Departm ent of Education could perhaps be used as some kind of resou rce for where these program s are available and to perhaps facilitate the movement of special needs students, who are not def ined as special needs under our definit ion of education , so they can, in fact, enrich the education which they 're going to receive . HON. J. STORIE: The member raises a legitimate point.

I simply point out that all of the school divisions , and Winnipeg 1 is a p ri me exampl e where there are expecta tions amongst those parent s who are fortunate enough to have gifted children , that the I.B. Program would be expanded . At the same time , we know from the division's own statistics and from CTBS skills which were made public, they have a very real problem in dealing with the basic skill levels of thei r students . Where do you address the money? Do you provide it to the students who are struggling to acquir e the basic skills, or do you provide it to enhance an I.B.

Program for those who many would say have so many other opportunities . Those decisions are made by schoo l divisions and I think the government, through its inner-city initiatives , through its additional support to Winnipeg 1, has made its priorities in favour of those who are struggling to acquire the basics . It's not any intentional desire to discount the benefits which accrue from an I.B. course to individual students , simply recognition of the fact that there are limited dollars and with tho se limited dollars , I th ink it behooves the governmen t t o meet

Monday, 28 July, 1986 the needs of the greater majority and meet the basic needs of public school students as best we can. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: I'm delighted at that line of reas oning, because that only makes my point even stronger. There is, in my opinion, very little justification for every school division in the City of Winnipeg having an International Baccalaureate Program.

There are not the children who could probably benfit from that, and it is indeed a costly program, which is all the more reason why children who don't live in divisions, who don't have the program, should be able to avail themselves of the divisions which do have the programs. HON. J. STORIE: I assume most of those problems can be worked out within divisions if there's a desire to.

I presume the issue is, in part, the question of residual costs, and if divisions seriously wanted to resolve the issue, they would be prepared to sit down with whatever offering school division they wished and work out more than just an arrangement to pay non­ resident fees but, in fact, there would be a legitimate recognition of the residual costs and those would be covered. The member makes the point that in all likelihood there isn't the need for one throughout each division. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I hope the Minister can also see that he could play a very significant role here in the jurisdictional disputes that do arise between school divisions, so children throughout the province can benefit from breaking down the jurisdictional barriers.

To ask a specific question, however, has the Minister become concerned, or become involved - it's not right to say concerned; I know the Minister is concerned - about the children who are now being denied access to the Hanover School Division, who presently live in the Seine River School Division but had been going to the Han over School Division, and taking a German education without paying non-resident fees and have just now been denied by the Seine River School Division access to that program? HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, obviously it's another one of those areas where you hope there wou ld be considerably more cooperation. I'm not certain what further role the department or the government can play without moving into a position where significant additional funding would be required if we were to address it, I suppose, from a financial perspective from the province's point of view. I suppose all we can do is be hopeful that a resolution will be worked out. I'm just reminded that I am meeting with a group next week, I believe, and this particular issue, I'm sure, will be on that agenda. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: I think this particular case where the children have, in fact, benefited from this education for a number of years and seem to be stopping in midstream, is one which is particularly critical. If Seine River wants to deny future children access to the program, I suppose this is their right - I prefer they didn't - but I think it's particularly unfortunate that they have allowed some of these children to go to this school for a number of years and now all of a sudden they seem to be calling a halt to it. I wish the Minister well in that particular meeting.

If we could now move into some of the financial issues, because I'm a bit concerned, or I guess I don't understand the sheet which was passed out earlier today, the funding of the 1986 program based on the 1985 financial statements, and the GSE formula has had more than its fair share of discussion today. I'd like to move into the guarantee which I understood was a solid previous year plus 1 percent. I thought that was the basis of the funding and yet 10 of the school divisions listed under this are getting less than a 1 percent increases. HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, the guarantee refer red, and remembering that the 1985 program referred only to block and equalization, so that what you're seeing in those areas where school divisions have, in fact, a less than 1 percent increase in funding is a reduction and in some cases a substantial reduction in categorical funding for whatever reaso n. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: What kind of things would be cut in terms of categorical funding? HON. J.

STORIE: lt could be transporta tion, pupils transp orted . lt could be reduction in vocational education grants. lt could be reduction of special needs, you know, a number of special needs, students moving out of the division. There is a whole range of vocational, special needs. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: In terms, Mr. Chairman, of special needs funding, we talked about it briefly in introductory day when we all seemed to go at wonderful extremes of philosophy .

Many of the special needs children, students, who are now finding their way into our public school system , were earlier funded through other programs which came primarily out of Health budgets and Community Services budgets. Has there been any significant transfer of funding from Health and Community Services into Education in order to provide the care, not the education, but the care required for these children during the school day? HON. J.

STORIE: Well, I suppose the inclusion of the Low Incidence Three grant would be about the only additional contribution which recognizes the heavy human resource requirement of special needs children. That grant was introduced in 1986. So this is the first full year of Low Incidence Three support and that amounts to some $1 3,200 per pupil. That's designated for multiply-handicapped pupils. That, I suppose, is in recognition of the high level of need of those particular students.

I should indicate that, generally, as the Welcome Home Initiative, as more parents have requested accommodation of their special needs students that the special needs budget has grown, almost doubled in the last four years, so in 1986, I believe the total funding for special needs is something like $7 1 million, somewhere in that neighbourhood. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: I want it very clear, Mr. Chairman, that I do not oppose special needs funding, nor do I 2312

Monday, 28 July, 1986 want these children removed from our classrooms, but I think we must deal with the reality that much of the money supporting these young people is in fact placing an unfair burden on the education budget.

With these children, the Low Incidence Three's 13, 200 will, in fact, probably pay for a full-time attendant for that particular child; but there is no question that whether a child is hearing impaired or whether a child is a cerebral palsy, but maybe not be Low Incidence Three, that they are going to need multiple help in the classroom setting which the teacher cannot provide, which means that the Education budget is forced to provide the teacher aide or whatever supplementary help is required.

I think it's unfair to the overall Education budget that this should be consistently coming from Education with no apparent transfer of funds from either Community Services or Health. HON. J. STORIE: Again, transfer of funds, I guess, is a relative term when you're talking about the allocation of resources in the government process. Clearly, the increase in contributions to special education needs from 1985 to 1986 represents some $3 million.

When you consider that apart from the Capital that went into our system, some $23 million was increased directly out of provincial revenues and that our overall support to all of the education requirements is 5.2 percent, I think we're still covering a significant portion and I don't feel at this point that increasing the requirements at the school level are working to the detriment of the school divisions is the case at this point; recognizing, however, unless there are continuing increases in the special needs area, that that's certainly likely to happen, and not some thing that I think would be good for the system or is desirable.

MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: In terms of the overall grant to the public school sys tem, is it not true that we will be dealing with 5,000 approximately less children this academic school year than we dealt with last year? HON. J. STORIE: My recollection is that there is very little reduction if any in the 19 85-86 - I see the other member nodding. I think it's relatively stable. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: So we lost about 5,000 a year ago, because the 1984 figure is certainly 5,000 less, but this year is a relatively flat year. HON. J.

STORIE: I think the projections are for the student population to remain relatively stable and increase marginally over the next five years. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: As to funding for the institutional program, I know that part of that $3 million plus in institutional program funding goes to St. Amant. Can the Minister tell me what other institutional programs are being funded by the Department of Education? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, the breakdown of the institutional grants that were referenced are as follows - I can give you the total breakdown - 1. 3 for Winnipeg No. 1; 63,500 for St. James; St.

Boniface 15 9,000; St. Vital- St. Amant would be 894,000. Some additional funds to Marymound in Seven Oaks School Division and the training resources for youth, and some 21 ,000 for Respite Care. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Can the Minister tell me why in the period of time where according to the Community Services Minister we are working to remove 220 patients from the Manitoba Developmental Centre, that we have closed the school completely, as I understand, and we're not even off ering any life skills training at the Manitoba Developmental Centre? HON. J.

STORIE: I don't know where other, although I recognize that Life Skills training is offered in many other locations, apart from MDC, including many of the community sponsored training programs, but again that's obviously not part of my budget and I couldn't comment where that transfer has occurred. I presume the majority of the transfer has occurred to the Welcome Home initiative and the cost that is attached to that. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Was not the school at Manitoba Developmental Centre previously funded by the Department of Education? HON. J. STORIE: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Chairperson.

I think perhaps that would be one of the benefits of that, to the extent that those individuals are able to integrate, not only into the community, but into the community schools, that they will be receiving a net benefit in that obviously that would be part of the public school system and benefit in that way. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: When I toured the Manitoba Developmental Centre I was told that the school was closing down. Therefore, I assumed it had been funded somehow by the Department of Education.

I was then told that the few children who were left would be integrated into the public school system in Portage, which is obviously going to come under your department because they're going to need a lot of special needs funding. HON. J. STORIE: The ones that obviously are part of the Welcome Home initiative will be part of a school division somewhere. I suppose the services will be provided through the home school division. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Mr. Minister, I don't think we're on the same wave length completely here.

What I'm speaking about is that because the school is closing at MD C, there will continue to be residents there who are under the age of 21 who will require education and who will now be taken daily from MDC, which will be their place of residence, and educated in the Portage School Division. · HON. J. STORIE: I think two things. No. 1, recognizing that the MDC was a developmental centre and not a school in the traditional sense of the word and, in that respect , perhaps an oversight in terms of dealing with many of the young residents obviously at MDC.

I'm also informed that Community Services has in fact transferred some funds to the Department of Education and, as an example, when Winnipeg took over the Hugh John MacDonald institutional program, 2313

Monday, 28 July, 1986 that Community Services did trans fer dollars to the Department of Eduction, those dollars which were identified as supporting the educational costs, so that is happening as well. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: My concern is that education not be lost as a component of the Welcome Home Program, and that if these children - and in some cases, adults - are going to be properly integrated into the communities to which they go from the Manitoba Developmental Centre, that in closing the school we have denied those young people the opportunity to get some life skills that they could then use in a community set ting. We shouldn't go into the community setting with no training; there should be some provided at MDC before they go out into the community. HON. J.

STORIE: I believe that of course will be part of the Welcome Home initiative, that anyone who is moving into a residence or back into the community to be supported in the activity centres, part of the educational system would have that training prior to leaving. Also, having been in a school where there was an exceptional learning styles room, which was esse ntially a special needs area, that life skills is very much a part of the special needs curriculum, that in most instances school divisions have special needs areas established to do specifically that and teach, essentially, home ec. and life skills. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: I would simply ask the Minister, as the Minister of Education, to speak with the Minister of Community Services and to make sure that these young people and adults are not falling through the cracks because we have in fact closed a school that used to exist. HON. J.

STORIE: I think that's a very important point and I can indicate to the member that the Minister of Co mmunity Services, my de partment and the Community Services Department have been working quite closely together, along with school divisions and the superintendents, in particular, who tend to be the first point of contact for parents receiving students or children from MDC, so that liaison is working and I think we have a fairly good working relationship now with the Superintendents' Assocat ion and, hopefully , we'll be able to overcome any of the existing or continuing problems with respect to integrating the students into the school sys tem.

MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: In the grants th at were mentioned earlier this afternoon - and I may have gotten the figure incorrect - it appeared to me that Winnipeg City was given an additional grant of $2. 1 million. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, that's correct, $2.1 million. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: I assume, because there's another budget line dealing with inner city education, that is above and beyond the approximate $300,000 that's going into inner city education. HON. J. STORIE: That's correct. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Can the Minister tell me if any of the money, any of the $2. 1 million is also going into inner city education? HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, I understand that the majority or all of it is directed at inner city education. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: So in real terms, between administration and granting, we are now spending $2.4 million on funding for the inner city in Winnipeg? HON. J. STORIE: That's correct and, in addition to that, of course some of the compensatory grants have been awarded to Winnipeg School Division for projects in the inner city to accommodate other particular problems, develop initiatives in that area. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: I think that the inner city initiative is a very positive one and is certainly necessary if we are going to end the cycle within our inner city and I congratulate the Minister for a continuation and his initiatives in this area. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you very much. I should pass on the congratulations to staff and those who are working in the inner city team. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. L. DERKACH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could just focus some attention on the sheets that were handed out to us this aftern oon. lt's the Support Program sheet - Capital.

If we go down to the Operating

Section on Special Needs. How many special needs teachers does a division have to have in order to qualify for a special ed coordinator? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, each school division is eligible for one special ed coordinator, regardless of the number of special needs students, that the special ed coordinators are responsible for programming other than those directly related to special needs students. Special ed coordinators, in my experience, are quite often associated with resource teachers, coordination of those resources, counsellors, career counsellors, apart from the special needs. MR. L.

DERKACH: Well, you have two categories. You have the special ed coordinator and the special ed clinician. HON. J. STORIE: You were talking about the clinician grants? MR. L. DERKACH: Well, both. What are the clinician grants based on then? You said that the school division qualifies for a special ed coordinator regardless of the number of special needs teachers who are in the division, so everyone gets a coordinator. Now in terms of the clinicians, is there a formula for that? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. I understand the formula is one clinician for 900 students. 2314

Monday, 28 July, 1986 MR. L. DERKACH: 900 special needs students, or 900 students? HON. J. STORIE: 900 students in total. MR. L. DERKACH: Oka y, if a school division then has, I'll say 1, 500 students, are they entitled to 1. 5 clinicians, or are they just based on the absolute number of 900 before they qualify for another one? HON. J. STORIE: No. In that case, they would be eligible for two clinicians. MR. L.

DERKACH: The special needs budget has always been dealt with as a separate kind of budget in terms of school divisions - and I don't know whether this is a general rule or not - but does the special needs department, CDPC - is that what it is? HON. J. STORIE: it's now CCDP, yes. MR. L. DERKACH: Are they in control of the budget as it is allocated to a division, or is the division in control of that budget? HON. J. STORIE: The division is in control of the budget. MR. L. DERKACH: So what is the role of the coordinator from the branch? HON. J. STORIE: The coordinator of what?

I'm sorry, are you ref erring to a special ed coordinator? MR. L. DERKACH: No, no, I'm talking about the . HON. J. STORIE: The coordinator in the department? MR. L. DERK ACH: Yes. HON. J. STORIE: Well, first of all not all school divisions hire their own, but some school divisions use the services of CCDP personnel from the department. Some divisions hire their own; some don't.

So the coordinator obviously is responsible for the activities of the clinicians in the Department of Education, as well in his branch, dealing with the school divisions on a consultative basis, providing expertise in different areas from time to time. MR. L DERKACH: With respect to support staff in this particular department - I'm talking about teacher aides and the like - is there a definite number of teacher aides who are assigned or needed by a teacher, depending on the number of special needs students and the needs of those students in a classroom? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr.

Chairperson, that would be a local board decision. MR. L. DERKACH: Is that a change in policy, or has that always been the case? HON. J. STORIE: No, that's always been the case. MR. L. DERKACH: So that means that if a teacher who has a classroom of special needs students has a support staff of one or two, those people can be utilized in the rest of the school when those kids would go to another class to be integrated, or physical education, or some thing like that? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, that's certainly possible. MR. L.

DERKACH: The control of that budget then that a school division gets for special needs is in the absolute control of that school division, is what you'r e saying? HON. J. STORIE: Well, yes, essentially that's the case. MR. L. DERKACH: Oka y, thank you very much. On the Vocational, does the industrial arts area fall into this category? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr. Chairperson, not the program itself, the grants that would be provided would be to the vocational, rather than industrial arts. MR. L. DER KACH: Where would the grants for equipment and programs be for industrial arts? HON. J.

STORIE: The equipment would be found in the vocational grants in the grants to school divisions. I believe we went over the list of the 19.5 million that was broken down. I believe the Capital grants for vocational was 1. 5 million in total. MR. L. DERKACH: And the programs? HON. J. STORIE: And the programs, well, there are categorical support programs for vocat ional and industrial support, yes. MR. L. DERKACH: Okay, I'm not clear on that. Is that a special grant to school divisions, or does that come HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, apart from the Capital there are special categorical grants to school divisions for the vocational industrial programs that they offer. I can give you the terms, if you wish. MR. L. DERKACH: Yes. HON. J. STORIE: Essentially, it's the total number of eligible units. lt is determined by dividing the full time equivalent enrolment on the preceding Sept. 30 in the vocational industrial programs by 15 , and adding one for any remainder or the number of qual ified personnel employed on the preceding 30th, whichever is the lesser, multiplied by 23,000.

So in essence, it would be about $23,000 per 15 full-time equivalent students. MR. L. DERKACH: If a school wanted to add a program in this area, in the industrial arts area, because of the fact that the division is oblong or whatever and it's a far distance to travel from one end of the division to the other, is there a situation whereby a small school can apply for equipment and for a program, even if they don't have the 15 students who are necessary for a class? 2315

Monday, 28 July, 1986 HON. J. STORIE: Yes, there would be one grant available for any school, assuming that it had fewer than 15 students available, and that any equipment grant obviously would go through the school board and to the Public Schools Finance Board. But it is possible. Now whether that would be the best use of resources, I guess that's an issue for the school board itself to determine. MR. L. DERKACH: But there is a willingness from the department to set up small industrial arts' classrooms in these small rural schools. HON. J.

STORIE: Let's separate the two, we're mixing it This support is for vocational. MR. L. DERKACH: I'm not talking about industrial arts. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, industrial arts, no. There are no grants, special categorical support grants for industrial arts programs, nor is there Capital grants available. I stand corrected. When the schools are being const ructed there are support grants through the Capital side. MR. L. DERKACH: Which brings me back to my question.

In a small school then, would the department look favourably at providing the necessary grants to es tablish an industrial arts facility in an existing school? HON. J. STORIE: I assume that the Public Schools Finance Board wou ld, yes, look at that proposal recognizing that it may not receive the highest priority. MR. L. DERKACH: Moving on to the next line that says the Immigrant student. Can we have a definition of this area and what it involves? HON. J. STORIE: That references the English as a second language supports and the English must be a second language. MR. L.

DERKACH: What is the grant per pupil in that category? HON. J. STORIE: $660 per full time program. MR. L. DERKACH: Students and families that emigrate to Canada then, are they entitled, as landed immigrants, for this particular grant when they attend a school? HON. J. STORIE: If English is a second language. I indicate, as well, that the grant is only available for three years, two and a third, if necessary . MR. L. DERKACH: The Native programs, in most instances this is a federal jurisdiction. What is the province's respo nsibility there? HON. J.

STORIE: I don't think the assumption that Native languages is necessarily the res ponsibility of the Federal Government, we have non-status and Metis students who come into the school system speaking essentially their Native language, Cree or Saulteaux as their first language. MR. L. DERKACH: In a case where an Indian Band has opted out and offer their own education, there are sometimes situations where some of the Natives do not live on the reserve that is in the vicinity. Do those students then qua lify for th e Education Sup port Program in our school or do divisions not get funding for them? HON. J.

STORIE: We, needless to say, have a small disagreement with the Federal Government sometimes in this respect. We have, to date, assumed responsibility in those instances where the Federal Government has refused to, whether or not the question of their status - if I can use that word, in two senses - has not been finally dete rmined. In some cases there are some reciprocating of costs and in other cases there isn't. I'd just like to back up to the Native Language Development Program.

I was refer encing the fact that not all students coming to our school system speaking a Native language as their mother tongue were status Indians. This program deals with the maintenance of Native languages and the ability of school divisions with high Native populations to offer Native languages as alternate courses. MR. L. DERKACH: So, therefore, in the case of Native students who are treaty Native but do not reside on reserves, and then come to the division for their educational needs, is the division then obligated to take them in if they do not receive funding? HON. J. STORIE: Mr.

Chairperson, to the extent that they no longer live on the reserve and that they are taxpayers, residents of the school division, clearly we are obliged to provide their education. lt's interesting that you should raise that issue because I have raised the issue of the sharing of respons ibility for particularly status Indians with Mr. Crombie, and now Mr. McKnight, because it is an issue that we are seeing the Federal Government refuse to take responsibility on a number of fronts for what we believe are illegitimate obligations.

On the other hand, we are assu ming responsibility in areas where I think a good case can be made for asking for a contribution from the Department of Indian Affa irs, or in those cases where the bands are in control of their own affairs, have their own board of education, the bands. So it's an area that is still not resolved . MR. L. DERKACH: What we're finding, I think, in some of the - and I'm sure the Minister is well aware of this - in some instances where we have the lndian-opted­ out programs.

There are cases where the students don't feel that they wish to attend the Native schools and we see families actually moving out of the reserve and moving into a village or town, wanting to take advantage of our school system. And in that instance - that's why I asked the question whether school divisions are all owed to count them as part of their eligible enrollment. HON. J. STORIE: They are. However, the member I think makes a good point, and that is whether there may not be some room for recovery. Essentially, that was one of the issues I raised with Mr. McKnight. MR. L.

DERKACH: Those are all the questions I had in that area, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to, whenever we get to (b), I have some questions. 2316

Monday, 28 July, 1986 I would like to know if, in the future, we could possibly get this kind of information a day or two ahead of time. lt would certainly make our work a lot easier in trying to frame our questions in a chronological order, rather than try to do it while we're sitting at the table. HON. J. STORIE: I apologize for that, Mr. Chairperson, that was my fault for not following up. Staff had the information prepared. I had intended to give it as we entered this area; it was simply an oversight on my part. MR. CHAIRMAN: Also, it was my assumption we are dealing with 3.(a)(

b) and (c), so if the member would like to deal with 3.(

b) now, since he's on a roll. MR. L. DERKACH: I see there's no increase in 3.(

b) and I'm wondering what areas that includes. HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, there have been no major changes and essentially the major groups that are provided with grants are the Canadian Education Ministers' Asso ciations; CEMC; Support to MAST; MAS BO, Manitoba Association of School Business Officials; the Principals' association. MR. L. DERKACH: I think I missed a couple. He said MASBO, MAST, MASS. HON. J. STORIE: MASS, Manitoba Association of School Superintendents; MAP, Manitoba Association of Principals. MR. L. DERKACH: What are these grants specifically for? HON. J.

STORIE: In the case of the profes sional asso ciations, they are simply grants to help them provide professional services in servicing conferences, those kinds of items. MR. L. DERKACH: In 3.(

c) Assistance to Schools in Remote Settlements, I see that's the same as it was last year. Can the Minister elabor ate on this particular line? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, that grant consists of a grant to Falcon Beach School, 176.3. We, the department, run that school, Grades 1 to 8, essentially for residents of West Hawk and the Falcon Beach area.

Southam Beach, Steinbach, transportation of Falcon Beach, Grades 9 to 12 students to the Hanover School Division, some $20,000; and some $46,000 in the other category, basically making arrangements for children in unorgan ized territory who are ess entially the respo nsibility of the Federal Go ve rnment or the Department of Indian Affairs. MR. L. DERKACH: Are these funds recove rable from the Federal Government or can the Minister explain why there was no increase in some of the costs he mentioned? lt would indicate that there should be some sort of an increase in costs. HON. J.

STORIE: I'm told in this area there are no recoveries; that the 10 students at Otter Falls or whatever that are paid for under this appropriation are neither the respon sibility of local school boards or the Department of Indian Affairs. MR. L. DERKACH: Well, are there a fewer number of students involved in the '87 year than there would be in '86? HON. J. STORIE: I understand, yes, there are fewer; but it does fluctuate from time to time and may fluctuate even in the year. MR. L.

DERKACH: Okay, the final question I have is with respect to students who come into Winnipeg who have some other school divisions to take the second language program. Now I understand that not all costs are borne by school divisions. Has the department got some way of funding those students or paying for their room and board in the city? HON. J. STORIE: I understand that there are a number of categories under which that board and room can be provided.

The member referenced immersion. lt doesn't have to be; it can also be vocational or specialized vocational programming, but I believe the number is somewhere around 20 in the province that receive that kind of support. MR. L. DERKACH: What are the categories? How do they qual ify? What's the criteria for qualifying for assistance for these . . . ? HON. J. STORIE: I believe I referenced that somewhat earlier, Mr. Chairperson. You have to be beyond 80 kilometres and establish a living arrangement which is not the principal residence of the sending parents, essentially. MR. L.

DERKACH: When I was speaking about it earlier, it was my impression that in most instances that was the resp onsibility of the sending school division. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, it is, but there is that grant provided in those instances where, for whatever reason, transportation isn't possible. But a room and board arrangement, a residential arrangement can be made. The res ponsibility lies with the school division to make those arrangements, that the grant is simply available to them depending on which option they choose. MR. L. DERKACH: What appropriation is that under? HON. J. STORIE: The first one would be 3.(

a) if you're talking about the assistance that's provided in those circumstances. MR. L. DERKACH: But what category is it broken down under? HON. J. STORIE: lt's within the transportat ion. You referenced the alternative that school divisions actually - they are provided with a grant. This is an alternative to that grant where those conditions that I just mentioned are met. 2317

Monday, 28 July, 1986 MR. L. DERKACH: Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Gar ry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Minister has been quoted in some of the initial interviews that he gave, just after he had assumed his new office, that he wanted to get to 90 percent funding of the educational cost to be transferred to the province. Is that a fair statement? HON. J.

STORIE: I believe that's a fair reflection of not only what I said, but what we as a government ha ve indicated would be desirable and hopefully something that we will be able to accomplish over the next number of years. MR. C. BIRT: What is the current level in the Province of Manitoba? HON. J. STORIE: The current level is approximately 80 percent. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, the previous Minister and the current Ministers indicated a desire to go to 90 percent funding. Has the Minister a program in place or some strategy on how this can be achieved? HON. J.

STORIE: To say that I had a strategy in place, at the present time, I think would be stretching the point. I've indicated to achieve that, particularly in a time when our reve nues will not be growing as rapidly as we would like in the face of what are some real concerns over the next few years for our ability to fund post-secondary education. I won't get into the problems that we are experiencing in that area. I think, realistically, that any solution lies not only with the Department of Education.

We currently have a working group established between the Departments of Municipal Affairs, Finance, and Education to start reviewing how we might approach that issue, amongst others that are common between our departments - the removal of the Education Support Levy, where revenues might come from.

So that while we do not have a stated plan at this point, I think, given the activites in the Department of Municipal Affairs and the Department of Urban Affairs, that we are coming to a better understand ing about what pieces need to be moved in order to allow us to achieve that over the next few years without significantly changing the current support or taxation levels in the province. MR. C. BIRT: Could the Minister advise when this committee was set up and who sits on it and who chairs it? HON. J. STORIE: I've indicated the departments that are involved.

Normally that would indicate Deputy Ministers and staff and the involvement of Ministers from time to time. MR. C. BIRT: Does this committee not have a formal structure? Was it set up by Order-in-Council? Could the Minister elaborate on just how this committee functions and where it gets its authority? HON. J. STORIE: Mr.

Chairperson, the committee that's established essent ially represents the departments - I neglected to mention the Department of Urban Affairs - essentially a working group of Ministers, senior staff, to develop options, and obviously take those forward to the government and Cabinet at some point for review and final determination. MR. C. BIRT: Is this a Cabinet committee or sub­ committee of Cabinet? Is that what the Minister is saying? HON. J. STORIE: lt is not formally a committee of Cabinet. lt is a working group of Ministers who share responsibility in the area. MR. C. BIRT: When was this set up? HON. J.

STORIE: I have only been involved since I became Minister of Education. MR. C. BIRT: Could the Minister make inquiries and advise when this informal group was set up? HON. J. STORIE: I can only indicate that informally, I suppose, members of Municipal Affairs, and Education, have been meeting for approximately two-and-a-half or three years. MR. C. BIRT: Have they provided an interim report or any suggestions and, if so, can the Minister share them with us? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr.

Chairperson, there have been no interim reports to this point and obviously before those would be shared in any event, they would be vetted through Cabinet and some determination as to direction would be garnered from Cabinet. MR. C. BIRT: The committee has been there for two­ and-a-half to three years; it's been meeting informally. lt has no direct mandate. it's a working group. When can we expect something concrete to flow from it? For example will they have a report to the government in time for the next Session of the Legislature, say in 19 87? HON. J.

STORIE: The committee obviously has had some impact and, as the member knows, the whole issue of assessment is moving forward . lt is a very complex issue and it's clear that anything that we do in the Department of Education in terms of funding and vice-versa, anything that's done in terms of reassessment or assess ment reform will have an impact on Education financing.

So it's simply a matter of becoming aware of what the potential problems and what the potential advantages are and then working into that mix the requirement, if steps are taken to move to 90 percent funding, that the transfer of revenue and the allocation of revenue within government has to be somewhat different. MR. C. BIRT: lt was for that very reason, that this whole area is complex and difficult, and I'm wondering why the committee hasn't been formalized in a much 2318

Monday, 28 July, 1986 more substantial way to try and add ress this issue. Two things seem to be pressing needs: The ever elusive commitment to 90 percent funding by the province of all educational costs; yet an attempt to try and bring some remedy or relief to the taxpayers, especially farmers. Is there any dead line which this informal committee is working to, to try and produce an interim report or final report? HON. J. STORIE: I don't know that there's a specific deadline. Again, I can only indicate that the intention would be to move in the area of educational finance in concert with assessment reform.

I believe the assessm ent reform issue is moving to a climax and I expect that as we proceed and see what directions we are taking in assessment refo rm, some of the other variables that go into educational finance will become more obvious and more finely determ ined. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, is there anyone other than civil servants working on this informal committee? In other words, has anyone been given a contract, or any firm given a contract? If so, who, and how much is that contract for? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr. Chairperson, there are no people outside of the departments presently working on that issue.

MR. C. BIRT: Would it be fair to say that one of the issues that they're reviewing, this committee, deals with the property tax credit and the possible elimination thereof? HON. J. STORIE: I should indicate that the Decter Review on the delivery of government services and the taxation reform issue may have a bearing on this. However, this is being conducted separate from the Department of Education and there have been no direct contacts at this point. MR. C. BIRT: My question to the Minister was, the study of the property tax credit, is it under review; is the possibility of it being eliminated being considered?

HON. J. STORIE: I can't say that there's a possibility of it being eliminated. Certainly it is a fairly significant tax expenditure on the part of the province. I believe that property tax credits are currently in the range of $16 0 million, very closely, coincidentally, approximates the cost of the Education Support Levy to property tax owners. However, as I've said, the whole issue of where to and how to add ress that revenue shortfall, should one dete rmine that you'r e moving away from ESL, has yet to be made.

So I don't think I can give you an indicat ion that's a likel ihood or tha t's being contemplated at present. MR. C. BIRT: lt seems to me there are actually two basic principles that this committee is dealing with. One is the question of assess ment and asses sment refo rm, if any, and the other one is the taxation that may or may not flow because of some asse ssment or reasse ssment. Is it incum bent upon the comple tion of the assessm ent review before the committee can make any recommendations as it relates to the taxation of property? HON. J.

STORIE: No, I don't think those two things necessarily have to coincide. lt is quite possible that there are reve nue changes and allocations of revenue which can be effected before the assess ment reform is finalized, recognizing that assessment reform is going to have a substantial impact on certain school divisions where there is, for example, a transfer of taxation costs from one category to another. lt may affect a large urban district with heavy commercial, for example, where there is an expectation - I believe there was in the Weir Report an expectation that the transfer would be from commercial to residential.

I think, certainly before we develop any forward­ looking formula to move to 90 percent, that we will want to understand what the impact of any assessment reform changes would have on any formula that we develop. Because it's possible that those changes into the future would skew the formula and make it unworkable or untenable. MR. C. BIRT: Can the Minister advise what other taxes this committee is looking at either imposing, or what tax breaks or benefits the committee may be considering removing? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr.

Chairperson, I don't think I could give you any more detail other than to say I think some of the obvious areas of taxat ion are being reviewed, not only in the context of educational finance, but general reve nue. I think there's a recognition that taxation reform is long overdue and something that we've been talking about for too long. I'll leave it at that. MR. C. BIRT: Am I to understand that once this committee has completed its work, it is the intention of the Minister that they will then provide the ways and means whereby the province will assume 90 percent of the funding formula? HON. J.

STORIE: Assuming that is an achievable goal in the next few years, I would expect that they will be recom mending perhaps a series of options, recommending anything from a sta ging of transference to 90 percent, to anyt hing in between that and no movement whatsoever. MR. C. BIRT: A question that arose this spring, and it primarily relates to the responsibility of the municipal governments to send out either one or two tax bills, depending on who you're talking to, the municipal councillors must forward the school tax portion as well as the municipal portion.

I know, from the City of Winnipeg and, I believe, in perhaps two or three municipalities, maybe more, there was some indication of almo st refusal to send or approve that portion of the school levy. I'm thinking now in the City of Winnipeg circumstances where they sent back the budget to Winnipeg 1 and said we're refusing to approve your budget, rethink it, because it had some 14 percent increase. Has the Minister had any discussions with the various school divisions about the concern of the municipalities refusing to pass their budgets? 2319

Monday, 28 July, 1986 HON. J. STORIE: No, I don't think any discussions I have had with either MAUM, Manitoba Association of Urban Mun icipalities, and the Union of Manitoba Municipalities, that any discussions I've had with them have been framed in that context. I think there is a sense of frustration on the part of mun icipalities tha t while they have no input in es tablishing the school budget, it is perceived as coming under their domain and they resent very much having to take the flak for the hefty increases in property taxes.

I gather some municipalities are toying with the idea of identifying specifically where the increase comes in their tax notices. Obviously that's something they can do. So that hasn't been raised as a concern. I understand that symbolically, councils have done those kinds of things from time to time but I think councils recognize, as well, that the prime responsibility lies with the school board and they, too, are answerable to the electorate. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, I don't think it's quite the same today as it was perhaps in the past.

I think for a very short time, for a period of 10 days or two weeks, the prospect was that Winnipeg School Division No. 1 would have to apply to the court to compel the City of Winnipeg to either pass its approprirate taxation bill or at least go about collecting its money. I know of at least two or three other municipal situations, especially in rural Manitoba, where the local council has in fact sat down the school board and went through their budget saying is it absolute essen tial that you pass this through.

I'm wondering if the Minister is contemplating any possibility of allowing the school divisions to direct bill; in other words, you don't have to go through the municipal council? HON. J. STORIE: I recognize that municipalities have done the kind of thing the member is refe rencing, but at this time there is no intention of doing that. I think the system is working.

I'm not here, obviously, to defend the local school boards but I feel quite confident that if school boards did allow that kind of review, they would convince the vast majority of city councillors, municipal councillors, and private citizens that, in fact, there is no easy solution to reducing the cost of education, that there is no magic solution that the reductions that would be required, whether it be Winnipeg No. 1 School Division or any rural school division, would require a reduction in services directly to parents and that, in itself, creates another set of problems. MR. C.

BIRT: On a slightly different issue, during this aft ernoon, we had some reference to the Education Support Levy in the sum of some $18 6 million.lt doesn't appear anywhere in the Estimates, at least in none of the places I've been able to find. I could appreciate that it's money raised by the municipalities, sent into the province, and then turned around and sent right back. Usually with cash flow like that, you normally identify them in your Estimates and I'm wondering why it's not an identified figure in the Estimates or, if it is, where is it? MR.

CHAIRMAN: Perhaps I could suggest something here.- (Interjection)-Yes, if you can. The Minister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: I didn't want you to usurp my autho rity. MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I don't think it's your autho rity, that's what I was going to suggest. HON. J. STORIE: To the best of my knowledge, and the staff indicate that that has never been the case, that in fact the Education Support Levy is transferred directly to the Public Schools Finance Board. lt will show up in the Annual Report of Public Schools Finance Board as a transfer- in, transfer-out. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, that may be okay, but invariably those annual reports are at least a year behind; and if one is to try and get, you know, the total funding for public schools in this province, it's not the $400 million, it's $400-plus; and is there any way of determining -(Interjection)-Yes, but that's often a year late. HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, the Member for Fort Gar ry, in his usual efficient manner, has raised something never before considered by members of the Legislature. MR. CHAIRMAN: Living or dead. HON. J. STORIE: Living or dead. MR. CHAIRMAN: I would suggest what I was going to say ... HON. J.

STORIE: . . . and in recognition of the member's contribution, I hereby call this the Birt amendment, and will henceforth make sure that in Estimates to come, that this kind of information will be provided fhwith to all members assembled. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, humour aside, there were a number of footnotes and they could probably very easily be put in as a footnote. I don't think it would disturb any thing, but it would allow you to get a better picture of the whole thing. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Minister notwithstanding, I would suggest that it is my belief that it is not under the competence of this Minister to decide the outline of the Estimates which is under the res ponsibility of the Minister of Finance. MR. C. BIRT: But, Mr. Chairman, he is one of a group of people sitting around at a table, who dra ft the laws and regulations as to how the Estimates should flow. HON. J. STORIE: And I know a good idea when I hear one. MR. C. BIRT: So the Chairman may not recognize, you know, capability when he sees it, but I would ... 2320

Monday, 28 July, 1986 MR. CHAIRMAN: I would also suggest that the Finance Estimates might be a proper place to bring up the format of the Estimates. The Minister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Ch airperso n, I take you admonishment carefu lly under advisement and I will advise the appropriate authorities of the interest of the question raised by the Member for Fort Garry and assume that it will be possible to accommodate him, and future Education critics into the future. MR. C. BIRT: And Ministers. Mr.

Chairman, if we could go to the two sheets that were handed out - and I don't know how to identify them - but I need some help in trying to understand them. There's one that has on the top, Capital 16-8-b-2, and then below that 16 -3-a. The other one deals with Other Support, 16 -3-a; and when one refers to Special Needs as $467,10 0, is that the same as the Special Needs on the second sheet that shows, Special Needs at $37,500,000.00? Why are there two different figures? HON. J. STORIE: The member is ref erring to these two sheets which . . . MR. C. BIRT: You handed out earlier. I'm wondering, Mr.

Chairman, is there any way these could be put into the record without reading them in, just so that when we're going through Hansard, or whoever is next time around will understand what we're talking about. MR. CHAIRMAN: My unde rsta nding is, it's not appropriate to the Rules of the House. That is a U.S. practice that is not adhered to here, that it must be read into the record. You cannot table a document into the record. MR. C. BIRT: Oh, I see. MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, I could check. MR. C. BIRT: Okay. HON. J.

STORIE: The explanation is as follows: that the Special Needs ref erenced on the Support Program side refers to the Clinicians' Grants, Special Needs Clinicians, Resource Clinicians, the Low Incidence Grants, direct to school divisions, yes. MR. C. BIRT: Oka y. HON. J. STORIE: That's the 37.5 million.

The other one references direct grants administered by other agencies, organizations, for Special Needs and they refer to multi-sensory handicaps, handicaps, Rossberg House, schizophrenic programs, blind-deaf in Winnipeg 1, Seine River, Pelley Trail and a grant to MACLD - the Manitoba Association of Children with Lea rning Disabilities - and the Educational Deve lopment Institute. MR. C. BIRT: So as I take it, the $400,000 grant is more in the way of specific grants to those organizations you just named out? 2321 HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C.

BIRT: And the other 37 million is more operational, salaries and that sort of thing, okay. HON. J. STOR IE: Two divisions directly , Mr. Chairperson. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, on the Support Program sheet there's a refere nce, Debt Servicing Interest, $23.5 million. What is that for? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, that is reference in the Public Schools Finance Board and forms part of the 16 -3-a - it's reflected in 3-a. MR. C. BIRT: lt's part of the $400 million referred to in 3-a? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: Now, what is that interest for? What are we paying it on? HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, it's broken down into two areas, the principle is shown in 8-b, and the Debt Servicing and Interest is shown in 3-a. MR. C. BIRT: Yes, but what is the interest for? HON. J. STORIE: Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairperson. The interest is for the debentured cost of schools, upgrading over the past number of years. MR. C. BIRT: I'd like to try and understand this area. Debentured is approved borrowing by the province for the school divisions and, to repay all or a portion of that debenture, the province gives some payment in Capital and some in interest, is that correct? HON. J. STORIE: That's correct. MR. C.

BIRT: If there is a debenture, does the province repay all of the debenture or is it cost-shared with the school division? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, since 1969, 100 percent of the Capital costs and repayment costs have been assumed by the Province of Manitoba. MR. C. BIRT: The other night we were talking, when we were dealing with Capital, some $37 million for either new schools or renovated schools in'85, and in '86, a similar sum of money.

Ass uming that all of that is borrowed and that construction program goes ahead, then it's fair to say that there'll be a significant increase in the interest portion on this particular aspect? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, that's a fair assumption. MR. CHAIRMAN: I would just point out for voting purposes, that the time is now ten o'clock. I assume the member wishes to continue.

Monday, 28 July, 1986 MR. C. BIRT: Continue. Mr. Chairman, those two appropriations, for last year and this year are what, $72-odd million. Is it the intention of the department to spend all of them in this year; in other words, expend most of them or as quickly as possible, or will they be phased in over a period of years? If you have to start servicing $72 million within a year or two, even at 10 percent, your interest costs and your Capital are going to be very high. HON. J. STORIE: I understand that they're staged at about one-third the first year and two-thirds the second year, for each of those years. MR.

C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, I'm not quite certain what one-third is and what two-thirds is. What are you referring to? HON. J. STORIE: The costs of the debentures. Just to clar ify. If, for example, we were issuing $30 million worth of debentures, the following year we would see about $10 million of that require interest payments, and the year following that, you would find the remainder. Essentially, that's because of the stag ing of the costs of construction. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, then the ability of the government to service the debentur e payments determines the amount that is going to be expended in the next two or three years; is that correct? HON. J. STORIE: That would determine more the amount of Capital that was set aside for construction. Once the program has been approved, obiouvsly you're going to continue and follow through with the program. Once you've done that, then clearly you're required to provide the interest. lt very much determines the size, the scope of the Capital Construction Program, those considerations. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, $37 million for two years is a fairly substantial construction program, as the Minister pointed out. Is it the intention to carry on for the next two or three years at this rate, or having digested a fairly large, some $70-odd million dollars, is it likely that there won't be a very large construction program or renovation program for the next two or three years after these expen ditures have been made? HON. J. STORIE: That's certainly a good question. I think that would depend on two variables and I believe I mentioned them previously.

One would be, first of all, on the necess ity of continuing with a program of that magnitude, clearly the accelerated portion of that $37 million that the member ref erenced, it's unlikely that would be maintained over a number of years, simply because most of the high-priority projects will have been completed by that time. lt depends on the need out there and how many priorities were left to be completed. lt would also depend, as I' ve indicated, on the government's willingness to continue Capital Construct ion, recognizing that apart from the objectives of upgrading the schools, there were employment objectives.

These could be met in a two-fold way by this accelerated program. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, if we could go to that page called Support Programs and, for the record, I'll be read ing some of this in so that we can make sense out of it later, hopefully. Operating: lt says Block 3, $17 7 million. We understand that, Special Needs. The Minister has explained the $37.5 million. The next item is Vocational, $4.8 million. What is that for and how much of an increase was it over last year? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, there was an increase of approximately $300,000.00.

That is provided, as I had indicated previously, in terms of categorical support to school divisions. MR. C. BIRT: For vocational services? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: The next item, Mr. Chairman, says Immigrant, $983,000.00. Could the Minister explain that and what the increase was over last year? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, Mr. Cha irperson, the Immigrant Program, I explained previously, is the ESL, English as a Second Language supp ort. lt has increased approximately $1 34,000.00. MR. C. BIRT: The line says Natives, 2.3 million. Again, a brief explanation, and the increase over last year. HON. J.

STORIE: The increase is fairly significant, approximately $900,000, and represents a significant increase in the number of students involved in the Native Languages programming throughout the province. MR. C. BIRT: Is all of that money, then, for the Native Student Language Program? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: Transportion is 25 million. I take it that's the busing that we've had some discussions on earlier? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: The next is Curriculum Materials, 7.3 million. Could the Minister explain what that is and what the increase was over last year? HON. J.

STORIE: Curriculum Materials, there was essentially no increase and it's the development of, obviously, curriculum materials, support materials - I'm sorry, that's the print and non-print grant. MR. C. BIRT: The Compensatory Line, showing at 3.3. Again, an explana tion, and the increase over last year. HON. J. STORIE: The Compensatory Grant Program, we hav en't discussed it yet, I think, in the Estimates, but it is part of the Categorical Grants

section and relates to specific projects within the school division. The increase was approximately $300,000.00. MR. C. BIRT: Small Schools, I understa nd, at 1. 8 million, but could the Minister just give us the increase over last year? 2322

Monday, 28 July, 1986 HON. J. STORIE: There has been no increase. MR. C. BIRT: The Equa lizat ion of 63 million. Bilingualism, 5.6 million, could the Minister explain that and what the increase was over last year? HON. J. STORIE: Essen tially that's the delivery of the Canada-Manitoba Agreement on Official Languages Education. This is, I believe, recovera ble or part of this, roughly 50 percent, is recoverable. MR. C. BIRT: Is that the $3 million which is referred to in the Estimates? HON. J. STORIE: Recoverable from Canada, yes, the majority of that. MR. C. BIRT: I have two areas, and I don't know whether they occur under this Bilingualism line, or they appear in another

part in the Estimates. One deals with regional high schools for French Immersion. Is that in this area or would it be better in another? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr. Chairperson, those would normally be under the Bureau in 7. MR. C. BIRT: Seven, all right, I'll leave it until then. MR. C. BIRT: The question of busing and funding for it as it relates to the Immersion Program, is it in this area or would it be better under the Francais Program. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, if it's a Grant issue, we can certainly talk about it here. MR. C.

BIRT: I'm not clear in this area so perhaps the Minister can help me understand it. lt was discussed earlier today and I bel ieve on other days, the basic grant formula for busing. Now, is that grant formula used for any purpose in the school division, or is a portion of it targeted for the transportation of the Immersion or Francais children? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, the grant is $410 per student. MR. C. BIRT: Then there is no additional funding from the province to any school divisions for the off ering of busing services for Immersion or Francais programs? HON. J. STORIE: No.

Some school divisions, particularly in a city, metro school divisions have made their own arrangements, but the funding is set and does not change. MR. C. BIRT: So if there are problems with the policy of busing within a school division, whether it be Immersion, Francaise or the English program, whether the services are available are not, are purely matters within the school division? HON. J. STORIE: Oui. MR. C. BIRT: Very good. HON. J. STORIE: lt's past 10, I can be silly. - (Interjection) - Pardon me? MR. C. BIRT: You even pronounced that well. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you. MR. C.

BIRT: Going on with the list, there is Early Identification, 250,000.00. I think I know what it is but perhaps the Minister could explain, and was there an increase over last year? HON. J. STORIE: No, there was no increase. lt's the Early Identification Program. The member is refer ring to Early Identification? MR. C. BIRT: Yes. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, basically that's a program that was used to assist school divisions in the establishment of early identification, tools and programs, to help them identify special needs, exceptional needs for young people as they enter the school system. MR. C.

BIRT: The Minister has been asked about this particular area but I believe back in 1980 there was an amendment incorporating Early Identification into the Statute in almos t a mandatory way. The Minister, I think, had responded saying that there were problems with it as it related to the Charter and a few other things. If it's a problem, or if the Minister will not bring it forward into legislation, why then is the Minister funding the program? HON. J. STORIE: I think essentially in the case of Early Identification specifically, that it has merit. To say that, it doesn't mean it has to be legislated and required.

I su ppose the cost that might be associated with a full­ fledged program needing expansion at various points would be expensive; and essent ially this appears to be meet ing the needs of school divisions without esta blishing it as a requirement and being viewed, I guess, as ... MR. C. BIRT: Thank you. I'd agree that the program is very essential and very important. lt almost sounds like this is a pilot program and its funding level has been constant for two years now.

When this is probably one of the most important steps or tools that one has in trying to assist children in their development, why the Minister is not putting more stress on it and in fact encouraging it, because to say that we don't put it in a Statute because it's going to cost more money, doesn't seem to make sense. If the principle is sound, then it should be properly funded and made available throughout the province. HON. J. STORIE: I think the reference is that the 40(1) (

q) dealt not only with this; 40(1) (q), my understand ing was, dealt with the broader question of special needs students; that there were more issues involved than simply the question of early identification. At least, that's my understanding. So it wasn't the question only of Early Identification and the whole issue of special needs students and how 2323

Monday, 28 July, 1986 we're going to treat them and what obligations we have as a government, what obligations school divisions have, this was a part of it, which I think was well accepted and its costs more understandable. School divisions have worked with this program for some years. This program, the Early Identification Program, has been going since, at least, about 1984. School divisions, on their own, have provided Early Identification Programs for many years. Flin Flon, I believe, introduced its Early Identification Program at least six or seven years ago. MR. C.

BIRT: Heritage Language, I understand it, but what's the increase over last year? HON. J. STORIE: Some $209,000.00. MR. C. BIRT: The original, or the amount set for this year is $434,000, so you've almost doubled it. HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: Why the doubling of the appropriation? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, the increase in this fiscal year represents, I understand, essentially two grants to metro school divisions to review the whole question of how heritage language program should be offer ed, what kind of format they should be offered , or can be off ered. MR. C.

BIRT: Could the Minister identify the school divisions that are carrying on the studies? HON. J. STORIE: The two school divisions are Winnipeg 1 and Seven Oaks. MR. C. BIRT: Why are the two of them doing the studies? HON. J. STORIE: I understand that that's where the problem is most acute. MR. C. BIRT: But are they both doing the same study? HON. J. STORIE: No, Mr. Chairperson, their situations are, I gather, substantially different. MR. C. BIRT: Winnipeg Inter-City, is that with the Core Agreement? If so, what was the increase or decrease over last year? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Chairperson, that is a new one.

There was no previous grant. MR. C. BIRT: Could the Minister advise then what the program entails? HON. J. STORIE: Essentially a direct grant to Winnipeg 1, kind of a compensatory grant, if you will, to Winnipeg 1, to deal with a disproportionate number of low-income single parent, and ESL students, as well as to deal with the mobility of the Special Needs. lt's simply a recognition of the very real and difficult problems Winnipeg 1 face. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, is this part of an agreement or a different funding formula that's been created?

I mean, how does it evolve? lt's one thing to have 1. 4 million to be transferred to Winnipeg 1 for a certain specific area, but is it based on a formula agreement, or what? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, it is based on a formula. lt is part of the Categorical Grants section. MR. C. BIRT: The Minister identified certain items or certain criteria necessary to get this funding. Is it possible that if other school divisions have identified similar needs, that they would be also entitled to get that funding? HON. J.

STORIE: Yes, if there is another urban division that has more than 50 percent, for example, of its students falling in those categories, they too would be eligible. MR. C. BIRT: The next item on this sheet is PSFB, and then under it, it says Administra tion, 730,000.00. Wha t do the initials stand for? HON. J. STORIE: The Chairperson tells me it's Public Schools Finance Board. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's what is looks like. HON. J. STORIE: I was trying to come up with some other acronym that could explain those initials. MR. C. BIRT: The item under PSFB is for Administration, 730,000.00. Is that an increase?

Is there an increase over last year? If so, how much? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, there's an increase of some 39,000.00. MR. C. BIRT: There is an item called Interest, $8.3 million. What does that relate to? I mean, what's it interest on? HON. J. STORIE: That's the same $8 million that was referenced earlier. MR. C. BIRT: Where? HON. J. STORIE: I stand corrected. lt was not the same 8 million. This is interest charges incurred in the borrowing of funds pending receipt of the ESL monies on September 15 and March 15.

Essentially, I referenced this earlier in the way that the Public Schools Finance Board delivers its funding to the school division, that there used to be a formula where X percent was provided on this date and because of the request of school divisions that they not be requ ired to incur borrowing costs that we have, in fact, provided 10 percent in January and then proceeding on through. MR. C. BIRT: Going to the other sheet that says Other Support, 16 .(3)(a), it shows Special Revenue. What does 2324

Monday, 28 July, 1986 that mean? lt's got a number of almost 399,000 attached to it. HON. J. STORIE: Yes, that's all explained on Page 38, Mr. Chairperson. That's support for school districts which derived the greater part of their support from sources other than the Provincial Government and property taxa tion. In other words, Pine Falls, Camp Shilo, Howard Edwards, Whiteshell, and Pineimuta. MR. C. BIRT: The Special Levy Reduction, 870,000, what is that? HON. J. STORIE: Special support is provided to a couple of divisions, districts, because of the low assess ment in those divisions. MR. C.

BIRT: The same ones that you just referred to, any of those? HON. J. STORIE: No, these two are in Northern Manitoba: Gypsumville and Frontier. MR. C. BIRT: A different area of questioning, Mr. Chairman. If a parent chooses to send their child outside of the school division, who gets the Support Grant for that child, the former school division or the one where the child is attending school? HON. J. STORIE: The receiving school division. MR. C. BIRT: Is there some specific date or time that a head count is taken and the money is paid to a division? How do you determine it? HON. J.

STORIE: I understand that the date for deter mining where the payment shall go is September 30. MR. C. BIRT: Is there no compensation for the school division where the child is left, by the department? And is the only amount of compensation left, then based on the parent's taxes they pay on their land in the school division? HON. J. STORIE: Yes, essentially that's correct. MR. C. BIRT: Is there any restriction on the students moving between divisions as far as the department is concerned; or is it some thing that's matter of a policy between the local school divisions and what they can work out? HON. J.

STORIE: No, the member is correct. Essentially the school divisions make that decision amongst thems elves. In some cases it's easier and there is less concern about the additional costs than in other cases, but they can nevertheless work out the residual costs as well, if they wish to. MR. C. BIRT: What happens if a group of parents decide on their own to send their children to another school division, and it will perhaps impact negatively on their home school division?

Is there not at some point where the school division, or at least the department, steps in and saying, you know, you're actually changing boundaries, or you'r e impacting the financial welfare of that school division, and do you take steps then to prohibit that movement of students? HON. J. STORIE: I suppose the scenario the member develops is possible to my knowledge, I guess, refe rring to staff that hasn't happened to this point.

While there have been some people dissatisfied, I think as it currently stands the school division, if it were offe ring the program being sought in its own school division, then would not be required to assist in any way, transportation or otherwise. Obviously the school division would lose the grants associated with the enrolment, but I guess the parents would make the determination of how important it was to do that. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, I met with the Ratepayers' Association of Richot, and it's a problem down there; and I gather it's a problem in many areas where you have sort of declining enrolment and the school division is trying to offer two, and sometimes three, types of tracts of education. And where the parents are prepared to pay the non-resident fee, the school division will lose their base grant and the children will move out into another district.

At some point it may or may not impact on the financial viability of that school division and, of course, this raises the bigger issue of school boundaries and the financing and provision of services. And is it something that is purely a matter of local concern and working out between the division and the parents and any accommodating school division, or does the province step in at some point? HON. J. STORIE: Well, no, I can only indicate that I am not aware, I wasn't aware of the problem the member was refe rring to. However, in most instances the divisions would work it out.

If there was a continuing concern and one which could be addressed through a boundaries change, then certainly individuals parents are perfectly free to contact myself and the Board of Reference and have the boundary issue reviewed. Other than that, there would have to be some accommodation between the school divisions and the Department may act as a mediator, or provide some information and other services, but that would be our only role. MR. C. BIRT: The Minister indicated he was meeting with someone from the area. Could he advise who he is meeting with on this issue?

I mean, I've met with parents, being the Ratepayers' Association of Richot, but I have also met with two school trustees of the school division. HON. J. STORIE: No, what I had said in response to your question was, that I was not aware of this issue. I have had no correspondence or meetings. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, I would just draw your attention to then a letter dated July 10, 19 86, addressed to yourself and myself and quite a number of other people, signed by Louise Pfitzner. 2325

Monday, 28 July, 1986 HON. J. STORIE: I do remember the name but the issue escapes me, the District of Richot, but if I have a letter then obviously it's been forwarded to the Board of Reference or Regional Services. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that the Minister look into this issue and see if he has received the letter and if he has given them a reply. If he hasn't received it, I'd be prepared to give him my copy of the correspondence, but perhaps when we resume tomorrow we could straighten this issue out. HON. J. STORIE: I'll check and see where it's gone. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you.

That concludes my questions, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: I just have a couple of short ones. Within the grant to Other Agencies, which I think is 287,400, did you mention that MACLD was one of those that received a grant there? HON. J. STORIE: I don't know if I mentioned it but I believe that's correct, MACLD has a grant of some $1 9,000.00. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Nineteen? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: Can the Minister tell me if his department has considered any kind of permanent funding for MACLD, or are they still going from year to year with regard to obtaining whatever they can get in any given year? HON. J. STORIE: No, they're still, as with other groups, their funding is based on a request and obviously the availability of funds, they remain in a category of separate grants to organizations. So no determination has been made to incorporate that grant into any longer term. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: The only other question I have, Mr. Chairman, is the Manitoba Association for Native Languages.

Where would I find a grant to that particular group? I know they received one. HON. J. STORIE: 16 (5). MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: So it does come in to there. All right. HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: That's it. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(a)- pass; 3.(b)- pass; 3.(c)- pass. Resolution 48: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty, a sum of $401 ,360,500 for Financial Support - Public Schools, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 87- pass. Committee rise. SUPPLY - HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Committee, please come to order. The Honourable Minister. HON. L. DESJARDINS: By leave, Mr.

Chairman, before the dinner hour, the Member for Pembina pointed out that there seems to be a discrepancy in the Out-of­ Province and he was right. I think he quoted on Page 86, Out-of-Province payments in'84-85 are $1 1 million and then the $2.9 million. Well, that should be right. In fact, if my honourable friend can turn to Page 111 now - and this is the Audited Statement - from the Aud ited Statement in the middle of the page, Expenditures, Hospital Services within the province and outside the province.

There was only enough copies to make for the members of the House to help us in this; this is not the final edition. That will be done a little later. There are other mistakes in the book, I'm told, and that will be corrected as we go along. But there is an increase; not a decrease. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River East . MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, under the Pharma care line, I'd like to discuss the plight of our pharmacists in the Province of Manitoba. Is that possible? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I wonder if I could suggest tha t we pass this first line. That is directly on Pharmacare.

We can pass the first line and then right after that, that will be acceptable. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is that agreeable? HON. L. DESJARDINS: With the understanding that we'll have the flexibility, but just to encourage us that we'r e advancing, anyway. MR. CHAIRMAN: Oka y, Administration, first line-p ass. Pharmacare Program - the Member for River East. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I guess regarding an

article that was in the paper last week, I bel ieve it was about the dispensing fees for pharmacists being raised from $5.20 to $5.25 per prescription, which is around about a 1 percent increase or a nickel. I really fee l, Mr. Chairman, that this is an insult to the pharmacy profession. There is a nation­ wide shortage of pharmacists and a lot of provinces are providing some incentive for pharmacists to come and work in their provinces.

At least a third of the pharmacis ts in Manitoba, the gradua tes who are graduating, leave Manitoba every year for work in other provinces or for better conditions. lt seems to me that $26,000 a year starting salary for a profes sional with four years of university training is rather low, considering that firemen, policemen - (Interjection) - star ting salaries are more than $26,000 per year. Mr. Chairman , the pharmacists in this province represent small businessmen; they're profe ssionals. They are critical to the citizens of Manitoba. Medications 2326

Monday, 28 July, 1986 that are prescribed should be properly dispensed for the safety and health of all Manitobans. Many people, seniors included, depend on their local pharma cist to recommend non-prescription remedies, also. So they play a very important role in our health care system . I think that a 1 percent increase in their fees, arbitrarily set, is unreasonable. lt's degrading to the pharmacy profes sion. This government is just increasing the drain on our medical profession by - yes, people in our medical profession are leaving the province, Mr.

Chairman, because - (In terject ion) - well, the pharma cy profe ssion, it's all part of the medical profe ssion, Mr. Chairman. Unlike a lot of union workers, there are no shift premiums for pharmacists. lt doesn't matter if they fill a prescription at 9 o'clock in the morning, 11 o'clock in the even ing or if they're called in at 3 o'clock in the morning, their dispensing fee is exactly the same, and I think that's a deplorable situation.

These small businessmen, the pharmacists who run their own business, are experiencing rising costs due to hydro and other utilities, increased taxes, salaries for their employees and mal practice insurance is really a big factor in increased costs for these profes sionals. Also I might indicate that the inventory costs, as a result of increased medication costs, not as a result of dispensing costs, are causing a real hardship for these professional people.

The que stion I want to ask the Minister, the government thinks that pharma cists are only worth a 1 percent increase in wages, can we expect the same for other union workers in this province? Not likely. Can we expect a 1 percent increase for the advisors hired in the Department of Health? I would say not likely. Can we expect a similar arbitrary settlement for the doctors of Manitoba, a 1 percent increase? I wonder if the Minister could answer that for me. HON. L. DESJARDINS: I'd like to give some friendly advice to my honourable friend.

I think at times it would be better if she asked some questions to make sure where she stands before making the kind of statement that she just made. First of all, let me tell my honourable friend that that is arrived at negotiating between the association and the MM A and the Manitoba Health Services Commission. lt is not some thing imposed by the government. Let me also give you added information that this was - you didn't know that, did you? You should have asked.

The next thing I should tell my honourable friend is that last year there was a settlement late in the year, from $5.05 to $5.20 and it was agreed then, at the time, that the base to start would be $5. 15. Thirdly, you are only looking at part of the cost. I can tell you that since 19 75 it's gone up gradually from $2.25 for dispensing fees , but then you have the average cost of . .. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: What year was that? HON. L. DESJARDINS: 1975.

My honour able friend was talking about the professional component; and then the average cost per presc ription and ther e's a profit on that, as my honourable friend knows, like any thing that you se ll. lt's not just the prescription; that's over and above. That has gone from the same period, 1975, from $5.30 to $16 .35; so, no, we certainly respect the profession. I don't know if there's such a shortage. We haven't felt it so far, the shor tage as stated by my honourable friend, but the situation is that, like any of those things, those things are negotiated.

There is a reason for that, like the two reasons that I gave and I think that's fine. A friend saw an

article in the newspaper, you can get that out of anybo dy, from any union, you can get that from anybo dy, noboby is satisfied with the wages. I would like to tell you the same thing. I would tell you that the last five years I've been here that we didn't have - and in fact I received a decrease every year for three years as a Cabinet Minister. We can always try to better the situation, improve the situation and there's reasons for that usually , and there's reasons in my case also. So the situation is that my honurable friend was only showing part of the story, not the whole story.

As I said I think the important thing is that this had been negotiated the same as unions negotiate, the same as the MMA negotiated their fees , that was negotiated between the Manitoba Health Service Commission and the Pharmaceutical Association. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: lt's my understa nding, Mr. Chairman, that the pharmacists that are working in the hospital situation in the Province of Manitoba are making more than pharmacists that are working in small business. lt would seem to me that the government is competing with the small businesses who are providing jobs and adding to the business climate of our province.

I'd like to know what the salaries are for pharma cists that are working in a hospital situation. HON. L. DESJARDINS : Well this'll be qu ite the revolution. If we're going to negotiate with people and then add on. I don't know how we would proceed with that. If my honourable friend can tell me what amount maybe we should put in, we can calculate what extra money is needed and then we can also look at the situation what the public will pay for their drugs also. Now negotiation is done in a fair way in all these instances and that is what was done in this case.

I explained to my honourable friend the settlement was late; it was agreed that the base would not be - not the 5.20 but 5.15 , and as I said there's also the other situation that's the profes sional component and then there's the sale of drugs also. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Mr. Chairman, the Minister's talking about a late settlement, I believe it was a late settlement this time again was it not? That's my underst anding. HON. L. DESJARDINS: The point that I'm trying to make is that the base it was agreed that the base was 5. 15 , would be 5.15 . MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Okay. Mr.

Chairman, I don't know how good my mathematics is but a dispensing fee from $5.15 to $5.25 is what, approximately 1. 5 percent. 2327

Monday, 28 July, 1986 HON. L. DESJARDINS: 2 percent. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Close to 2 percent, yes that might help out. I'm not sure. Anyway to me - or 10 cents. To me that just does not seem like - do you feel that's a fair and reasonable settlement with profes sionals in this province that are making $26,000, much less than a lot of unionized, not trained. Jobs in this province are - starting salaries are higher than what someone with four years experience at university is receiving, professionals in our province that are responsible in their way for delivering health care. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: I can add also that the volume is going up quite a bit. We haven 't got the amount, as we said, because we don't know what the volume is, plus past experience is that the volume had been going up; so there's the prescription, there's the volume also that's going up and there is also the sale of drugs. Let's not talk about the 10 percent, what I think is fair, what I think is not fair. Let's talk about the system of negotiating with them. If you want to suggest that we should change the sys tem, we'll look at it.

Right now it is as is done with the medical profession, with every body else; and this is what we do. I don't think my honourable friend should suggest that we reach an agreement and I, as Minister of Health, should suggest to my colleagues that we put another 10 cents or 5 cents increase on prescriptions. We wouldn't last very long if that was the case. MRS. B. MITCHELS ON: Mr. Chairman, I don't think the Minister answered my question about whether we can expect a similar arbitrary settlement for the doctors of Manitoba. HON. L. DESJARDINS: One is arbitration; it's a differ ent set up.

I couldn't tell you what we can expect. lt might be less; it might be more; and I don't think you can automatically make the comparision, whatever the percentage is. I think you have to look at the past. I think you have to look at volume; I think you have to look at a lot of things and one of the important things is the take home pay for these people, either the members of the medical profession or the pharma cists. I think that's an important thing also. If there's more ways than one to get your wages or your fair share, I think that has to be taken into consideration, not isolate one area and say, that's it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: The Minister is saying that it's up to $5.25 now and they established a base of $5.1 5. Am I not correct in saying that the latest prescription dispensing fee, prior to the $5.25 coming into effect , was $5.20, so that despite the fact the Minister is talking about the base being $5. 15 and it's now $5.25, there was actually a nickel increase on the

schedule this year. Can I ask the Minister, in terms of these negotiations that the MHSC arrived at, what was the starting position? Were the pharmacists asking for a nickel increase or a dime increase in dispensing? HON. L. DES JARDINS: That was part of the negotiations. I wouldn't have that at every stage that . .. I don't think that is something necessary that we have to give at this time. I think the bottom line is the important thing and I did say that it was $5.20-$5.25; and I also said that was agreed between the two at the negotiating last year because it was late in the year. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, the Minister is making the point that volume is going u