Manitoba Committee Hansard — 25 April 2023 (Social and Economic Development Committee, Sitting 4, 42nd Legislature, 5th Session)

42-5-sed4

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session – Forty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development Chairperson Mr. Andrew Micklefield Constituency of Rossmere Vol. LXXVII No. 4 - 6 p.m., Tuesday, April 25, 2023 ISSN 1708-6698

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Forty-Second Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALTOMARE, Nello Transcona NDP ASAGWARA, Uzoma Union Station NDP BRAR, Diljeet Burrows NDP BUSHIE, Ian Keewatinook NDP CLARKE, Eileen, Hon. Agassiz PC COX, Cathy Kildonan-River East PC CULLEN, Cliff, Hon. Spruce Woods PC DRIEDGER, Myrna, Hon. Roblin PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne, Hon. Lac du Bonnet PC FONTAINE, Nahanni St. Johns NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Lib. GOERTZEN, Kelvin, Hon. Steinbach PC GORDON, Audrey, Hon. Southdale PC GUENTER, Josh Borderland PC GUILLEMARD, Sarah, Hon.

Fort Richmond PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC ISLEIFSON, Len Brandon East PC JOHNSON, Derek, Hon. Interlake-Gimli PC JOHNSTON, Scott, Hon. Assiniboia PC KHAN, Obby, Hon. Fort Whyte PC KINEW, Wab Fort Rouge NDP KLEIN, Kevin E., Hon. Kirkfield Park PC LAGASSÉ, Bob Dawson Trail PC LAGIMODIERE, Alan Selkirk PC LAMONT, Dougald St. Boniface Lib. LAMOUREUX, Cindy Tyndall Park Lib. LATHLIN, Amanda The Pas-Kameesak NDP LINDSEY, Tom Flin Flon NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Malaya Notre Dame NDP MARTIN, Shannon McPhillips PC MICHALESKI, Brad Dauphin PC MICKLEFIELD, Andrew Rossmere PC MORLEY-LECOMTE, Janice, Hon.

Seine River PC MOSES, Jamie St. Vital NDP NAYLOR, Lisa Wolseley NDP NESBITT, Greg, Hon. Riding Mountain PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PIWNIUK, Doyle, Hon. Turtle Mountain PC REDHEAD, Eric Thompson NDP REYES, Jon, Hon. Waverley PC SALA, Adrien St. James NDP SANDHU, Mintu The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron Springfield-Ritchot PC SMITH, Andrew, Hon. Lagimodière PC SMITH, Bernadette Point Douglas NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Vérendrye PC SQUIRES, Rochelle, Hon. Riel PC STEFANSON, Heather, Hon. Tuxedo PC TEITSMA, James, Hon. Radisson PC WASYLIW, Mark Fort Garry NDP WHARTON, Jeff, Hon.

Red River North PC WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC WOWCHUK, Rick Swan River PC Vacant Morden-Winkler

105 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Tuesday, April 25, 2023 TIME – 6 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Andrew Micklefield (Rossmere) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland) ATTENDANCE – 6 QUORUM – 4 Members of the committee present: Hon. Messrs. Ewasko, Khan Messrs. Altomare, Brar, Micklefield, Pedersen Substitutions: Mr. Bushie for Mr. Brar at 11:42 p.m. APPEARING: Hon.

Jon Gerrard, MLA for River Heights PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Arianne Cloutier, private citizen Joy Smith, The Joy Smith Foundation Joel Swaan, Garden Valley Teachers' Association Scott Durling, private citizen Amy Warriner, private citizen Gabriel Hurley, private citizen Sam Zurzolo, private citizen Augustine Watanabe, private citizen Rachelle Dunlop, private citizen Jay Ewert, Evergreen Teachers' Association Sean Giesbrecht, private citizen Elizabeth Bourbonniere, private citizen Gregory Walker, private citizen Cameron Watson, private citizen Sonja Blank, private citizen Nicole Bobick, Swan Valley Teachers' Association Karla Rootsaert, private citizen Mike Urichuk, private citizen Jon Bettner, private citizen Shelagh McGregor, private citizen Kevin Rebeck, Manitoba Federation of Labour WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Beth Burrows, private citizen David Wall, private citizen Jennifer Engbrecht, private citizen MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 35–The Educa tion Admin istration Amend - ment Act (Teacher Certification and Professional Conduct) * * * Clerk Assistant (Mr.

Tim Abbott): Good evening, everybody. Will the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development please come to order. Before the committee can proceed with the busi - ness before it, we do have to elect a Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Hon. Wayne Ewasko (Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning): I nominate MLA Andrew Micklefield to be Chair. Clerk Assistant: Mr. Micklefield has been nominated. Are there any further nominations? Hearing none, Mr. Micklefield, please take the Chair. Mr. Chairperson: Our next item of busi ness is the election of a Vice-Chairperson. Are there any nominations?

Mr. Ewasko: I'll nominate MLA Mr. Pedersen. Mr. Chairperson: MLA Pedersen has been nomin- ated. Are there any other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, MLA Pedersen is elected Vice-Chairperson. This meeting has been called to continue consid- eration of Bill 35, The Education Admin istration Amendment Act (Teacher Certification and Pro fes- sional Conduct). I would like to remind everybody that the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Dev - elopment–that's this one –will meet again if required on Wednesday, April 26th, 2023, at 6 p.m. to continue consideration of Bill 35.

I would also like to inform all in attendance of the provisions in our rules regarding the hour of adjourn- ment. A standing committee meeting to consider a bill

106 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 must not sit past midnight to hear public presentations or to consider clause by clause of the bill, except by unanimous consent of the committee. Written submissions. Writte n submissions from the following people have been received and distri - buted to committee members: Beth Burrows, private citizen; David Wall, private citizen.

Does the committee agree to have these docu - ments appear in the Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed] Prior to proceeding with public pre sentations, I would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in a com mittee. In accord - ance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for pre sentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from com mittee members. Questions shall not exceed 30 seconds in length, with no time limit for answers.

Questions can be addressed to presenters in the following rotation: first, the minister sponsor ing the bill; second, a member of the official opposi tion; third, an in depen- dent member. And that's the order. If a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list. If the presenter is not in a ttendance when their name is called a second time, they will be removed from the presenters list. The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript.

Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter–okay, this is the part that usually goes wrong–each time someone is–wishes to speak, be it an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name so that the people who are recording know who is speaking. This is the signal for the Hansard recorder to turn the mics on and off. As previously agreed, the com mittee shall hear presentations from Arianne Cloutier and Nicole Lafrenière, members–as the first and second present - ers at the meeting scheduled for today. Is this agreed? [Agreed] This was–okay, yes. We did that last night.

Agreed and so ordered. Okay. Okay. On the topic of deter mining the order of public presentations, I do need to note we do have an out-of-town presenter in attendance, and I'm won- dering if there's leave of the com mittee to allow that individual from out of town to go first, after the two French presenters we already agreed on. Is there leave for that out -of-town person to go first? [Agreed] Okay. Agreed, perfect. Then, Joy Smith will be speaking following the two French presenters that we agreed on earlier. Okay. Thank you for your patience. We are now going to proceed with public presentations.

Bill 35–The Education Administration Amendment Act (Teacher Certification and Professional Conduct) Mr. Chairperson: I'd like to call–I hope I'm saying this correctly–Arianne Cloutier, is that right? Forgive me if I'm mispronouncing either. Welcome, and you do have the floor. Ms. Cloutier, please go ahead. Arianne Cloutier (Private Citizen): Bonjour, je me nomme Arianne Cloutier. J'enseigne depuis 2005 dans la Division scolaire franco -manitobaine. J'enseigne présentement à la maternelle, mais j'ai enseigné dans ma carrière tous les niveaux de la maternelle à la douzième année.

J'ai enseigné en région, comme en ville : j'ai donc une expérience très variée et complète. * (18:10) Je suis ici aujourd'hui parce que j'ai des inquiétudes au sujet de loi–du projet de la loi 35, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'admin istration scolaire. Pour être claire, je soutiens pleinem ent les lois qui amé - liorent la sécurité des enfants. En fait, le premier point du code de déontologie des enseignants est que notre principale responsabilité professionnelle est envers nos élèves. Je suis une enseignante qui s'assure que les élèves qui sont dans ma classe et dans mon école se sentent inclus et en sécurité. Mes élèves savent que c'est correct de faire des erreurs parfois, et qu'ils peuvent me poser n'importe quelle question sans aucun jugement de ma part ou des autres élèves de la classe.

Ils savent aussi que je ne tolère aucune violence physique ou verbale ou quelconque forme de harcèle- ment ou de discrimination. Ainsi, vous n'entendrez aucun argument de ma part pour soutenir les lois visant renforcer la protec - tion de l'enfance. Si je suis ici devant vous aujourd'hui c'est pour vous parler de moi, de mon expérience personnelle, afin d'essayer de vous faire comprendre le mal que le P rojet de loi 35 pourrait causer aux enseignants dans sa forme actuelle.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 107 J'ai débuté ma carrière dans une école de campagne à 350 kilomètres de Winnipeg. J'enseignais à 28 élèves de la 7 ème et 8 ème années combinées, où tout le monde était cousins, cousines, frères et sœurs. Moi et un autre élève étions les seuls à ne pas être apparentés avec personne de la cl asse. Même les auxiliaires étaient la tante ou la grand -mère de mes élèves. Cette année-là, qui était ma première vraie année d'enseignement, les parents portaient constamment plainte contre moi. Je vais vous en donner quelques exemples un peu plus tard.

Je ne dis pas que certaines plaintes n'étaient pas fondées –comme que je ne parlais pas bien anglais, que je ne pouvais donc pas enseigner l'anglais, chose que j'avais partagé avec ma direction d'école lors de mon embauche, mais ils m'avaient dit que ce serait ok, que je serais capable de le faire. Et j'ai vraiment fait tout que j'ai pu. Il faut aussi comprendre que j'avais fait mes stages en maternelle, donc enseigner en 7 ème, 8ème année était un choc et une courbe d'apprentissage énorme. Mais, encore une fois, j'ai fait ce que j'ai pu, et j'ai demandé l'aide dont j'avais besoin pour accomplir ma tâche.

Le reste des plaintes étaient cependant frivoles et injustifiées. Ma directrice d'école m'appelait dans son bureau chaque fois qu'elle recevait une plainte. J'étais plus souvent dans son bureau que mes élèves à problème. Et quand je dis problème, je veux vraiment dire problème. J'ai dû suivre cette année- là des cours d'auto-défense pour enseignant. Certains élèves ont mis des agrafes dans mon verre d'eau, des punaises sur ma chaise–mais selon ma directrice, et les parents de la communauté, c'était ma faute.

Après quelques mois de me sentir incompétente et rejetée de la communauté où je vivais, j'ai averti ma directrice que s'il y avait une autre plainte contre moi, je quitterais l'école. Ça a pris deux jours pour qu'elle m'appelle dans son bureau pour me partager une autre plainte. J'ai donc avisé que je quitterais pour de bon à la fin de la semaine. J'ai commencé par prendre deux semaines de congé de maladie pour essayer de figurer ce que je ferais, et pendant ce temps -là, ma directrice m'a suppliée de revenir et m'a offert un changement de niveau.

J'allais donc à mon retour enseigner une autre semaine en 7 ème, 8ème année, puis j'allais changer en 1ère, 2ème année–quand même les frères, les sœurs, les cousins, les cousines de tout le monde. Ça ne faisait pas deux jours que j'étais de retour que ma directrice m'appelait dans son bureau pour me parler d'autres plaintes portées contre Mme. Arianne. Et la portée de la plainte portée contre Mme. Arianne est très importante. Elle a commencé à me dire que les parents se plaignaient que je ne faisais pas la prière avec les élèves le matin. Je me suis mise à rire à ce moment-là.

Et j'ai compris que les plaintes n'avaient pas été contre moi. Elle m'a regardée avec un air étrange, mais elle continuait en disant que les parents s'étaient plaint que je n'avais pas de contrôle sur ma classe depuis quelques semaines. J'ai ri encore plus fort. Elle a alors m'a demand é qu'elle était mon problème? Je lui ai demandé de regarder mon horaire et de me dire ce que mes élèves avaient à la première période de la journée, heure où on faisait la prière. La réponse était que c'était anglais, et que donc, ce n'était plus moi qui enseignait ce cours.

Les parents avaient finalement eu gain de cause à ce sujet – à mon grand bonheur, je dois le dire. Puis, j'ai demandé à ma directrice qui était dans ma classe les dernières quelques semaines, et c'était à ce moment -là qu'elle a réalisé la folie des plaintes. Pendant mon séjour là, les parents s'étaient plaint que je n'allais pas à l'église, que j'avais m'enseigné à mes élèves que mon meilleur ami était gay, qu'il y avait trop de chansons en français dans mes cours de français, que les mathématiques que j'ai ensei gnées étaient trop difficiles –même si je suivais le pro - gramme d'études à la lettre.

Je me suis aussi faite reprocher de ne pas pouvoir empêcher un des élèves–qui avait des rages de colère subite inattendues –de frapper les aut res élèves, ou moi. Cependant, mon absence–pendant mon absence, ma remplaçante n'a pas pu faire mieux, même si c'était la tante de la majorité des élèves.

Cette longue histoire est pour vous faire com - prendre que si la loi 35 avait existé dans mes débuts , les parents auraient porté plainte en masse contre moi, et quelqu'un qui n'est pas dans le domaine de l'éducation et qui ne connait pas la réalité des petites communautés éloignées–qui n'aiment pas quelqu'un juste parce qu'ils sont de l'extérieur –aurait proba- blement donné gain de cause à ces parents.

Et si leurs nombreuses plaintes n'avaient pas été fondées, le fait de perdre mon brevet temporairement et d'avoir à passer devant un comité disciplinaire sans représentation, j'aurais quitté la profession et je ne serais pas l'excellente enseignante que je suis main - tenant.

108 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 J'ai eu quelques accrochages avec des parents pendant mes années, mais même avec mon expé- rience, le processus par lequel j'aurais dû pass er chaque fois m'aurait détruit –parce que je s uis une enseignante. Je passe tout mon temps à penser à mes élèves et à m'inquiéter de leur sort. Et de me faire juger parce qu 'un parent pense que leur enfant a subi un préjudice émotionnel importante m'aurait anéantie. En terminant, j'aimerais donc, au vu de ma propre expérience, vous proposer les amendements suivants : Supprimer la compétence du projet de loi.

Quand je commençais ma carrière, je n'avais définitivement pas les compétences que j'ai présentement. Veiller à ce que les comités d'audience soient composés d'une majorité d'enseignants, conformé - ment à la composition des comités disciplinaires d'autres ordres professionnels au Manitoba. Si des enseignants m'avaient jugée, ils auraient rapidement compris la situation dans laquelle je me trouvais. Inclure le droit exprimé à la représentation quand on fait l'objet de l'enquête.

Au début de ma carrière, je ne connaissais pas nécessairement mes droits, et avoir droit à une représentation m'aura it probablement beaucoup aidée. Limiter les signalements par les employeurs aux suspensions et le licenciements, par opposition à toute mesure disciplinaire pour faute professionnelle ou incompétence. Si ma directrice avait signalé toutes les plaintes, le comité disciplinaire aurait été surchargé par seulement les signalements à mon égard. Définir préjudice émotionnel im portant.

Juste le fait de ne pas aller à l'église et d'avoir un meilleur ami gay auraient suffi à donner un pr éjudice émotionnel important à la majorité des élèves dans la classe cette année-là. Protéger la vie privée des enseignants qui sont déterminés comme de ne pas avoir la capacité d'assumer les responsabilités professionnelles d'un enseignant en raison d'un handicap physique ou mental. Je vous remercie d'avoir pris le temps d e m'écouter. Translation Hello. My name is Arianne Cloutier. I have been teaching in the Franco- Manitoban School Division since 2005.

I currently teach kindergarten, but I have taught all levels from kindergarten to grade 12 in my career. I have taught in rural areas as well as urban ones, so I have a very varied and complete experience. I am here today because I have concerns about Bill 35,

An Act to Amend the Education Adminis - tration Act. To be clear, I fully support legislation that improves the safety of children. In fact, the

preamble to the teachers' code of ethics is that our primary professional responsibility is to our students. I am a teacher who ensures that the students in my classrooms and schools feel included and safe. My students know that it is okay to occasionally make mistakes, and that they can ask me any question without any judgment from me or the other students in the class. They also know that I do not tolerate physical or verbal abuse, or any form of harassment or discrimination. As such, you will not hear any argument from me against laws that strengthen child protection.

The reason I am here today is to tell you about myself, about my personal experience, and to try and make you understand the harm that Bill 35, in its current form, could do to teachers. I started my career in a rural school about 350 kilometers from Winnipeg. I taught 28 students in grades 7 and 8 combined, where everyone was cousins and siblings. I and one other student were the only people not related to anyone in the class. Even the teaching assistants were my students' aunt or grandmother. That year, which was my first real year of teaching, parents were constantly complaining about me.

I will give you a few examples later. I am not saying that some of these complaints did not have merit –like the complaint that I did not speak English well, so I could not teach English. However, I had shared that issue with my principal when I was hired, and they had told me it would be okay, that I would be able to do it–and I really did everything I could. You also have to understand that I had done my internships in kindergarten, so teaching a grade 7, 8 class was a shock and a huge learning curve. Again, I did what I could, and asked for the help I needed to get the job done.

The rest of the complaints, however, were frivolous and unwarranted. My principal would call me to her office whenever she received a complaint, and I was in her office more often than my problematic students. And when I say problematic, I really mean problem- atic: I had to take teacher self -defence classes that year, some students put staples in my water glass and

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 109 thumbtacks on my chair –but according to my prin- cipal, and parents in the community, it was my fault. After a few months of feeling incompetent and rejected by the community I lived in, I warned my principal that, if there were one more complaint against me, I would leave the school. It took two days for her to call me to her office and share another complaint. Con- sequently, I advised her t hat I would be leaving for good at the end of the week. I started by taking two weeks off sick leave to try and figure out what I should do.

During that time my principal begged me to come back and offered me a class change. If I came back, I would teac h just one more week in grade 7, 8 and then switch to a grade 1, 2 class. Meaning a class where all the students were siblings or cousins of my former students. I had barely been back two days when my principal called me to her office to tell me about more complaints against M me. Arianne–and the s cope of the complaints against Mme. Arianne is significant. The principal started telling me that parents were complaining I was not doing morning prayers with the students.

I started laughing at that point –and I realized that the complaints had not been against me. The principal looked at me strangely, but she went on to say that the parents had complained I had had no control over my class for the previous few weeks. I laughed even harder. She then asked me what my problem was. I asked her to check my

schedule and tell me what my students had in the first period of the day, which was the time were prayers were done. The answer was that it was English–and I was no longer teaching that class. The parents had finally found some vindication on that issue–much to my delight, I must say. Then I asked my principal who had taken over my class the last few weeks, and that is when she realized how crazy the complaints were.

During my time there, parents complained that I did not go to church, that I had told my students my best friend was gay, that there were too many French songs in my French classes, that the math I taught was too difficult–even though I followed the curriculum to the letter. I was also criticized for not being able to prevent one of the students, who was prone to unexpected fits of sudden rage, from hitting other students –or me. However, in my absence, my substitute had not been able to do any better, even though she was the aunt of the majority of the students.

I am sharing this long story to make you understand that, if Bill 35 had been a law in my early years, parents would have filed a massive quantity of complaints against me, and a person not working in the field of education and ignorant of the realit y of small remote communities – where outsiders are not much liked just because they are from somewhere else–would have probably sided with those parents.

Even though most of these complaints had been unfounded, temporarily losing my certificate and having to appear in front of a disciplinary committee without representation would have led me to leave the profession–and I would not have become the excellent teacher that I am today. I have had a few run- ins with parents over my years, but even with my exper ience, the process this bill would have put through each time would have destroyed me–because I am a teacher. I spend all my waking hours thinking about my students and worrying about them.

To be judged because a parent thinks their child has suffered significant emotional harm would have destroyed me. So, in closing, I would like to offer the following changes, based on my own experience: Remove the notion of competency from the Bill. When I started my career, I definitely did not have the skills that I have now. Ensure that review boards include a majority of teachers, as it is the case with disciplinary boards of other professional colleges in Manitoba. If it had been teachers assessing the complaints in my case, they would have quickly understood the situation I was in.

Expressly include the right to representation when under investigation. At the beginning of my career, I did not really know my rights, and having represen- tation would have probably helped me a lot. Limit employer 's disclosure to suspe nsions and terminations only, not every disciplinary action for misconduct or incompetence. If my principal had reported all the complaints about me, the review board would have been overwhelmed with reports about me alone. Clearly define the notion of sig nificant emotional harm.

Not going to church or having a gay best friend would have been enough to cause significant emotional harm to the majority of the students in my class that year.

110 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 Protect the privacy of teachers who are found to be unable to fulfill a teacher' s professional respon - sibilities because of a physical or mental disability. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. Do members of the committee have questions for the presenter? Mr. Ewasko: Merci, Mme. Cloutier, and your pas - sionate–passion and your story. And I just want to assure you that some of the things that you mention in your past and, again, sorry that you had to go through some of that.

But from reading through the bill , some of the things that you had gone through would not carry on to the com mis- sioner as the bill is written today. So–but thank you very much for coming to com- mittee today and sharing your story. Mr. Chairperson: If you would like to respond, you're welcome to, but not obligated to. Okay. Are there any other questions? Mr. Nello Altomare (Transcona): Thank you, Mme. Cloutier, for your pre sentation this evening, and for being here to exercise your democratic right to bring your thoughts forward on bills that have conse- quence here in Manitoba.

Every bill has consequence, of course, and is im- portant. And it's certainly –this is why we have com - mittee here in Manitoba, so that we can hear from everyday Manitobans and have their voice added to this very important process. So, can you tell us just a little bit about how this bill may affect your day-to-day practice as a teacher? Mr. Chairperson: Mme. Cloutier, go ahead. A. Cloutier: You'll see that my English has improved a lot since I started teaching. Being a teacher, even ex perienced teacher, I always have in the back of my head the parent's voice.

And that is something that I think about every day. * (18:20) And I'm exper ienced; I know my rights; I know what I can do; I know what I can't do, and if I may say so, I'm an excellent teacher. I'm a great teacher. But I always have, in the back of my head, what are the parents going to think about what I'm doing. And that is scary. That might be one reason one day that I decide not to go to work.

If a parent comes to me and says well, I didn't like when you did that, that's a big reason why this bill could affect teachers in their every day live, just having –just being always scared that, oh, what are they going to think about that. But I just–one simple example: I teach in a French school, so mostly Catholic, but in the past month, we talked about Ramadan because it was the Ramadan month. And I have a lot of students in my classroom that does Ramadan, so we made it as a big thing in my classroom that I did for Christmas and Easter.

And I was scared of doing that because I know that some parents are not going to like it and they might think that it's something that have an effect on their kids. So, everything that I'm doing I always h ave the thought of the parents in my head. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Vous avez reçu beaucoup de plaintes qui sont vexatoires, qui sont difficiles à –mais il me semble, c'est très im portant avec ce projet de loi que nous ayons un projet de loi qui protège ceux qui sont enseignants. Translation You have been the subject of many vexatious complaints, which is difficult.

It seems to me that we should have a bill designed to protect teachers. A. Cloutier: Je suis parfaitement d'accord avec ce que vous dites. On a besoin de quelque chose pour protéger nos élèves, mais pas au détriment de la pro - tection des enseignants. Je suis parfaitement d'accord que si un enseignant fait quelque chose qu'il ne devrait pas faire, il doit y avoir des conséquences –comme il y en a présente- ment.

Si un enseignant se fait accuser de harcèlement physique ou sexuel, il y a des choses qui sont déjà mises en place présentement pour faire en sorte que cet enseignant -là soit retiré de la salle de classe et perde son brevet. Donc, il y a déjà des choses mises en place présentement pour ça. Translation I completely agree with what you are saying. We need something to protect our students, but not at the expense of protections for teachers. I completely agree that if a teacher does something they should not be doing, there must be conse - quences–as there are currently.

When a teacher is accused of physical or sexual harassment, there are

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 111 measures in place right now to ensure that teacher is removed from the classroom and loses t heir cer - tification. So there are currently already measures in place to deal with such situations. Mr. Chairperson: We do have 15 seconds, or are there any other questions? Mme. Cloutier, any –oh, Mr. Brar. We have just a few seconds, literally. Mr. Di ljeet Brar (Burrows): Just wanted to say thank you for your presentation and I appreciate your courage to share your experiences. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your pre sentation, Mme. Cloutier.

We are grateful to members. We are going to move on now to the next pre - senter–[interjection]–okay, we've been made aware that Nicole Lafrenière is not able to present this evening. So, I'm going to propose that if the com mittee meets tomorrow–and if the com mittee meets tomor - row to hear public presentations, is there leave to hear Ms. Lafrenière first? [Agreed] Great. Okay. Now, as previously agreed, we will hear our out-of-town presenter. I'd like to invite Joy Smith to the podium. Joy Smith (The Joy Smith Foundation): Good evening. Mr. Ch airperson: Oh, Mrs.

Smith, welcome, and you have 10 minutes to make your presentation. We welcome you to the Legislature. J. Smith: Good evening. Thank you for this oppor - tunity to speak to you on this very important bill. You know, I was a tea cher for 23 years, at the junior high level mostly, and my husband was a teacher for 26 years. We know how hard teachers work and–most of them, how dedi cated they are to their profession. We both left the profession with–we're very proud of all the years that we spent there and all the students we influenced, and we still see some of those students.

I am so glad that Bill 35 is being presented here in Manitoba; excellent leadership. You know, right now we've worked to suppress human trafficking in Canada. We've worked over 7,000 files and that means 7,000 survivors of human trafficking; plus their families, you can add three or four or five or six to that number. Now, some of you I know around the table because I was an MLA and it's so nice to see you, Dr. Gerrard. You're one of my lovely favourite people.

And so, when I went to Parliament to be an MP, I went to Parliament–I can't say I'm a very good politician; I never thought I was–but, you know, I was very moved by the plight of young people who were trafficked across this country. So, we talk about schools. You know, there's a lot of wonderful teachers, but there are others too. In any profession, whether it's police officers, whether it's doctors, whether it's nurses, we have seen victims of human trafficking from every walk of life: football players, hockey players, everybody.

So, you know, it's not about as –me as a teacher– it's not about me as a teacher; it's about the kids. Protect the kids. There is evidence, great evidence and we have some cas es in our office where kids were trafficked by, you know, I hate to say it, but they were professional teachers. So, you know, and this is–I would want to say it's rare. We have a lot of cases, but in this day and age, I think we have to think about one thing. And all the stories you hear from teachers, you know, we were under scrutiny, as teachers, by parents all the time. And why shouldn't we be?

Parents raise their children, but also, wonderful teachers across the country impact the children immensely and really enrich their lives. But in every segment of society, in the year 2023, we have to protect the children. Every profession, whether it's law or medicine or anything else, all those professions are under accountability for how they treat the chi ldren. Now, we are especially cognizant of what happens when kids are sexually exploited or human trafficked.

There are other things that, you know, kids might complain about or parents might complain about, like mental, you know, they're being intimidated or bullied or whatever. There is nothing that intimidates or hurts a child as much as sexual ex ploitation or human trafficking, where they're bought and sold like cattle. Traffickers earn in excess of $280,000 per victim per year. It happens less than a kilometre from where you're sitting right now. We've had five cases around this area: two of them came from the church and three of them came from a school.

112 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 And teachers, per se, will not be blackballed because of this bill. They will be respected, and good teachers would support this bill because they want to protect the children. And so, sometimes it can be uncomfortable when a child will accuse someone of doing some thing. I know my husband, as a male teacher, he always made sure there was another teacher in the room when he met with a student on his own, because that protected him.

And I think the emphasis has to be on, first of all, protecting the children and, secondly, protecting the integrity of the very good teachers that we have. You know, y ou've heard the expression one bad apple spoils the barrel, and that's true. We've seen police officers, pastors, heads of cor porations who were traffickers. We have seen johns from all walks of life. So, I think–I compliment the gov ernment. I compliment the minister for putting this forward with your committees. It's a nonpartisan issue. * (18:30) When I look at Dr.

Gerrard and people like that, I mean, there's so–that I know personally –there's very 'integrous' people on all sides of the House. And I took the liberty, since I taught so much and for so long, I took the liberty of calling my colleagues before I came here tonight. Every one of them said, this is an excellent bill. This is an excellent bill. Now it's up to the students' union–or the teachers' union–to take care of the teachers, and they should. I represented the student –the teachers' union in my career. I love teachers. I love schools. I love books.

But most of all, I love children, and children should never be put in any compromising position because the most of our victims of human trafficking, and most of the sexually exploited children we have talked to were always afraid to tell anybody because they weren't believed. They carried the blame and shame for years. And I have to say, t his bill is an excellent first step in carefully protecting the children. That's first of all. It's not about me as a former teacher. It's not about my husband who is a teacher. It's about the kid in front of you because they are at your mercy in many ways, in the classroom.

And I believe parents need to be very much a part of a child's education. They should be fully informed of what's going on. And they will have their own positions. But you know the school board has policies, and they are the ones, a long with the principals and the superintendents, and the teachers in the individual schools and the adminis tration, that formulate those policies. And those policies need to be around education in every form. No teacher should be afraid to talk about a subject area, or afraid of parents. And no parents should be afraid of teachers. There should be open communication.

I think that is so important. But sadly, we have dealt with a lot of cases, and one little girl in particular that I want to tell you about. She was sexually abused by her teacher for years, and the teacher followed her up through the grades and she was never –it's like you're listening to the stories coming out of the sports world right now. I know I'm a personal friend of Sheldon Kennedy's, and I remember having him at a gala to talk about his experience and he opened his book and he cried when it came to the paragraph that said, I was talking to this cop, and he believed me.

Because Sheldon had gone to so many people about his story and no one believed him. And in a classroom, children are afraid to talk to their parents sometimes on this issue and they are afraid to talk to even their best friends. So, you know, having this is a great step forward. It really brings us up to 2023. All professions do it. No one should be afraid. Open communication should be there. Being a teacher myself for 23 years, and my husband a teacher, we have a deep respect. But please, everybody around this table, pass this bill. It will keep th e children safe.

And you know what, it could be a member of your own family. You would be surprised the people we deal with in human trafficking. You think it can't happen to your children or your grandchildren? You would be mistaken. We should all be open and accountable, and be able to defend what we're doing and why we're doing it when we have the interests of the children in our hearts. So, I've come here tonight while I have sick husband at home. But I've come here to talk to you because it's so– Mr. Chairperson: Your time has expired. Just to recap for members, there's a five -minute allotment for questions.

Questions can be up to 30 seconds. The answer is as long as you would like. So, Minister Ewasko, please go ahead.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 113 Mr. Ewasko: Thanks, Ms. Smith, for coming and presenting tonight. I know that with your educational back ground, but then also your exper ience all across this great country of ours –I mean, as the member from Transcona mentioned earlier, we are fairly fortunate in Manitoba f or the public to be able to come and represent and demonstrate their democratic right, here at committee. So, thank you very much for coming and pre - senting. And I might have a question for you next op- portunity I have. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: If you'd like to respond, Mrs.

Smith, you may. J. Smith: Well, I feel like it's a real honour to be here. I feel like members around the House that are supporting this, and I don't care what party they belong to–very honourable people–and they're thinking about the kids, not about everybody else. Because education is about the kids when you're a school - teacher. Education is about the kids. And I've seen the ramification of what happens when a child is exploited sexually or when they're so intimidated they're afraid to go to school.

You know, I think there are a lot of very brave teachers who are just very strong and they will stand up for what they do and they will work with the parents. We need to improve our education system. We need 'incrus'–increase the standards and increase the communication; this should be a room that is filled with people tonight and I'm sad to say it's not. It needs to be filled with people. This is one of the most im - portant things. So, I really commend you, M inister, and I commend that your com mittees and the Premier (Mrs.

Stefanson)–and it's not a partisan thing ; I commend anybody around this –I had friends in Parliament on all side of the House, good 'integrous' people. And I just ask you to think about one thing: and that is the protec tion of the children when you work out all the details around this parti cular impor- tant piece of legislation. Mr. Altomare: Thank you, Mrs. Smith, for making your presentation this evening. It is important that we hear all perspectives.

A part of this bill is a composition of the panel and in many other professions, the composition of panels that adjudicate their members are made up of majority of their members. Tell us about your thoughts about how the composition of the panel here should reflect or be part majority teacher. [interjection] Mr. Chairperson: Mrs. Smith. J. Smith: Sorry, Mr. Chair. I think it should be –there–should have a teacher representative on it, sure. But I think the majority should be from the public. I should think it should be parents. I think it should be law enforce ment that bring their expertise.

I think some NGOs should be part, because we all have children, right? I raised six of them. I think that panel should not be laced only w ith educators. I'm very in favour of educators but we need to take this away from the political field. We need to take this into your world, into your –what you see around you, to bring the voice there. It should not be political and this is what I'm fearin g about this parti- cular bill. I went to Parliament for 12 years, passed two laws that made Canadian history and the politics that got into it was what messed it up.

You have done some - thing here, all of you, that is real leadership in this country, real leadership. And I have to say, when you make up the panel, you should have representation from all facets of the community. And there should be a teacher element, of course, or a teacher represen tative but it shouldn't be only that. In my view, it should be from all walks of life, like a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher, a parent, a grandparent, because there's lots of grandparents now raising young children. And then you will get the actual idea of justice for the children, so they're not exploited.

Thank you for the question; it was a very intel - ligent one. Mr. Chairperson: We have 20 seconds, Mr. Gerrard. Mr. Gerrard: Very quickly, you've got international experience. How does Bill 35 compare with what other juris- dictions have? J. Smith: Unique and new. You know, Winnipeg–I mean, we're in the centre of Canada, Dr. Gerrard. And I have to say to you,

114 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 we're making this country notice that here in Winnipeg, we are leaders– * (18:40) Mr. Chairperson: Mrs. Smith, your time is expired. Thank you, Mrs. Smith. We're very grateful. I really do not like cutting people off, but I have to because if I let one go for X amount, then I have to let the next person, and before the evening's over, there's– Floor Comment: It's 5 in the morning. Mr. Chairperson: It's 5 in the morning, yes. Okay, we're going to keep working our way through the list here. Mr. Adam Hildebrandt, are you here? Or online? We're just checking online.

It does not look like Adam Hildebrandt is here. We will drop him to the bottom of the list. Ms. Gina Cerqueira. I hope I'm saying that right. Are you here? Or online? For any who are partici pating online, there is a feature to raise your hand. If you could do that, then our tech people will be able to find you quickly. So, we're goi ng to keep working our way down the list. We're going to put Gina Cerqueira to the bottom of the list. Mr. Joel Swaan. Is Joel here? Or online? I believe Joel is online.

We'll just give a moment for that to–Joel, for you to get hooked in here, and once I get the go-ahead, I'll recognize you to speak. You'll have 10 minutes, and then there'll be a five-minute question period. [interjection] Joel–[interjection]–Joel, you know what? Before you get started, for the sake of the proceedings, I'm obliged to recognize you. We certainly welcome you virtually to the Legislature and, Mr. Joel Swaan, please go ahead. You have the floor for 10 minutes–up to 10 minutes. Joel Swaan (Garden Valley Teachers' Association): Good evening.

My name is Joel Swaan, and I've been a teacher for 20 years, 12 of them in Garden Valley School Division, most recently teaching grade 4, middle-years band and French. And I'm also the president of the Garden Valley Teachers' Association, representing more than 400 teachers, clinicians, prin- cipals, vice-principals and substitute teachers. Sorry, I had to run up the stairs. I'm here tonight because like many others, I have some concerns about Bill 35, The Education Admin- istration Amendment Act.

I'm proud of the many teacher –teaching col - leagues that I've seen presenting from their living rooms, kitchens and homes, teachers and parents taking the time to stay up late or take time away from their own children, from marking assignments, or planning tomorrow's lessons to come and speak on legislation about which they have signi ficant con - cerns. My spouse and I have three children in preschool, in grades 1 and 3. And as a parent, I am in full support of laws that improve child safety.

In fact, the first point of the teacher code of pro- fessional practice is that our primary pro fessional responsibility is to our students. It's our duty to ensure that schools are always safe places, not just safe places for making mistakes or for asking difficult questions, but also safe places that are also free from harm and abuse for every child. You will get no argument from me about sup- porting laws to enhance child protec tion.

However, this bill goes beyond the protec tion of children from harm, and delves into how effective teachers are at teaching the curriculum and the methods they use, with its strong focus on teacher competence. I've heard the minister state several times that the bill isn't about competency and that there's a commit- ment to work with MTS to define competency. But to be clear, we're presenting on the bill as it is written, and in its current form, the bill allows for people to make only two kinds of complaints: 8.9(

a) profes- sional misconduct; and 8.9(

b) that a teacher has been or is incompetent. Competency is literally only one of the two things people can report on teachers about, so if this passes in its current form, it will do a disservice to educators and education. I fail to understand how investigating and adjudicating complaints related to a tea cher's know- ledge and skills or their ability to instruct and assist learning of the Manitoba curriculum addresses the safety of children, which at one time was the stated intention of this bill.

I've heard the minister say in these meetings that this bill is not intended to remove the division's responsibilities toward teacher competency; however, it obviously isn't clear in the legislation as written.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 115 Again, to be clear, I'm not opposed to standards and regulation. My colleagues and I want classrooms to have the best teachers, and we work hard to be the best teachers, to ensure that we're responsive to the growing and evolving needs of our students. Our code of pro fessional conduct requires us to continuously improve professionally, and we aim to improve our competency endlessly. But competency and conduct are two separate issues, and they're inappropriately linked in this bill.

I'm hired, supervised and evaluated by my employer, Garden Valley School Division, but under Bill 35, the com missioner has the power to address issues of competence. And I've heard the minister indicate in these meetings that the Bill 35 process through the com missioner will act alongside this process. But what it's really doing is setting up a dual track process.

And more than that, in addition to this dual track process, in 8.14(2)(b), the commissioner can in- vestigate on their own initiative the competency of any teacher in this province, with no require ments or limitations on this allowance within the act. The hearing panel will also be made up mostly of non-teachers, which is another example of why competence should not be part of this bill on misconduct. It creates a situation where individuals without expertise in education are now responsible for judging teacher competency.

And I've heard the minister say that the–that MTS will be appointing one of the three panel members. But the bill actually states that MTS only nominates three of the four teachers on the roster. With the fourth member coming f rom an inde pendent school, it's possible that any public school teacher coming before the panel might be adjudicated by someone who has never worked in a public school. To improve fairness, the panel composition should be consistent with other regulated professions in Manitoba, where most of the panel is made up of members from the profession.

The broad definition of misconduct, which in- cludes 'significal'–significant emotional harm is another red flag. Significant emotional harm or incompetency could be associated with anything from how a student is graded to classroom manage ment practices to resources or teaching of topics considered sensitive.

In our school com munity, we're not immune to parent concerns around 2SLGBTQIA+; using affirm- ing language; having certain books in our libraries, if you're familiar with the South Central Regional Library controversy going on right now in southern Manitoba; using Manitoba Education's own curricular materials that address family composition, com pre- hensive sex education or even having members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community working in our buildings as teachers and support staff.

To say that, again, simply being a member of the rainbow com munity has proven to be enough for members of the public to question teacher conduct. Under Bill 35, teachers are being put at risk not just for teaching the approved curriculum regarding gender and sexuality, but even just for simply being who they are in a building with children, these people are under attack.

And while the minister may suggest that frivolous complaints will be dismissed, this decision is left to a partisan-appointed com missioner, who them selves are not protected from attacks from the public if there's a perception that they're not doing t heir job to the fullest extent. To use a less extreme example, in Garden Valley, teachers, principals and even the school board were accused of inflicting sig nificant emotional harm on students simply by enforcing the prov incial mask mandate during the pandemic.

The reassurance that frivolous, vexatious or malicious complaints will be weeded out by the com- missioner offers little comfort, as the impact on the accused teacher can be sig nificant depending on whether or how far the investi gation proceeds before it's deemed unfounded. In meeting with teachers from my association on this bill, one member referred to it as guilty until proven innocent. Qualifying sig nificant emotional harm more narrowly would help to minimize this vulnerability for teachers while ensuring pro tections are in place for students.

In addition, this bill is silent on whether teachers can have union repre sentation at public hearings. Other regulated professions specifically have wording that makes the right to repre sentation clear. This essential representation is missing from Bill 35. And I've heard the minister say in these hearings that it was not intended that teachers be disallowed repre sen- tation, but the ask here is for the expressed right to representation to be included in the final wording of the bill. Finally, I'm also concerned about the ability through the bill for it to be deter mined that a teacher

116 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 may not have the capacity to carry out the professional responsibilities of a te acher because of a physical disability. This part of the legis lation, found in

section 8.29(1)(d), addresses a matter of ableism that isn't otherwise addressed or referred to in any other part of the bill, and its lone appearance in this part of the bill is very disconcerting, especially in this bill that purports to be about student safety. * (18:50) I would like to propose the following amend - ments:

(1) Remove competence from the bill.

(2) Ensure that hearing panels are composed of a majority of teachers, in line with the composition of disciplinary panels of other pr ofessional bodies in Manitoba.

(3) Include the expressed right to repre sentation for a teacher being investigated.

(4) Limit reports by employers to suspensions and terminations as opposed to any and all discipline for professional misconduct or incompetence.

(5) Define significant emotional harm; this includes specific language related to psychological harm to the pupil or child where the act is based on a characteristic protected by The Human Rights Code, repeated con- duct that could reasonably cause a pupil or child to be humiliated or intimidated, or a single occurrence that could reasonably be expected to have a lasting and harmful effect on the pupil or child; and

(6) Protect the privacy of teachers who are deter- mined not to have the capacity to carry out the profes- sional responsibilities of a teacher because of a phys- ical or mental disability. Thank you for your time. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Swaan, thank you for your presentation. We will now proceed with a five-minute question period. Each question can be up to 30 seconds, and the answer, Mr. Swaan, is at your discretion, but the five- minute limit on the entire time does remain. Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, Mr. Sw aan, for taking the time out of your busy

schedule to come tonight to give your presentation. I know that you've got some–I think you said Cub Scouts to get back to or –so thanks for your presenta- tion again. So, just to clarify–not to clarify–but just to inform you, on the

section of the bill that you mentioned in regards to incompetence due to a dis ability, that's misconduct, and that's because of a dis ability; that's why the teacher is being found incompetent. I do have another question for y ou, but I've run out of my 30 seconds. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Swaan, if you would like to respond you are free to, but not obligated. J. Swaan: Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you, Minister.

I think the fact that it's only in one place without any definition about what that might look like–there's no terms of reference on how a teacher's physical dis ability might lead to their incompetence, and so I would look for that clari fica- tion before the bill is passed as opposed to passing the bill and coming up with the background later. Mr. Altomare: Thank you, Mr. Swaan, for your pre- sentation this evening. I do echo what the minister says when it comes to the extra stuff that you're doing later this evening and how important that is as well.

You did talk about how this bill may create what you described as a dual-track process. Can you expand on that a little bit more please? Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Swaan, you're welcome to respond but not obligated. J. Swaan: Thank you. Currently, if there is a concern about teacher misconduct, a parent may approach me or may approach my principal. They'll be directed to me. If it's not resolved there, then my principal will be involved. If it's not resolved there, then my super intendent will be involved. And at some point in that process, it may be deter mined that some sort of disciplinary action is necessary.

So for that, there might be some sort of penalty. And then, through the com missioner system, there may be, again, another deter mination of com - petency which would require, perhaps, a second penalty for the same offence. And for clinicians, who are also guided under the act and also report to their professional body, it's potential that they may even have a third track of responsibility regarding the same offence, and they may be penalized even a third time.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 117 So, I think that we're taking something away from school divisions that school divisions are doing well around teacher competency, and we're sending it to another party without removi ng the obligation from the first party. Because I've been told that both parties will work simultaneously or hand in hand or alongside each other, which creates two or three possible mechanisms for discipline for a teacher or clinician. Mr.

Gerrard: I'd like a little bit more clarifi cation over this concern that teachers with a physical, or it could be mental, dis ability could be declared in - competent because of their disability. Which clause is that, and why are you so concerned about it? J. Swaan: In

section 8.29(1)(d), and I'm sorry that I'm working off of loose-leaf here and not a binder, so for me it is on page 21 of the bill: "deter mine that the investigated teacher does not have the capacity to carry out the professional responsibilities of a teacher because of a physical or mental disability." So, I know that the employer might be involved or MTS might be involved in whether a teacher has an injury or disability and requires short-term disability, requires long-term disability, requires access to assist- ance, aided devices to teach in the classroom, but the only

part in the bill that physical dis ability is men - tioned, is where the commissioner can determine that a teacher doesn't have the capacity to teach because of a physical disability. And there's no other reference to that in the bill. Mr. Chairperson: We have 20 -something seconds. Are there any further questions, or– Mr. Altomare, we have 14 seconds. Mr. Altomare: Thank you, again, Mr. Swaan. It's good to hear from people out of town as well, and I enjoy. It's great that we have this process where we can present virtually. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Swaan, we thank you for your presentation. The time is over.

We now move to the next presenter, Mr. Scott Durling. Mr. Scott Durling, are you here? Welcome. You have the floor for 10 minutes, Mr. Durling. Please go ahead. Scott Durling (Private Citizen): So, my name is Scott Durling. I'm a teacher, a husband of a pediatric fellow in Winnipeg. I'm a master's student at the Uni- versity of Manitoba and also a former student of Kelsey McKay. And although I was not a student that was impacted by him in the ways that some of my friends and peers have, I do take this matter very seriously.

As a student in the faculty of education at the Uni- versity of Manitoba, studying education in my master's, my current thesis is looking at competency. When we're thinking about student safety, I have direct–directly challenge the idea of competency in this bill. I do not believe, as written, that this bill produces student safety in describing competency, and there's–what I'm speaking to you spe cifically is, in

section 5, that the minister establishes competent standards that a teacher must be–meet in order to be issued and to maintain a teaching certificate. And also, 8.14(2), that the com missioner may initiate and in - vestigate, on the commissioner's own initiative, if it is in the public interest, on the conduct of a teacher and also the competency. So, like Mr. S waan, the only two things that the commission can engage in is either the conduct or the competency, and I'm failing to understand how competency is directly related to student safety.

The idea of competence as a standard in teaching is to provide a fram ework for defining the knowledge, skills and dispositions that teachers need to possess in order to take effect–or to effectively educate students, and we're using competency, also, in education, through its recent learning framework document that was published last year. There's several limitations to competence, parti - cularly as they relate to teaching. Standards–or, sorry– these competencies don't reflect current research for a community's culture.

So, competence standards are typically developed ba sed on current reach –research and best practice, but these can often be delayed or based on poor models of education that are political dependent. * (19:00) When we rely on perhaps outdated forms of com- petency to deter mine whether a teacher is able to teach, we might be actually moving towards and relying on harmful colonial perceptions about what teaching and learning is, and that can, in fact, be detrimental.

118 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 We're also relying on an idea that a com munity might have specific ideas about what they require out of teachers, and like bill 64, which tried to centralize power and decide, sort of, what was happening through the governance of communities–competency coming from an overarching institution might actually hinder innovation and also might impact the ways in which teaching and learning is required, and–or is–the kinds of things that is, kind of, expected out of a com- munity.

And so, what's best left to competency is, rather, a divisional approach that –where the nuances or ideas of competency is based not on an overarching sort of idea, but rather from a divisional com munity or school culture. These kinds of competencies can also be too broad or too specific. Competence can either –and it can be difficult to apply some of these into practi ce, specifically in that they might not provide enough guidance on how to implement them effectively and also, if they're too specific, that they might not be relevant, even based on some of what we know in edu- cational research.

Competencies are also contextual factors. So the language of competencies for students, for example, is based on an international level and articulated down to a national level, and then basically described through a province-to-province basis. So, the way in which we describe a teacher or the way in which we're looking at competency from an inter national level might not actually be relevant or, in fact, innovative in the way that we know education needs to move towards. Competency also may not reflect the full range of a teacher's responsibility.

So competency focuses on instructional practices, but they do not fully reflect the broad range of responsi bilities that teachers have, such as building relationships with students, collabor- ating with colleagues and engaging in pro fessional development. So, competency can narrow the defining features of what a good teacher is, and that is based on, I think, an archaic way of viewing what teaching and learning should be.

Furthermore, this doesn't necessarily promote the idea of professionalism, but rather as a technical model where teachers are acting as a technician rather than as an intellectually thinking teacher. So, when we're thinking about this bill, I'm also unsure about how this bill is proactively protecting children. As far as I can tell, many of the qualities of this bill are based on retroactive pro tections for children. In

section 8.12(1) with the complaint of a teacher, the commissioner can deter mine not to in - vestigate or to in vestigate, but at –in this case to not investigate or take further action if the complaint was frivolous, trivial or, in the sense of what Mr. Swaan was talking about, which–whether or not emotional harm is being caused.

My question around the emotional harm com - ponent of this bill is how that might be determined and whether or not –if any com munity member can perhaps, like, learn about the things that I'm teaching in school, and they have an exception to that, how that relates to the parental responsibility of engaging me in conversation about the kinds of things that I'm teaching about.

So, for example, learning experiences that are related to gender-affirming care, abortion, transgender rights, drag storytime, Land Back or white supremacy, how might somebody who take s exceptions to these ideas connect to whether or not I'm emotionally harming children or acting in professional responsi - bility for being a teacher in 2023. And, lastly, one of the thing that I'm concerned about is the way in which these kinds of com plaints might occur that actually drives good teachers out.

When we have many kinds of injustices in our society, and we are teaching about them with students, is the way in which a student might –or, is a way in which somebody makes a complaint, or multiple com- plaints–or, you know, there's some thing that I'm thinking about, which is online presences and creating like groups of people to go and attack teachers. These kinds of stories are well documented in the United States that push educators out.

Overall, I do not believe that this bill as written demonstrates that it actually solves student competencies–or, sorry, solves students safety, but rather tries to make an over - reaching system that attacks teachers and their profes- sional responsibilities. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Durling, for your presentation. We will now move to a time of questions. Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, Mr. Durling, for coming tonight and presenting, and good luck on your masters as you continue to do that. Just in–just to let you know.

So, bill 34, right now in its present form –because you've mentioned that many times–it is set up as a legislative forum and op- portunity to then go forward and then write some of the regulations and the standards and that.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 119 And so, we've committed to working with Manitoba Teachers' Society, additional teachers, Manitoba School Boards Association, to write those standards. So, do you agree or not that we should be writing those standards in Manitoba for teachers? S. Durling: As an idea of competency around stan- dards, written from an overarching perspective, no. I think that writing these kinds of things can be used in ways that don't reflect current research, and they can be used in ways that limit the ability to decide what good teaching is, and what good teaching is not.

And those can become, I think, politically motivated, that move us away from things like reconciliation, or moving towards climate justice. Mr. Altomare: Well, thank you, Mr. Durling, for presenting tonight. It is interesting that you're in a master's program right now that's dealing with competency. I'd like you to expand on that a little bit more. What does the current research say about how teacher competency can be defined, and how –what can it be founded upon? S. Durling: My specific research is not directly towards teacher competency, but rather global competencies that are being developed.

I think one of the things that worries me around competency is that the way in which competencies have been d efined over inter national institutions are based on colonial mindsets that further perpetuate many of the injustices that we see in our society. And so, if we have governmental bodies moving towards defining what a good teacher–or, good teach- ing, or bad teaching–is, those can be used in ways that perpetuate the kinds of colonial violence that we see happening in Canada and around the world.

And so, you know, for us to–and I'm thinking about parti - cularly in the United States–is a good teacher one that speaks to critical race theory. And I think that's one of the problems that we see coming out of these, is that we have many politically motivated parts of what good teaching is and good teaching–or, bad teaching is. And so, if we're relying on these kinds of models, we're setting ourselves up to further injustices. * (19:10) Mr. Gerrard: As we heard from an earlier presenter, there is already a mechanism to look at teacher com - petency. You're studying this.

Tell us what that mechanism is currently, and how well it's working. Floor Comment: For teachers? Mr. Gerrard: Yes. Mr. Chairperson: Sorry–Mr. Durling. I have to do that so when they type it out –you know. Anyway, Mr. Durling, go ahead. S. Durling: So, as far as I'm aware–so, if there was an issue of competency, like Mr. Swaan said, that goes to my principal or myself, and there's dialogue. If that is unresolved it goes up to superintendents. And I think that's one of the things that I'm kind of pointing out, is that the –it's–competency is –and capacity is nuanced. It's based on com munity.

It's based on research and innovation. It's based on teachers' abilities to, like –and–teachers' abilities and who they are. And so, like, currently there's already systems–if I'm not practicing in ways that I think are appropriate, there's ways already for us to approach that. Mr. Chairperson: The honourable minister, we have 15 seconds. Mr. Ewasko: Mr. Durling, thank you for your presen- tation today. And because we've only got a couple seconds, it's more of a comment.

So, you made a couple references to a couple situations earlier on, and just to let you know that the commissioner must follow The Human Rights Code, which has already been confirmed that that would not be followed under this legislation. So, I'd just– Mr. Chairperson: Your time has expired. Mr. Durling, thank you so much. We must move on to the next presenter, Ms. Amy Warriner. I'm told Amy is virtual. Amy, we'll give you a moment to link in here, and as soon as I can see you, I'll re cognize you to speak for up to 10 minutes. How is everyone doing for temperature? Just while we're –the windows are good?

Yes, okay, all right. Want everyone to be comfortable. Hello, Amy. Welcome to com mittee. You have the floor for 10– up to 10 minute s, and we look forward to hearing from you. Please go ahead.

120 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 Amy Warriner (Private Citizen): Good evening, everyone. I'm just grateful to have this opportunity to address the committee today. I know that many have already said it, but it bears repeating, my presentation today should not be taken as any indication that I'm not in favour of legis lation to protect children. Their protec tion and care have always been, and remain, one of my primary concerns. So, my name is Amy Warriner, and I'm speaking here today as an educator of 27 years of ex perience.

I've worked rurally for 13 and now in the City of Winnipeg for the past 14 years, and I've loved both experiences. Over the course of my career, I've taught every grade from kindergarten to grade 12. I've been a school counsellor. I've occupied the roles of vice - principal and principal. I have three degrees 'incrilu - ding' a master's in educational administration. I'm also the president of my local division's administrators association. In addition, I'm currently involved in two minis - terial projects.

First, to support the renewed vision of French immersion, working with the Bureau de l'édu- cation française principal advisory team, as well as a member of the provincial principal learning network, focusing on the pillar of improving student en gage- ment. Today, however, I'm appearing in my most im - portant roles, that of citizen and parent. I have three children who have been well served by our current public education system.

As a member of the teaching press–profession, I take great pride in the work that we do and I firmly believe that teachers need to subscribe to standards of professional values and conduct which are currently reflected in our code of professional practice. With my experience as a parent, teaching profes- sional to–and teaching professional to frame my pre- sentation today, I'd like to begin by noting that the education admin istration amendment act risks ap - pearing as a knee- jerk response to allegations of teacher misconduct, and especially those coming from media.

It's an unfortunate association to make, as it is my belief that a formal body for teacher certification is actually a positive one and would be a positive move if done properly. It could e levate the teaching pro - fession for the sake and well-being of our students. It's a lofty and admirable goal, a goal that, in principle, I support. I have some concerns, however, regarding lan- guage and intent presented in Bill 35 that I wish to bring to your attention.

I request that this commit tee consider altering the scope and refining its intent in the areas of teacher competence; the number of teachers on hearing 'panimal' –panels–on the hearing panels, pardon; the concept of signi ficant emotional harm to a student; and elements of procedural fairness. It's important to me that you understand that as I speak to you day –today, over the course of my vast experience in education, I've encountered very few teachers who were not entirely commi tted to student success and well -being.

I feel –fear that current dis - course risks giving public a false sense that their edu- cation system is failing their children when the public narrative seems to revolve around outlier behaviours and other components of a failing education system. And those are untrue. My experience has led me to value and experience hundreds of dedicated professionals who consistently demonstrate kindness, compassion, knowledge, com- mitment, understanding and professionalism, and we cannot lose sight of this as we discuss this proposed legislation.

Further, let me note that as an educator and parent, I've experienced a collaboration, creativity and innovation of the public school system as it has worked to meet the needs of children, my own included. And today, as I address you, I would like to speak to you both about the strengths and pitfalls of Bill 35, and I propose to you a series of alternatives so that as you reflect, you do so armed with research and addi - tional information. First, I would like this commit tee to consider removing all references currently written in the act which refer to teacher competence.

Teacher compe- tence is a very complex concept and needs to be assessed in light of current research with a deep under- standing of pro fessional practice, and it cannot be fairly adjudicated by a panel that includes members who are not knowledgeable, educated, trained or ex- perienced in a school setting. It's not a black and white question, and in order to assess it, the person evalu - ating a teacher's competence must exert a subjective use of professional judgment.

Professional judgment relies on supervisory use of professional knowledge, contextual understanding balanced with the systemic application and–of sup - port. The research highlighted in the report of the Commission on Kindergarten to Grade 12 Education

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 121 underscores the need for appropriate professional dev- elopment to occur with a com munity–within a com - munity of professional learners, and it highlights the need for professional standards to be clearly articu - lated. In fact, the research cited by the com mission works to define teacher excellence and does so by citing multiple factors that would influence and sup- port such standards.

Competence does not belong in legis lation, but rather, it must exist as part of a process, which is better supported in the field by qualified, educated and ex- perienced professionals in a supervisory role–in fact, that of the employer. In addition to the idea of adjudication of com - petence, the assessment of complaints to the hearing panel must be informed by experience from the field, and therefore, the members of that hearing panel must have majority representation from people with exper- ience teaching in a classroom.

Further, when school leadership is the object of a complaint, the panel must also have a majority repre- sentation of members having school leadership exper- ience. Just as we would not want a doctor to be judged by teachers, for example, the inverse is also true, which makes the point that expertise matters. Again, the report of the Com mission on Kinder- garten to Grade 12 Education highlights the need for a profession to govern itself. The research cited from that report clearly supports my assertion. A balance, though, must be struck for public accountability and legitimacy.

There must be a majority teacher repre- sentation on the panel when discussions of teacher certification occur. As I've cited p reviously, expertise really does matter. This is why I strongly recom mend that the wording of a signi ficant emotional harm to a student be removed from this legislation. It's a slippery slope when dealing with the complaint. Who is to define the meaning of significant emotional harm? Who has the expertise? How can it be measured? And until these questions are answered, the risk to those of us who diligently serve our students is too high.

Additionally, we have current processes in place that serve the protection of children well, and allow us at a school level to do our jobs and support children with ap propriate pro gramming. There's systemic oversight and dispute resolu tion processes already legislated in The Public Schools Act on ap propriate educational programming. Further, there exists bodies assigned to advocate for children and their families through the office of the Manitoba Advocate for Children and Youth, and the inclusion of this wording is unnecessary and creates multiple system redundancies.

Let the wording of the legis lation reflect, for example–yesterday's presenter, Ms. Dobbelaere's def- inition, as it was clear, comprehensive and targeted on student safety, all of which are concepts that I support. * (19:20) Finally I'd like to address the lack of adequate procedural fairness for teachers who are the object of a complaint. There are two main failings in this legis- lation as it's currently written: first, it does not explicitly state that a teacher shall receive repre sen- tation during an investi gation. This is a sig nificant shortcoming.

If the purpose of the legis lation is to protect the safety of children in our care, we must also ensure that the process itself is designed for the safety of all parties for it to be considered just. As a system, we must always uphold its values for everyone. Secondly, the report of the com mission on kindergarten to grade 12 education stresses the need for transparency. Anonymity is, in fact, the opposite. It has no place in a fair and just process. Additionally we allow –when we allow complaints to be made anonymously, we create a climate for abuse.

If a person is feeling victimized, there are procedural ac- commodations that can be made to allow that person a sense of safety. But the process itself cannot be undermined by 'complaintant' anonymity. We have an obligation to provide a process deemed fair for all parties. In

summary, the report of the com mission on kindergarten to grade 12 education clearly outlines what a pro fessional teacher college, for example, should consist of, and this legis lation clearly misses the scope of those recom mendations and instead focuses solely on concepts of discipline. This legis - lation is missing an im portant opportunity to elevate our profession. As a parent, I want high quality instruction for my children with a view to their unique talents and gifts. As a taxpayer I want to avoid waste and redundancy, and as a member of the teaching profession I want to protect its integrity.

I don't want bad teachers; I want great teachers. I support the dev elopment of a teacher pro fes- sional certification body to elevate our profes sion, protect our children and support public accountability,

122 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 but I request that this com mittee re -evaluate the language and scope of this legislation as it is currently written. Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Warriner, thank you for your presentation. We will now proceed to five minutes of questions, each question not longer than 30 seconds. Minister Ewasko, please go ahead. Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, Mrs. Warriner, for coming on tonight and exercising your democratic right coming to com mittee and thank you very much for bringing forward also a few ideas in regards to amend- ments to the bill.

So j ust for –just a quick point of clarity: any anonymous points or things that I brought forward to the com missioner is automatically denied and not looked at. Anonymous complaints are not looked at. Secondly, just a quick question: you mentioned a teachers college. Would you be in favour of a teachers college? Why or why not? Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Warriner, please go ahead, if you'd like to. A. Warriner: Yes, thanks. No, I think I would like that reference to be understood as a body of self-gov- ernment.

Whether I use the term correctly or not, I think it is an im portant aspect that can be dealt with and is dealt with in many professional areas and dealt with fairly by repre sentation from the field that it represents. So, I think that that's the clarity I'd like to bring to that comment. Mr. Altomare: And thank you, Ms. Warriner, for your pre sentation. Thank you for your work on Bureau de l'éducation française advisory team. It's really important work, work that can't go understated. As a sch ool principal, I'd like you to reflect on how this bill may alter yo ur practice as a school leader. [interjection] Mr.

Chairperson: Ms. Warriner, please go ahead. A. Warriner: Sorry. Yes, I've heard you ask that question of other people, and I've refle cted on it. I think that, in large part, what's already been stated and answered in that is quite true.

I think that the effects can be, you know, in terms of the types of complaints that might be brought forth and how those would be dealt with in dual systems and dual analysis or investigations, both by the employer and then by the hearing panel or the commissioner, in which case I think that those types of things can become extraordinarily time consuming for me in a role as a school leader. And that when they're frivolous, those things can cause a great deal of harm beyond the scope of what people understand.

I think that, in terms of wanting to elevate and protect our profession, we need to have oversight ; we do need that. I think it's currently provided very well by our employers and I think investi gations are thorough when it comes to many, many issues. I sup- port the bill in principle for the protection of children and to protect them from ex ploitation; there's no denying that. I think in terms of the day -to-day impacts of the work that I do, the scope is actually quite large and probably would bear a deep analysis. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for your presentation.

Just as I understand it, you were talking about the assessment of competence. And we have, already, an approach. And I think you're suggesting that the current approach is designed so that if you've got a teacher who's struggling, you can take that teacher and help the teacher to become a great teacher.

Whereas, you're concerned about the process in this bill for assessing competence might actually be more penalizing and not helpful. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Gerrard, your time has expired. Ms. Warriner, if you wish to respond, you may do so. A. Warriner: Yes, I think that's a fairly excellent summation of, sort of, the point that I was trying to make around that. I think that teacher competence is contextual sometimes, and so different things can happen to support teachers to be great teachers. And I think, in the process of supporting, we have oppor tunities to address when competence is lacking.

And, should other steps and actions be required, there are processes in place for that that allow those people a fair and due process. Mr. Chairperson: We have 28 seconds remaining. I see Minister Ewasko.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 123 Mr. Ewasko: Thanks, Ms. Warriner. And you know what? I think you mentioned it, but I think we all echo it: we do want continued great teachers. We already do have great teachers in this great province of ours. I think at the same time, with Bill 35, I think when we come to the–writing the standards and that, I think we're going to protect kids and teachers. So, thanks for your presentation tonight. Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Warriner, we've run out of time. Thank you for sharing with us, we are very ap - preciative. We now move to the next presenter, Ms.

Jacqueline Ross. Is Jacqueline Ross here? I see movement in the room, but I don't think that's Jacqueline Ross. I think someone's just–not online. We will move Ms. Jacqueline Ross to the bottom of the list. Is Ms. Clare Burns here or online? And again, online presenters, if I do call your name, please raise your hand so that our moderators can see. Okay, Ms. Clare Burns will move to the bottom of the list and ask in–later on this evening. Ms. Rebecca Sulkers. Ms. Rebecca Sulkers? Is Rebecca here or online? Ms. Rebecca Sulkers will be moved to the bottom of the list. Mr.

Gabriel–or, I hope I'm saying it right–Hurley. Is it Gabriel or Gabriel? [interjection] Gabriel, my apologies. Welcome to com mittee. We invite you to share your thoughts with us. You have 10 minutes, and please go ahead. Gabriel Hurley (Private Citizen): In the month of February, 2021, an Ontario science teacher named Chanel Pfahl, made a mistake which I hope none of you have ever made: she posted a political opinion on Facebook.

On a non –a public facing page, the teacher criticized what she called, critical race theory, which she believed to be a political movement associated with promoting anti -capitalism and the idea that all white people are inherently racist. She wrote, quote, kids aren't in school to be indoctrinated with critical race theory. Schools should be non- partisan. Focus on modelling kindness to everyone and speak out against any form of discrimi- nation you see. End quote. Another teacher on this Facebook group reported her for voicing her opinion.

As a result, she was suspended for one week from her job, without pay, and subject to an investigation by the Ontario College of Teachers, an in vestigation which threatened her licence to teach in Ontario. * (19:30) Some of you may be less concerned by this event than others. Perhaps you may disagree strongly with the opinions that she voiced, but should we only support due process for those who have the opinions we support? Consider that Ms.

Pfahl is not just a science teacher but also a private citizen, and that she wrote the offending comment outside of school hours in a private discussion group on a topic that is very much now a matter of public debate in Ontario. There is no evidence that she had ever in her own classes had a complaint from her students on what she taught or from the parents of those students. Instead, the complaint came from another teacher, and it was only about the Facebook post.

After a year of investigation, the Ontario College of Teachers issued her an oral caution, a warning not to voice her opinions again, lest she face more severe consequences next time. I bring this story to light because it relate s to the proposed changes in Bill 35. These changes allow for a complaints process that is overly broad in scope and lacking in due process. The bill would create a gov ernment com mis- sioner with the power to investigate and ban from the teaching profession any teacher found guilty of pro- fessional misconduct.

The bill gives some examples of what professional misconduct means, but it also specifies that the term is not limited to those examples. In fact, professional misconduct could mean anything that the commissioner believes makes the accused unsuitable to be a teacher. No doubt, anyone found guilty of child abuse should be kept as far away from the teaching pro- fession as possible, but professional competence is best judged by a teacher's employer.

The bill creates a hearing panel composed mostly of non- teachers to decide on a teacher's pro fessional competence, cir - cumventing the responsibilities of the school principal and divisional superintendent. If a school division has no concern about keeping its employee in the classroom, then why should a Manitoba commissioner or a panel of non-teachers get involved?

124 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 There are also problems with the process itself. The legislation allows any person to make a complaint about a teacher's alleged professional misconduct or incompetence. The complainants need not be the teacher's student or the parent of the teacher's student or have ever come in contact with that teacher. It could simply be somebody who sees a teacher having a little too much to drink after a Friday night hockey game and decides that this teacher doesn't meet their puritanical standards for what an educator ought to be.

Or someone who spots a teacher's risqué photo on a dating app, and figures that anyone with a teaching licence should be a paragon of Victorian virtue. The Manitoba Teachers' Society already has a code of professional practice. This exists to maintain standards of professionalism and an orderly school environment. One key element of the code is that, q uote: "A member first directs any criticism of the pro fessional activity and related work of a colleague to that col - league in private.

Only after informing the colleague of the intent to do so, the complainant may direct in confidence the criticism to appropriate officials through the proper channels of communication." Close quote. And furthermore, that, quote: "A member does not bypass imme diate author ity to reach higher authority without first exhausting the proper channels of communication." Bill 35 encourages colleagues to act in an unprofessional manner by acting against the code of conduct, just like the teacher who thought that Ms. Chanel Pfahl should suffer for her inadvisable Facebook opinions.

The teaching profession is constantly affected by public debate and rightly so. Even for those who do not have children, teachers are involved in shaping the minds of people who make up their communities, but it also means that teachers are often subject to unfair criticism from multiple d irections and from people with a variety of political agendas. By creating an overly broad definition of mis - conduct, usurping the responsi bility for pro fessional standards, and creating a complaints process that is unfair and easy to abuse, the drafters of this bill have strayed from its original purpose.

Respected members of this committee, I ask you: Narrow the focus of the bill to match the original purpose: protecting children from sexual abuse and physical harm. Thank you. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hurley, thank you for your presentation. We will now begin the five minutes allotted for questions; no question more than 30 seconds, the answer is as long as you would like. Mr. Ewasko, please go ahead. Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, Mr. Hurley, for mak ing it back here today, and thanks for your presentation. So, quick couple questions I have for you.

So, first of all–and it's more of a comment, and then you can comment on it. We've had some education stake - holders or partners chime in on the bill and basically say that the definition is not broad enough, first thing. Secondly, because I've only got a couple seconds, so, what is the present practice, from your opinion, on how misconduct is dealt with? Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hurley, please go ahead. G. Hurley: So, in regards to the first question, I saw the presentation from the Canadian Centre for Child Protection yesterday.

What I understand her concerns to be is that there are specific examples that she would like included in the definition. That's not my concern. Adding more specific examples does not concern me. What concerns me is the part at the begin ning where it says pro fessional misconduct of a teacher means conduct that makes them unsuitable to be a teacher, including, but not limited to, the following. So, the problem isn't that adding more examples would cause an issue. The problem is that those examples are including but not limited to.

So, for example, she gave an example of, oh, gosh what was it–conduct towards students –no, conduct towards children who are not your student s. That is not a concern for me. And just for the record, I am a teacher. The concern is that adding that would not limit the definition at all. There are no limits other than that it's in the opinion of the commissioner that the conduct would make them unsuitable to be a teacher, with no definition of what those things could be. Mr. Altomare: Thank you, Mr. Hurley, for coming on day two of committee hearings. It's great that you're participating in this process.

Your voice is an im portant one, and I want you to expand a little bit more regarding the lack of due process. What portions of this bill raise your concerns around lack of due process?

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 125 Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hurley, please go ahead. G. Hurley: Thank you for the question. I'm concerned that it could lead to opinion shopping, where, for example, if you have a concern about what your –what the teacher in a classroom is doing, you could either go to the school, or you could go directly to the com missioner, or if you don't like the response from one you could go to the other.

As I've already mentioned, the code of profes- sional practice, as it stands for teachers, is that if you have a concern about professionalism, then you need to talk to the teacher, your colleague, first. But, because the–this bill allows anyone to make a complaint, that could lead to unprofessional conduct, or at least encourage unprofessional conduct, by encouraging teachers to contact a commissioner with regards to what t hey believe to be unprofessional conduct rather than contacting their colleague. Mr. Gerrard: I'm struggling trying to understand why the bill has competency.

We seem to have a pretty good way of addressing teacher competency, so why do we need to dupli cate it and to impose a different definition or a new way of doing it? [interjection] Mr. Chairperson: I'm sorry, my mic was not on. Mr. Hurley, please go ahead. G. Hurley: I don't know. Certainly, concerns about competence are some- thing that everybody should care about for teachers. I–I've–so–but I can't speak for why it's included in this bill. Mr. Ewasko: So, Mr. Hurley, just–quick question.

I had asked you earlier about what the present process is and you didn't quite answer that, but just in regards to competence, we've already committed that in regards to teacher standards here in Manitoba, and as it's been mentioned from a couple prior presenters, here in Manitoba–and the Manitoba Teachers' Society agrees as well–that we actually have to sit down and create those standards for teachers and to write them. Those consul tations are going to happen with teachers, with employers, with teacher represen - tatives, et cetera. So, give me 15 seconds of your com- ments on both. * (19:40) Mr.

Chairperson: Mr. Hurley, go right ahead. G. Hurley: Nothing wrong with esta blishing stan - dards, but the question is, how are they addressed in the school? Currently, teachers are observed by principals in their teaching, and that's where the discussions about competence should start. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Hurley, thank you. Thanks for your presentation, and thank you for coming out. We do appreciate it. I'm going to call Terri Willard, who's the next presenter. Terri Willard, are you here virtually or in person? Not virtual, it appears, not in person. Terri Willard will go to the bottom of the list. Mr.

Sam–I hope I say it correctly –Zurzolo. Mr. Zurzolo is online. We will –Hello, Mr. Zurzolo, do I say it right? Sam Zurzolo (Private Citizen): Mr. Zurzolo, Zurzolo. However you want to say it. Don't mind. Mr. Chairperson: Okay, we were discussing it here. Welcome to the committee. You have 10 minutes to present. We look forward to hearing your thoughts. You have the floor for 10 minutes. S. Zurzolo: Forgive me, as my attention will be on my screen.

Chair, Minister, esteemed members of the committee and honoured guests: my name is Sam Zurzolo, and I'm a teacher of the Winnipeg School Division at Elmwood High School, and I've been a teacher for 16 years. I come before this committee to voice my opinion and propose a change to Bill 35. This bill purports to provide safeguards against ill -intended actors in the education system. It sets up a process,

whereas a member of the public fearing for the safety of a child, either in their direct care or their periphery, may present to the com missioner their fears of grave misconduct. The commissioner is then guided to act on their best understanding of the situations and initiate in - vestigations into the misconduct, form a review panel to judge the founded information and enact a form of punitive action against the purveyor of said mis - conduct. I am not against addressing the issues that this bill is designed to protect. I do not oppose the attempt to offer avenues for the public to address concerns about misconduct and misbehaviour of those who are in care of children.

126 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 It must be said, without question, that any and all methods to which we could protect children from physical and psychological harm should be explored. We should and must install strong policies and systems from which we can ensure the safety of the students in our schools. We've listened to many presenters address the content of this bill. If it has not been obvious, what this bill purports to do and what it actually may do seems to be at odds with its intent.

I'll be brief–excuse me–I will be brief in my critique and try to summarize the statements of those who have preceded them. If the intent of this bill is to ensure that stude nts are safe from physical and psychological harm, then the question of the role of competency arises and must be addressed. There has been no connection drawn in this bill between the safety of the student and the competency of a teacher.

In fact, in a p revious pre sentation, a repre sen- tative of the Centre for Child Pro tection offered an example where it was a highly competent teacher that used their competency to lure students, not a low competency teacher. So, why then, does this bill seem to insert the words incompetency as in

section 8.9, reading that a complaint could be made that a teacher has been incompetent to carry out the professional responsi - bilities of a teacher? Is there data that exists, that draws parallels to the competency of a teacher and their likelihood to harm a child? Further, the minister has re peatedly pointed out that we should have a one -table system from which concerns regarding teacher behaviour should be reviewed and brought into the purview of a single entity. Perhaps the minister could elaborate on why a one-table system is the best we can come up with.

In those juris dictions which have adopted a similar review board and com missioner model, is there data that shows that there's been a link between the competence and the incidences of abuse? I will not belabour this com mittee with more of the same. Let me just say that I believe that the word competency was inserted here, when we could have just used a different phrase. Perhaps a better definition of what this bill should be looking at is teachers not being dutiful, teachers ignoring their duty to report, ignoring their duty to keep students safe.

Competency does not ensure that a teacher will perform their duties. I propose that the word incompe- tency be removed and replaced with the word unduti- ful. That's the end of my presentation. Thanks for your time. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. We now move to five minutes of questions. Minister Ewasko, you have 30 seconds, as doe s any other question-asker. Please go ahead. Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, Mr. Zurzolo, for coming on tonight and presenting. And you know what?

You're the first one out of the many presenters I've listened to over the last night and a half, here, that has brought forward that type of amendment. Just a quick question–or a quick comment. You asked me about why a –one table. So when you talk about misconduct and you talk about competence– Mr. Chairperson: Five seconds. Mr. Ewasko: –and apparently I've only got f ive seconds, so I'm not even going finish that. I'm going to be able to just say thank you for your presentation. Hopefully I'll have enough time to finish that up later on. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Zurzolo, if you wish to respond, you're welcome to. S.

Zurzolo: No response to that. Mr. Altomare: Thank you, Mr. Zurzolo, for your pre- sentation this evening. It did pique my interest around the term undutiful. Where did that come from? How does that –how do you believe that makes–this amendment would make this bill a little bit better? S. Zurzolo: I think the term incompetence is way too general and really brings itself to start to question things that belong with professionals, with principals, with superintendents, with the Minister of Education himself, to sort of judge whether a teacher is doing what their tasks are.

Now, when we talk about duties of a teacher, some of the duties of a teacher are very well laid out in the public schools act, and one of the duties of a teacher is, of course, to have safety in your classroom, to have safety with all your students; we also have a duty to report when we suspect abuse. It's these duties

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 127 that I think are failing in terms of what's happening and where these abuses are coming from. And, now, don't get me wrong. These abuses are not as widespread as some members of the legislative seem to purport, but they are things that do need to be addressed, and I have a sense that if we can simply just talk about the duties of a teacher as laid out in the public schools act, and perhaps the duties in terms of reporting harassment specifically, that would address the concerns that this bill is purporting to address. Mr. Gerrard: I'm just trying to clarify what you're proposing. I think you're talking about

section 8.9, complaints: Any person may make a written com - plaint to the commis sioner that alleges, and then (

b) that a teacher has been or is not dutiful in carrying out the professional responsibilities of a teacher. Is that the change that you would suggest? S. Zurzolo: Perhaps simply replacing the word wouldn't do it the full justice. Now, once you're talking about duties, you're kind of moving yourself away from the necessarily – the professional respon sibilities and more into the specific duties outlined in the public schools act, and I believe it's the child protection act–I'd have to verify that–but where we have our duty to report. And really, that's the crux, is the duty to report abuses.

So, any involvement with a competent teacher, like I said, it's –it doesn't seem to be –there doesn't seem to be a link between competence and abuse, and if there is, I have yet to see it. It does seem to be a very simple, you know, a very easy thing to point to and say, oh, these must be incompetent teacher s, but I don't see the data. I haven't come across that data, and I'd love to see if there is any reports available to where incompetence is the problem. Mr. Ewasko: Mr. Zurzolo, just in regards to the single desk for teachers or for parents or students t o be able to bring forward complaints of a teacher.

So, you mention that you have not seen any of the incompetence piece. Incompetence–what can happen is this becomes a pattern, and if that becomes a pat - tern, that's where the commissioner and the panel can come into play and then be able to offer various different things, whether it's a suspension of a cer - tificate or something that the teacher would have to do to carry on with upgrading or get themselves– Mr. Chairperson: Minister, your time has expired. Mr. Zurzolo, unfor tunately we have very few seconds, about 15 seconds or so, but please go ahead. * (19:50) S. Zurzolo: Okay, yeah.

So, if we could, I would simply report–or, I would simply say: find me that connection that incompetence leads to safety–or, excuse me, that competence leads to safety, and incompetence leads to abuse. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Zurzolo, thank you for your presentation. We must move now to the next presenter, and I call forward Mr. Augustine Watanabe. Am I saying that right? I hope so. Is Mr. Augustine– Floor Comment: My name is Augustine Watanabe. So, Irish, English, Japanese. My wife is Japanese, I took her name. Mr. Chairperson: Welcome, Mr. Augustine Watanabe.

Augustine Watanabe (Private Citizen): Yes, that's right. Mr. Chairperson: You have the floor for 10 seconds–actually, you know what we'll extend that to 10 minutes. You do have it for 10 seconds, and also 9 minutes and 50 seconds after that. Please go ahead. You do have the floor. Thanks for being with us. A. Watanabe: So, as someone who has worked in education for the last three plus decades, I take my role as a–I take my job as a role model very seriously.

And with ex perience from elementary school to grade 12, in a variety of subjects, in multiple jurisdic- tions, I feel it's my duty to speak as a professional to the issue of teacher certification, pro fessional mis - conduct and competence as an educator. I was in Ontario in 1997 when they started their college of teachers. It was establis hed to protect the public interest. It was about professionalism. Nobody mentioned protecting children at the time; it wasn't an issue. It's about teacher professionalism.

And, by the way, the college of teachers of Ontario has a 37- member council, and of those 37 members, 23 are professional educators. So, 23 out of 37, that's 60 per cent of the College of Teachers of Ontario. So, I heard last night that we want to have standards that are similar to the rest of the country. Well, Ontario has 60 per cent of the college of teachers being professional educators.

128 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 Children do need protection. I agree with that, of course. Everyone–who doesn't agree with that? And, as a citizen, I'm also going to tell you I'm a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I'm a product of the '60s scoop mentality. I can't say I'm a '60s scoop survivor, because I'm not Indigenous, but anything that's gone–happened to the '60s scoopment survivors, yeah, it happened to me. I was moved from –4,600 kilometres from Newfoundland to Ontario, against my will, when I was five, as an example.

So, it helps me understand, as a high school guidance counsellor, the issues that both students and adults are living with and the icky issues that no one really likes talking about. That's my job. If Bill 35 is truly about the safety of children, why are the powers of the minister conflate competence with protecting children? And I'll get to wh at Ms. Classen said last night. There's a contradiction, right in

part 2, where it allows for re -consideration of a refused licence. How does that make children safer? I fun damentally–by the way, I might disagree with some of my colleagues –but I funda mentally agree that we need to support the M ani–teacher–toba teachers' society's role as a union, from its role as a professional regulator. They need to be two separate things in my opinion–my professional opinion. Teachers need to be seen as professionals. There is, however, one major cultural difference in our society towards educators as opposed to other professionals. Everyone has been a student.

Everyone has an emotional connection to the school system. Whether it's a wonderful memory or a terrible one, our experiences colour how we see the school system. Most people think they know how schools operate, but they don't. Most people working within the school system don't fully comprehend all the ins- and-outs of how it actually works on the ground. They don't understand the funding models, they don't under- stand the policy decisions or the most recent research, and that's because they're too busy with the group of students right in front of them on a daily basis.

So, how are people who don't have any sense of how the school system actually works and how the profession operates –they're supposed to understand it? For decades –decades–I have heard colleagues comment on wanting professional respect from the public, both in Manitoba, and Ontario and Japan. While I think COVID helped change the image of the profession in some minds, I do think the college of teachers would do more about profes sionalism. I do ask you, though, to look up at the governance makeup of pro fessional law societies, colleges of physicians, surgeons, nurses and social workers.

Again, they're regulating the mselves, because they know what they're doing. The majority of people sitting in gov ernance positions should be professional educators. And when I hear some say we can't trust educators to help them- selves–or, to police themselves, I wonder why doctors and lawyers don't hear those same things, because not everyone's been a doctor or a lawyer, but everyone's been a student. The minister re peatedly referred to the hearing panels as having three people and was all even, last night.

And while I respect that opinion, I'm going to ask you, what about the rosters of hearing panel members being comprised, four out of the 12 are pro- fessional educators. That's one third, 33 per cent, from that–from the roster. Why can't the roster –and this is an amend ment suggestion–why can't the roster of panel hearing members be 20? How about having 10 professional educators, five Manitoba School Boards Association members and five members from the public at large? Why can't hearing panels be five people instead of three?

Three professional educators, one Manitoba School Boards Association member and one member from the public at large? And while we're at it, I don't agree that the com - missioner has too much power. I think the com mis- sioner needs to be someone with a Ph.D. in education; needs to be a university professor of education. Bill 35, from my point of view? I was sexually abused when I was a child. I know that protecting children is fine, but to label this bill as protecting children negates t he whole idea of professional respect.

Bill 35's inclusion of teacher competence, along with certification and pro fessional misconduct, takes away–and I know it's been said before –a vital em- ployer responsibility. I want you to remove

section 9.9(b)– incompetent to carry out professional responsibilities of teachers–explicitly says that. Because, by the way, The Child and Family Services Act dictates we have–someone was talking about duties earlier tonight–we have a duty to report.

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 129 I don't think many Manitobans know that every adult in Manitoba has a duty to report a suspicion. They're not–we're not responsi ble for doing a –the in vesti- gation. We have a duty, if we find something, to report it. That's for every Manitoban. And besides, again, who decides what constitutes competence? People who have never worked in edu- cation? In my life, I've had the pleasure of working with wonderful, caring parents over the years. I also worked with someone who was accused of sexually abusing a young girl in his class.

He had no idea where the accusation came from. He knew he hadn't done what he was accused of. He also knew if the public became aware of the accusation, his career was over, guilt or innocence aside. He was put on leave during the investigation and after a lengthy and stressful time, he was exonerated. And here's the thing: the girl was being sexually abused. It's called transference. She was being abused by her father and her brother. And he got tagged for it, for a year.

Now, luckily for him, his father died, so he had to go home and take care of his carver –father, and used that as cover for why he wasn't working. To this day, there are many people who don't know he was ever under an investigation, which is as it should be. I had another colleague who was also put on leave for alleged sexual misconduct with a teen girl. He was working with incar cerated youth. She did not like being told what to do, and she blatantly said, I'm going to get you in trouble.

Again, after investigation, he was exonerated, but it was much more difficult for him to explain to friends and neighbours and family, over many months why he wasn't at school, why he was at home for those many months. What story did he have to come up. Now as painful as those experiences are for those educators, the system worked. And we have to protect the children and as it's been alluded to, it hasn't worked in the last couple of years for some young athletes in the city–student athletes, and also that not all predators in the school system are teachers.

But I want you to contrast those two investi - gations I just mentioned to the parent who said to my face, "I don't want my daughter engaging with any of these gay people." To my face. And I knew that students, colleagues and parents that I work with are part of the LGBTQ2+ community. I don't want that person anywhere near, judging my incompetence –or competence. Contrast that to the parent who emailed the teacher at 6 p.m. on a night, and didn't get a response, so emailed again and again and again.

And, angry about not getting a response, emailed the principal, then emailed the superintendent's office, then emailed the trustees, in one night. The teacher had two, three kids at home. Of course she didn't answer it. I don't w ant people who have nothing to do with the education system commenting on our competence. I had a parent –parents vehemently disagree with me. I'm a high school guidance counsellor right now. I taught, like, all grades, but now I'm a high school guidance counsellor. They thought I was biased against them, that I wasn't doing right by their daughter.

And then later on, like years later on–because you know, grade 9 to 12–when the kid was in grade 12, they were talking to me about self-identity, self-deter- mination and how teens build identity. And they would not have imagined the first time they met me, would we be having that conver sation a couple of years ago, later. I did because that's my job. My job is to have difficult conversations. That's my job. * (20:00) And it's also because I'm a pro fessional with ex- perience and the training that goes with it.

I could talk about teaching pedagogy, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Bloom's taxonomy, Hattie's ranking, Carl Rogers or the effect of trauma on the nervous system: how it effects learning and behaviour–means nothing to parents. They're emotionally attached to their parents, as they should be, and they want what's best for them. And they're also coloured by the emotional experiences they had whi le they were students. And emotion blinds reality for sometimes, okay? I've opened novella-length emails; seeing who it was from, what it was about, I didn't even bother reading it.

I just phoned the parent right away, because I knew that a phone conversation would be much more constructive than any response to that. So, protect children of course. Recognize the pro- fessional of educators, yes. Judge them on an arbitrary understanding of competence, no. So, I see my time there is–it's like planning a lesson plan, right? Yes, I recognize the minister's–and actually minister Nello is also, both former teachers.

130 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA April 25, 2023 Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. We're going to move to five minutes of questions. So, I'm just going to set the clock here. Minister Ewasko, please go ahead. Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, Mr. Watanabe, for coming in and giving your pre sentation, and the courage to share this story, as well. It doesn't sound like it's the first time you've shared it, but I'm sorry that you've gone through some of the things that you've gone through.

But also, as a guidance counsellor, myself, before this wonderful gig, I applaud you for what you're doing on a day-to-day basis, and I'll ask you a question after I get another chance. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Watanabe, you have the option–you're welcome to respond if you want to. A. Watanabe: There was no question, but thank you. I guess I would just say that I'm not here for myself. I'm this close to retirement. I'm here for the integrity of the profession, and I'm–yes, sure, protect the kids, but I'm here for the integrity of the profes - sion.

Because this bill, just like the ones that when I was–I started my career in Ontario, under Mike Harris in the mid -'90s, early '90s. And the effects of t hose changes in the educa tion system felt, you know, 25 years later. And this bill is also going to have a decades-long effect. So, I'm here for the children, the parents and my colleagues that I will never meet. Mr. Altomare: Thank you, Mr. Watanabe, for your presentation; certainly well -researched, well though out. I'd like to ask a question about how Bill 35 may impact your practice as a guidance counsellor in a high school. Mr. Chairperson: Mr.

Watanabe, please go ahead. A. Watanabe: Like I said, it's not here about me. And frankly, I'm this close to retirement, it won't affect my practice at all. Because I'm always going to do what's in the best interest of the child, and if people disagree with that, I don't care. The best interest of the c hild is what guides my professional judgment and my professional compe - tence.

But what I will say about this bill, and also about Ontario, because that's –I was educated in Ontario, although I did graduate from U of M –you know, Lakehead and University of Western Ontario– Ontario published a report over 20 years ago talking about why are there such a lack of males and male role models in the education system: 20–over 20 years ago. And the conditions they can–the conditions they identified, one of them being the fear of males being accused of something sexually inappro priate with a student. That was one of the signi ficant factors why men don't go into education.

And 20-plus years later, nothing's changed. We do have to respect that, but I also think that we have a paucity of role models for these young boys, and even the teen boys. And the males that do go in education usually go into high school or maybe middle school. Most elementary schools are almost a hundred per cent female. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, I give you an example of in- competence that was brought up to me recently. I've been helping children with learning dis abilities, and families, all right?

And one of the families came to me and said, we've got a teacher who's completely in - competent in helping a child with his difficult learning disability. Not surprising, because it's not mandatory for teachers to have training about learning disabilities in Manitoba, right? So, it seems to me that would be much better dealt with by the teacher and the supervisor, superintendent in the school board, rather than going through this sort of a process. Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Gerrard, your time has expired. Mr. Watanabe, please go ahead. A.

Watanabe: Yes, so, like I said, I want the word competence–and we've heard how many times the professional teachers have said we want the word competence removed from this legis lation. That should say some–the sheer number of people asking, that should say something. But I will say–because some people tonight, just didn't seem to understand that Noni Classen from the child centre –protection for children, Canada, last night testified–and I agreed with her. I agree with her that in some cases, predators use the guise of e xtra help as a cover for abus e. And I think that's what you're referring to.

She also pointed out last night that the employer should be addressing issues of compe - tence as it relates to job performance. So, she actually used the word from my per - spective, here's what I'm talking about. That's kind of word jumbling to put in a legislation. I understand the legislation is a framework, and then after framework

April 25, 2023 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 131 you've got regulations. And the devil is always in the details, right? But how do you bridge that divide between, I'm talking about job performance versus someone using their professional position as cover? So, in my case, I actually had an idea– I had a thought about that last night, and this is an idea not new to some people, but enshrining the rule of two in law. Not as a suggestion, as a must. It won't be easy; it can't be black and white, it has to be nuanced and it has to be–what's the word for it? It has to be –it can't be black and white.

So, rule of two if you're a volunteer outside of school hours. Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your pre sentation, we do app

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	42-5-sed4
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	42nd 5th hansardpdf sed4.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	cb158718e6d669c98c81199a1865d45cfba4030b

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