Social Services Committee — Department of Education has a budget of about $796 million, it is quite a large budget — 2 May 1991
1991-05-02
Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
May 2, 1991
SOCIAL SERVICES ESTIMATES - EDUCATION (UNEDITED)
The Committee met at 7:00 p.m.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
Ladies and gentlemen, I would at this time like to
call the Social Services Estimates Committee to order and welcome you all. First
of all let me introduce to you the official Members of the Estimates Committee.
To my immediate left the Member for Humber East, Ms Lynn Verge. Right across
from Ms Verge is the Member for Carbonear, Mr. Art Reid, Mr. Aubrey Gover from
Bonavista South, Mr. Doug Oldford from Trinity North, Mr. Jack Harris from St.
John's East, Mr. Charles Power from Ferryland, and we have also with us Mr. Jim
Walsh from Mount Scio - Bell Island, and of course our secretary, Deputy Clerk
of the House, Ms Elizabeth Murphy. I want to welcome also the Minister and his
staff, and at this time ask the Minister if he would be kind enough to introduce
his staff to the Committee, and if he could have an opening statement of
approximately nine minutes and fifty-nine seconds.
MS. VERGE: But who's counting.
DR. WARREN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
Members of the Committee. Perhaps I will first of all introduce my associates
here. To my immediate right is Dr. Keith Winter, the Deputy Minister. Bob Smart
on my left here is the Assistant Deputy Minister responsible for Finance and
Administration, and then on my far right is Cyril McCormick Assistant Deputy
Minister responsible for post-secondary education. Behind me is Edna
Turpin-Downey, who you have met before, who is the Assistant Deputy Minister
responsible for Primary, Elementary and Secondary education, and Aubrey Halfyard
who is the Director of Financial Services and Operations.
I am pleased to be here really, much more pleased
than I was last year. I was rather nervous last year. I do not know why I was
after the session was over, but I was. I am pleased to be here to answer your
questions. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to give a long statement this year. I
had a long statement if you would like to hear it, but perhaps I will make a
very brief statement and then get right into the questions so that we can get to
the meat of the issue.
In preparing the Budget this year I think there
were a number of guidelines that provided a framework for us in the Department
of Education. We certainly had to face up to the fiscal situation in the
Province and we admit that education needs more money, but this year we had to
balance that need with the capacity of the Province to fund education and other
services.
Another guideline was that we tried to exercise
restraint in a manner which had the least impact on students possible. We are
not going to say that we were successful totally in eliminating negative impacts
as some of the decisions were made. We tried to minimize the impact on students
in the classrooms and in the college programmes that existed.
I guess a third guideline that provided the basis
for our Budget was that we attempted to rationalize the post-secondary system
with the actual labour force needs of the Province in mind. We had a White
Paper, as you know, we issued a White Paper a year previously, and in exercising
restraint in the post-secondary system we focused on rationalizing programmes in
a manner that was consistent with the needs of the Province.
So these were the three general principals that
guided us in the preparation of this year's Budget.
In certain areas we were able this year to increase
spending. I will not list these. Even with the salary freeze there were a number
of areas where we felt the needs were such that we had to increase the actual
amount of funding. There were other areas where we attempted to freeze and to do
the best we could within the context of the guidelines with a frozen budget.
There were some areas as a result of the salary freeze where there were some
actual reductions - I will not list these. Mr. Chairperson, if that is enough I
will attempt to introduce my other comments in answers perhaps later on in a
summary form.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr.
Minister.
First of all if I might before I move to the
Vice-Chair to open on the estimates, if I could have someone to move the minutes
of May 1.
On motion minutes adopted as circulated.
Ms. Verge.
MS. VERGE: Thank you.
I thank the Minister and the Education Department
officials for their presence here. I have a set of questions about the
Department staff. I will get right into them now.
The other day in the House of Assembly the Minister
admitted that the Department recently eliminated six permanent positions in the
Division of Communications and Publications and laid off the people who had held
those positions. The first question is, if those cuts were intended to be
counted in the cuts announced in the Budget on March 7, why were salaries for
the positions listed in the Departmental salary details for 1991-1992? Subject
to that change, subject to the elimination of those six positions, is the
information in the salary details accurate? Or, will there be other deviations?
If there will indeed be other changes, if there
will be other positions eliminated, how many and which ones? When will the
announcements be made?
Last year the departmental salary details listed
334 permanent positions in the department. This year the salary details which
were, of course, only published the other day indicate 308. We now know there
will be at least six fewer to bring it down to 302 and perhaps lower, which is
at least thirty-two positions fewer than last year with 334. We know now 302 and
perhaps fewer this year. After the Budget Speech the Minister said that only
seventeen positions would be eliminated from his department this year but we
know now these numbers are about double that and perhaps for all we know now it
may be more.
Last year the Department had a budget of $4.1
million for temporary employees, that budget is now down to $1.2 million, which
is about a $3 million reduction, it is a cut of over 70 per cent. How will that
be accommodated? How many temporary positions have been declared redundant or
are being eliminated? Will the Minister provide the Committee with a list of the
temporary positions last year and the names of the people who held the
positions, and the temporary positions that have been or are going to be
declared redundant or eliminated with the names of the people who will lose
those jobs? And finally, will the Minister provide a list of the temporary
positions that will be left, with the names of the people who occupy the
temporary jobs?
I will stop there because I realize that I have
asked several questions, but I have more to come on substitute teacher funding.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms Verge.
Mr. Minister.
DR. WARREN: On the first question, I tried to
take account and some of them I can answer. Others I will have to defer to my
officials and provide the data later.
On the six: one person is retiring this fall. One
was on contract and there were four people who received layoffs, some of whom
will bump - of the six you asked about. That was included in the Estimates
because we have been working through using a number of factors in arriving at
our staff. One is that we are given a global amount of money and we have found
that as a result of this fact we had to make some additional changes. These were
part of the budgetary process, we anticipated that. We perhaps could have made
the announcement two or three weeks ago, but for a variety of reasons the layoff
notices were not issued until last week. But it was part of the process of
looking at the total Budget and estimating this year what our needs will be and
what our costs will be.
I think the Department last year - I pay tribute to
my officials on this, we lived within our Budget. This year the Department of
Education has a budget of about $796 million, it is quite a large budget. You
have a lot of staff changes every year and we are going to have a substantial
number this year with people going and coming, hiring and leaving. But we try to
live within the budget, and we now believe that we are within the budget. There
will be some people going, I do not know how many. You asked how many are likely
to go. There will be no additional layoffs -
MS. VERGE: If I might clarify, Chairperson, I
am not interested in people coming and going, I am interest in the complement of
jobs or positions.
DR. WARREN: Well we do not expect any
significant reduction in the number, three hundred and six you said. One of
those was a contract. We do not expect any significant reduction now as a
result. We have made the determination that we can live within our budget with
the 300 approximately that we have. There will be quite a number of changes
though throughout the year, I want to stress that. In a department such as ours
people leave and we may not replace that person who leaves. We may decide that
if a person leaves we can re-allocate the responsibilities to somebody else and
hire someone who is perhaps more urgently needed at that point in time. So we
have a lot of that going on, but we do not expect any great fluctuation in that
number this year.
We went down from 349 if I recall - 349 to 308. I
will give you additional information, which I think is very pertinent, that of
the forty positions that are listed about twenty-eight to thirty were vacant
positions.
Last year we lived within our budget because we
kept a large number of positions vacant when we could get by without filling
those positions, so really as the result of the fiscal restraint this year the
number of actual layoffs of persons in Education was only, and I say only
respecting the fact that one is too many in terms of the person involved, there
were eleven actual layoffs. Perhaps a maximum of thirteen, Dr. Winter? Something
of that order.
There were eleven to thirteen actual persons laid
off and the rest of the forty positions were held vacant throughout the year
because we felt we could get by in a very difficult year last year without
filling these positions. Perhaps thirteen is the figure I would give you, actual
layoffs as a result of the fiscal position the Province was in. Now, how many
temporaries? I am afraid I cannot provide you with the names of the temporaries
and the numbers. I do know that we have released a number of temporaries and we
will not be hiring temporaries this year in the same way. We just do not have
the funds to do it. We will be hiring students, of course, and if you want to
get to the student issue later I can provide you with some data on that, for
marking and so on. But with temporary employees we have to reduce very
substantially our hirings this year. You asked for the names of temporaries we
now have?
MS. VERGE: I did not expect the Minister to
have this but I would like the Minister and staff, when you have a chance in the
next few days, to table a list of the temporary positions and the names of the
people who held the positions last year, and a list of the status quo.
DR. WARREN: We have released a number of
temporaries. I do not have the exact number because I would not have that at my
disposal immediately. There were about nineteen temporaries and, as I said,
about thirteen full-time persons and the rest of the positions were vacant.
MS. VERGE: The Budget last year was over $4
million and now it is $1.2 million.
DR. WARREN: May I have just a moment to consult
with Mr. Smart?
I apologize to the Committee. The major reduction
in the funding for temporaries is a result of moving student assistants to
another subhead under grants. Last year all the temporary positions, the $2.5
million that we allocated to student assistants was in that category and as a
result there is not the significant reduction that I indicated. That explains
that.
MS. VERGE: Thank you.
My next question is about funding for substitute
teachers. The Estimates for this year show $415 million for teacher salaries.
How much of that is for substitute teachers?
DR. WARREN: We had an estimate some weeks ago
but I think when the Budget was released negotiations were still ongoing with
the teachers and some possible changes in the payment of substitute teachers was
being contemplated at that point in time. I think at that point in time $10
million was put in for substitutes, but that is an amount within the total
Budget. Really, that is a global Budget and what we have said in substitutes is
that we will allocate to school boards the same number of days that were used
last year. What it cost we do not know because we do not know what number school
boards will hire, what grade levels they will hire. The significant factor is
that we have indicated to the school boards that we will be allocating the same
number of days as were used last year. I think the figure is, perhaps, around
80,000 substitute days. The amount of money is hard to project because we do not
know who will be hired at what level and it is included in that $400 million and
some odd total salary budget.
MS. VERGE: Did the department tell boards that
the vote would be the same as last year, at least $12.8 million?
DR. WARREN: No, we told the boards that the
same number of days would be available as were available last year.
MS. VERGE: And it is reasonable to expect that
would cost more than $12.8 million.
DR. WARREN: Not necessarily. I will say that
the second thing we are doing this year, Ms Verge, is, as a result of the
collective agreement we are setting up a committee to study the whole substitute
teacher issue and to see if there are ways and means which we can use to perhaps
control the growth of the substitute teacher expenditure. I think there has been
a concern over the last, I will say two years but I know that that concern was
there before the last two years, about the growth of substitute teachers. And
there may be other ways of providing these days with some control of the cost,
but the committee is being put in place now to look at ways and means of
improving perhaps the whole substitute teacher programme. But we have guaranteed
school boards the same number of days and the amount of money is included in the
total salary budget.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr.
Gover.
MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would
like to ask the Minister a question as it relates to the Bonavista campus of the
Eastern Community College. As the Minister is aware, due to the recent
re-organization which took place, there were changes at the campus at Bonavista.
And as the Minister is no doubt aware as well there is a new regional high
school being constructed at Bonavista in close proximity to the Eastern
Community College campus there. In fact it is my understanding that the plans
call for a link between the new high school and the current campus of the
Eastern Community College at Bonavista. I understand that this will result in a
sharing of facilities and in fact, if my information is correct, will be the
only high school campus situation in the Province with the link. So I just would
like the Minister to comment on how he sees the role of those particular
institutions given the fact that they will be unique in Newfoundland and
Labrador at this point in time.
DR. WARREN: In answer to your first question,
Mr. Gover, we indicated in the budget that we were going to review the mandates
of some of the college campuses. Perhaps I was wrong in the House when I
indicated that some of these campuses were underutilized. They were
underutilized for traditional programmes. Baie Verte was another college,
Springdale, St. Anthony, Bell Island and Bonavista were the others. They were
underutilized in terms of their traditional role.
MR. GOVER: Explain yourself can you?
DR. WARREN: I have used the word underutilized
in the House and I have perhaps used the wrong term. They were underutilized in
terms of their traditional mandate, and I look at a former Minister of Career
Development, which was to offer trades programmes, and they had not been fully
utilized, St. Anthony for example, in that respect but they were utilized very
extensively for adult education programmes in the evening and community future
programmes. Bell Island is a booming campus at certain times. Certainly Baie
Verte is, but it is not through traditional mandate.
So, Mr. Gover, in response to severe questions
about the viability of these campuses we undertook this year to do a thorough
review of their mandate. Now we are very optimistic that they can become very
active adult learning centres, but with a new mandate, so that is in answer to
your first question. There are a lot of needs out there that can be met in the
colleges. On Bell Island, I do not know if I should use specific things about
what might happen on Bell Island, but one thing I have heard is that they are
examining the possibility of putting the community library in the campus and
also, the city council is using it for offices and so on.
The new mandate for these campuses that may not be
utilized in the manner in which they were traditionally anticipated, but I will
get past that because I want to get to your second thing, I am equally
interested in what you say about the new high school. This will be a new
development.
The Integrated Education Committee has allocated
funds, and this will be a pilot, to build a new school adjacent to the campus,
where we can share the facilities of that campus, and if there are a lot of
night programmes going on that is fine because it will not interfere with the
school's use they are examining.
Some suggested that instead of building a new high
school in Bonavista, the school board should take over the campus. There are
some problems with that I have been told by architects and by others. That is a
possibility they suggested that they examine, but I think the Integrated
Education Committee is attempting to put on that campus a high school which will
utilize fully the very extensive facilities that are in the college.
Sharing seems to be the word, interdenominational,
interinstitutional, I am very encouraged by that and I think it has real
potential in Bonavista to provide for the students of Bonavista, the adults,
many evening programmes and some traditional trades programmes for the high
school students and provide them with access to a broad range of programmes that
they would not otherwise have. I am very encouraged by that announcement and I
congratulate the Integrated Education Committee and the school board concerned
for their initiative and we are working with them of course on that.
MR. GOVER: Yes, Mr. Minister. Just to get back
to or, to take up on a point where you left off about interdenominational
sharing.
Having reviewed the budget estimates for this year
- you can correct me if I am wrong certainly - I see that the capital for new
school construction has remained at $27 million. I believe that $27 million has
been the figure in the budget since the new Government has taken office and is
up from $20 million from the year that the Conservatives left power, so there is
a significant increase in the level of capital for new school construction
around the Province. But given that increased amount and given the role of
interdenominational sharing, I wonder, could the Minister give us his views on
the need for new facilities in rural Newfoundland, how the current level of
funding can address those needs and how interdenominational sharing can
complement the increased amount in the budget?
DR. WARREN: I thank you for the question
because it gives me an opportunity to say something about sharing itself; I will
be very brief on sharing itself, I will get to the capital.
One of the most exciting things that I have seen
happening in the past few months in this Province is the willingness of boards
and even the desire of school boards to start looking at ways in which they can
make better use of the resources that they have to offer in an enhanced
educational programme. I have really been encouraged, it has been going on for
some time. Some of the former Ministers, the Vice-Chair and Mr. Hearn, saw it
develop in the earlier years, but in the past year, for a variety of reasons,
including the fiscal restraint, we see dozens of examples of where boards are
seriously looking at the possibility of sharing. In some areas there is some
controversy as we have seen in the press in the last few days. It may be not as
much as interdenominational sharing as intercommunity problems that exist. That
has been a tradition in this Province and that might contribute to the
controversies that have existed. But I think denominational sharing is an idea
whose time has come, and we are looking forward to the Royal Commission Report
to examine models for future sharing.
Having said that, in the area of capital, the
interdenominational sharing movement creates a special challenge for capital
costs, $27 million. We increased it in the first year we were in power from $20
million to $27 million and we kept it at $27 million even this year when there
were tough times keeping it at $27 million. But that is not enough money. We
will admit that the $20 million that was made available three years ago was not
and the $27 million is not enough. I can tell you that if the IEC and the CEC
and the Pentecostal council were to total their amounts of money, they would be
perhaps in the $150 million to $200 million of needs in the Province.
So if you were to look at the three councils
independently their long term needs might probably be four times or five times
the amount of money available. What they do, of course, is that $27 million
provides an opportunity to borrow. But the challenge now is to look at the needs
community by community, and if there is going to be sharing, that creates a
whole new environment for capital. I am pleased to report to you that we put
money in the Budget this year to develop a ten year capital needs plan. There
have been suggestions in the past that if we develop this plan there might be
new financial ways of financing a long-term plan. We have started discussions
with the Churches. I think our committee is chaired by Dr. Winter, and Gerry
Fallon is Co-Chair, and we have started discussions about a long-term plan for
capital in elementary and secondary schools.
The challenge is to look at it in the new context.
Really, I do not know how it is going to evolve because if you have two high
schools in a community now, do you renovate both or do you, in the process of in
the new context, can perhaps one high school serve the needs of all students.
And with declining enrolments we have excess space in some communities, so we
have a whole new set of conditions and I cannot tell you how long that committee
is going to be working, but they are off to an excellent start in trying to
provide for the Province a ten year plan for capital construction, and then, of
course, we will have to see if the Government can find a new way of funding it
instead of every year providing $20 million or $27 million. Maybe there is some
way, like we do in municipal government, where we can fund long-term capital
needs. I am giving you a long answer, Mr. Gover, but it is not a matter of just
totalling the needs of the three councils now because they control capital
funding. As you know the money is given to the councils. It is within the new
context of getting together to discuss areas where perhaps joint initiatives
might be the best way to go, and I am encouraged that the committee is working
and will present to Government, as soon as possible, a long term needs study.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I would
like to welcome to the Estimates Committee hearings the Member for St. Mary's -
The Capes, who is usually extremely punctual. I am very surprised, actually.
Mr. Harris.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Since I
asked the Minister of Social Services I might as well not let him off the hook
either. The Minister's office, in your estimates, has a salary vote for - this
is 1.1.01 - of $151,500. The detailed salary estimates have a total of $142,168
in terms of permanent employees. How is that difference of $10,000 accounted
for?
DR. WARREN: I would have to get some advice on
that. The $151,500 down to $143,000. That is the $8,000. And you know what the
$8,000 is used for. That is the car allowance.
MR. HARRIS: And that comes out of salary?
DR. WARREN: Well, I don't know if it comes out
of salary. It is other earnings. It is listed under other earnings on page 1 of
the budget in the Department of Education estimates. I see here $143,300, $200
under overtime, $8,000 for other earnings - I guess other income, is a better
way to describe it.
MR. HARRIS: Oh, I see. So that -
DR. WARREN: And that gives $151,000. It is paid
to me.
MR. HARRIS: I understand that. But it is
considered salary budget and not under transportation and communication.
DR. WARREN: No, it is other income. It is an
allowance in lieu of car.
MR. HARRIS: And taxable in your hands.
DR. WARREN: It is taxable, yes, I can assure
you it is taxable.
MR. HARRIS: I am sure it is taxable, yes. Okay.
Again, under the Minister's office there is listed in addition to yourself three
other salary units. Are there any other salary units in the Minister's office.
DR. WARREN: The answer is no, I am told.
MR. HARRIS: The Minister of Social Services was
very coy when I asked him a similar question but we did find another person
working in his office.
DR. WARREN: I have a secretary, a Departmental
secretary she is, as distinguished from a personal, political secretary. Mrs.
Ingerman is my (Inaudible) secretary and Mrs. Gulliver and my executive
assistant, Mr. Comeau. That's three people.
MR. HARRIS: I am just going by the detail now,
as this is all I have in front of me.
DR. WARREN: Yes. Three persons.
MR. HARRIS: So you have an executive assistant,
okay, fine. And then you have a secretary to the Minister, and a Departmental
secretary to the Minister.
DR. WARREN: A Departmental secretary to me. We
have two secretaries. A political secretary, and I guess a Minister may have two
political secretaries. Am I right on that? In my case Mrs. Ingerman is the
Departmental secretary to the Minister.
AN HON. MEMBER: That was the practice.
DR. WARREN: So each of us has two secretaries
and an administrative assistant. But one of course is a political secretary who
works in the district, works -
MR. HARRIS: You are almost as confusing as the
Minister of Social Services. Let's go down the list here now. We have Minister.
Well, we have you looked after. Okay.
DR. WARREN: The Minister, the executive
assistant -
MR. HARRIS: An executive assistant. Now that is
your political assistant, right?
DR. WARREN: Mr. Comeau, yes.
MR. HARRIS: And there is a secretary to the
Minister.
DR. WARREN: The secretary to the Minister is
the political secretary.
MR. HARRIS: Yes.
DR. WARREN: And then the Departmental secretary
to the Minister.
MR. HARRIS: Right. And that is it. You do not
have a third secretary that -
DR. WARREN: No, no.
MR. HARRIS: No, okay. Because I think Mr.
Efford does, and he was calling that his political secretary.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will have another opportunity,
Mr. Harris, to review Social Services.
DR. WARREN: Is it clear now, Mr. Harris,
because I probably confused it by talking about the difference between the two
secretaries. One is a departmental secretary, who has been with the Department
for some time and works for the Minister and then the political secretary who
arrived with me and is working in the district -
MR. HARRIS: And that is the person who is
called secretary to the Minister here?
DR. WARREN: Yes.
MR. HARRIS: Then there is no other secretary in
addition to that?
DR. WARREN: No.
MR. HARRIS: Okay. If we can move to the
Literacy Policy Services on page 165, I see a $200,000 reduction from the actual
expenditure in 1990-1991. How can the Department justify that kind of decrease
in our Province when there is so much emphasis being placed on the needs here,
is there something I am missing here?
DR. WARREN: Yes, there is something you are
missing. Last year was the International Literacy Year and the Government
allocated a special one year fund for events last year. We did not eliminate the
whole $500,000; it is my understanding that we kept an extra $100,000 for this
year, it is not a lot of money for literacy.
Literacy is done in the colleges and in many other
ways, but this was the departmental literacy budget, this is not all that is
spent on literacy, this is what the Department has as a literacy office, but
last year we added an extra $500,000 for special events to help celebrate
International Literacy Year and this was not made available of course in
1991-1992.
MR. HARRIS: Well, there appears to be an
additional-
DR. WARREN: $100,000.
MR. HARRIS: -$100,000 over last year's budget-
DR. WARREN: Yes, we added an extra $100,000
this year to do a few extra things. In fact we have a person who came in to work
with us last year on special events in our office; we have a very small literacy
office in the Department itself, because we have tried to get literacy
programmes done through the colleges and through all the other agencies, but we
do have a policy office.
We have one person who is an adviser on literacy
policy and last year we brought in a second person and that person is staying on
for a period of one year to complete the activities that were initiated during
International Literacy Year, so we do have an extra $100,000 there.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you. The grants and subsidies
of $350,000, how many different agencies or groups does this go to, is that one
or two groups or is that spread out?
DR. WARREN: No. We receive proposals and they
are evaluated and I would think, fifteen to twenty groups receive funding. I
know that some of the centres receive funding and by the way, we work closely
with the Federal Government in this whole area of literacy so our money is used
to match dollars from the Federal Secretary of State, so I would think fifteen
to twenty groups would receive grants from that amount, at least that; it is not
just one or two groups, but our primary focus again in literacy, is through the
colleges.
MR. HARRIS: The colleges themselves initiate
adult education programmes aimed at illiteracy (inaudible)?
DR. WARREN: A, B programmes, yes, all kinds of
programmes, community future programmes, all kinds of adult programmes. Let us
take Eastern Community College with Dr. Frank Marsh as the President; they are
doing a lot of work in the schools with all kinds of short term programmes.
MR. HARRIS: How about extension programmes?
Would these be purchased services from community futures groups?
DR. WARREN: Pardon me?
MR. HARRIS: Community futures, you mentioned.
Is this a -?
DR. WARREN: Yes. They are using our facilities.
Cyril, would you like to comment on (Inaudible)?
MR. HARRIS: Are they actually buying literacy
services with their money?
DR. WARREN: They are buying -
MR. HARRIS: Literacy services.
DR. WARREN: - literacy programmes. And I might
say that the most recent controversy - and I do not want to raise controversial
issues necessarily throughout the night - is whether private colleges should get
into literacy programmes. They feel they should also offer adult basic education
programmes. And you have heard in the press recently their request that they be
authorised to offer these. But right at the present time the programmes are
offered through the public institutions, (Inaudible) programmes.
MR. HARRIS: Page 167, the DECs, receive grants
and subsidies of $1 million. What is that principally used for?
DR. WARREN: That is to fund a number of staff.
They have an office. Actually the three denominational education councils share
a common facility with respect to facilities.
MR. HARRIS: Is this because you cut their
budget or something? To make them share?
DR. WARREN: No. I smile when I say that because
they do share at the top and we are having this controversy about sharing
throughout the Province. But you have the Roman Catholic Council, the Integrated
Council, and the Pentecostal Council with a common facility. They are over on
Crosbie Road. And they have a number of staff, they have an executive director,
each of the three denominations, and they have some other staff. I do not know
how many staff. I probably could get it for you. About ten. So that $1 million
goes for staff, facilities and travel, because the Denominational Education
Councils have certain functions specified in the legislation and they work with
school boards. So it is used for that. And it has remained $1 million for a
period of time.
MR. HARRIS: That is ten staff for all three, is
it? Ten staff altogether, is that what you are saying?
DR. WARREN: Yes. A total of ten staff.
MR. HARRIS: I notice that there is a
significant increase in the next item on page 167, 2.1.06.04. An increase of
nearly $1 million in supplies. Is there an explanation for this? Price of
pencils gone up?
DR. WARREN: Yes. I am pleased to say that we
lost $1 million last year and that is why the figure was down a bit, and we got
it back this year, for supplies and for new books and all of these things. I
think last year what we did was use the previous year's budget to buy things,
and the total amount was reduced by $1 million, but we recovered that amount for
this year, because we want to ensure that we increase the supplies and materials
in our schools.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr.
Power.
MR. POWER: Thank you, Chairperson. I am going
to ask the Minister a question that is not related to post-secondary, not
related to detail. I get the feeling that the Minister and the Government would
like to do away with the denominational educational system. I for one - not my
caucus, I do not speak for them, at least not yet. Just a little hint to my
Chairperson (Inaudible) keeps this thing alive.
DR. WARREN: I like that. There might be some
disagreement in the room because of that.
MR. POWER: But I for one have believed for a
fair bit of time, and certainly am reasonably convinced, that the denominational
education system is wasteful, unnecessary, and it does not do anything to
improve in any substantive way the educational system in Newfoundland. We spend
this year about $762 million. We are still substantially below Canadian averages
in an awful lot of areas and I think it is time for this Government - upfront,
directly, through the front door - to do away with the denominational system.
But I think you are going to do it - I think you want to do it - in a slow,
dragged out, fiscal restraint, rationalization restructuring process. I think
that is only hurtful to the students, teachers and people who are involved
today. I would just like to get the Minister to show some real leadership and do
for education in times of restraint, when we do not really have enough money to
do all we would like to do, to let's make sure at least we use the money we have
as wisely as possible.
And I think that is one place to start. And I think
the Minister wants to do it, I think the Government wants to do it, but I do not
really think you have the guts to do it. Now tell me why not. Or am I
misinterpreting Government?
DR. WARREN: That is quite a statement. I might
say that is the firmest statement I have seen made by any political person in
this Province in the last few years. I think it is the clearest statement of
personal position that I have seen or heard made by an elected official. People
who get out of politics sometimes state their positions quite clearly. But that
is a very clear statement of your position.
The Government's position is a little different
from that. The Government's position is that the system is deeply entrenched in
the culture and the Constitution of this Province. In the culture because it has
served the Province in difficult times, some would say reasonably well. But for
whatever reason it is deeply entrenched in the culture of the Province. It is a
very sensitive issue and many people feel very strongly about it, so it is
deeply entrenched in the culture.
But perhaps equally important, the system itself is
entrenched in the Constitution, as you know as well as I do. It has its roots
deep in the laws of this land, protected by Term 17 of the Terms of Union of
Newfoundland with Canada. Confirmed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Confirmed in an amendment that the former administration brought in to extend to
the Pentecostal assemblies the same rights that the other denominations had. So
the system is deeply entrenched in the Constitution of the country.
The question today is not: do we keep or do we
abolish the denominational system? Our position - and I guess as Minister, I
have been stating this position - the question today is: how can we change the
system so that it can better meet the needs for better education, with declining
enrolments, where you have a number of small schools, and with the fiscal
restraint. So the question is not do we keep or abolish. The question that I
keep putting to the public of this Province - and we have asked the Royal
Commission to examine - is how can we rationalize the system, how can we change
the system, to better meet the current needs?
No, Mr. Power, the Government's position is not
that the system should be abolished. It should be changed, streamlined. We are
waiting for the Royal Commission to give us the proposals. But that is the
Government's position. Sharing can perhaps provide for the system the benefits
of cooperation and also the benefits of having a system that focuses on values
and morals and some of the issues that many in society believe are important in
education today. Whether or not this is something that reflects a lack of
courage on the part of the Government or not I leave others to judge. We think
we are moving in the right direction and we are actively going to promote the
whole interdenominational sharing thing. We started it in St. Fintan's and
McKay's. On the West Coast was our first example of where two denominations
wanted to build separate schools. We worked closely with the school boards and
with the denominational councils and as a result of our discussions one school
system emerged with the elementary school offering education for everybody,
operated by one denomination, and the high school operated by another
denomination offering education for everybody. That is the kind of joint service
and sharing. At the school board level there is all kinds of sharing. We think
it is possible at the district level, at the school level and that is the
initiative. I am taking a long time to answer your question because it is a very
important question and I feel I should explain the Government's position.
We do not know precisely what models are most
appropriate and that is why we established the Royal Commission to recommend for
us the kinds of changes that will take us into the 21st century but it is a very
important issue, Mr. Power, and I appreciate your own position.
MR. POWER: One very brief comment: my idea of a
nondenominational system does not mean you cannot have morality and values
taught in a school system.
DR. WARREN: I understand that.
MR. POWER: I am sure the Minister in any other
jurisdiction in Canada I suspect -
DR. WARREN: You are talking about one system.
MR. POWER: I think morality and values can be
taught just as well in Saskatchewan that is nondenominational as it can in
Newfoundland with the denominational system, there is a process to do it, but it
does not have to be organized along religious lines.
Could the Minister tell me what would happen if a
group of parents or teachers were to open a public school non-affiliated with
religion? Would it be funded on a pupil-teacher ratio the same as the
denominational schools?
DR. WARREN: I might preface my answer to that
question with a comment. As a Minister I have expressed concern on a number of
occasions for the non-adherents, whether they be non-Christian or non-religious.
We have in this Province the only strictly denominational system in the country.
We do not have schools for others. In Ontario the separate school system
provides education for the Roman Catholics and the public for others. In
Saskatchewan you have a dual system. We in this Province have the most
denominational system in the country and we do not have schools for others.
Traditionally, there have been no provisions for funding other schools. You have
to get authority from the Department to open a school and I guess we would have
to approve the curriculum and the teachers and so on. My own view is: let us
take a particular group, non-adherents and they made that proposal. I would
encourage the Government to consider any application for funding because at the
present time they attend denominational schools but their system is not
entrenched in our legal system. I do not know if the Government would ultimately
fund the school. I think the Government might look at whether there are other
schools available, would this be a duplication or triplication, because we are
trying to discourage further proliferation of schools, so we would look at it in
that context. If they were non-adherents, however, I would encourage the
Government to look at the possibility of providing funding for them. People can
change their religion at any time, and declare their position as has happened in
the Province many times. The freedom of religion is very important in this
country. But I would say that we would look at very carefully whether that
school would result in further fragmentation, whether it would have the numbers
to offer a broad programme. All of that would be looked at before we made a
decision on whether we would fund it.
It is an interesting question.
MR. CHAIRMAN: A very brave question with a very
brave statement, I guess, and certainly an equally interesting answer.
Mr. Oldford.
MR. OLDFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am in
what I feel is an awkward situation here. I have all my former political bosses
around me and... the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes was my boss at one time.
DR. WARREN: Oh no!
MR. OLDFORD: Humber East, Ferryland district.
Of course, even Dr. Warren. So I do not know if I should ask him about some
things that did not happen when I was in the Department, or if I should change
it now and go the other route. Should I put him on the spot? Ask him about
reclassifications and things like this? But really, I would not want to get into
that now.
There is one thing I wanted to ask the Minister and
it pertains to the White Paper and this affects my district to a great degree.
Are the changes in the structure now of these two community colleges, on the
fast track? And if so, when do you feel that it will be finalized with the move
of the headquarters to Clarenville? I have a couple of other things. Maybe you
could make notes and I will go through those.
Last night we did a review of the Social Services
estimates. One of the things that we found there was a change in emphasis from
community development projects to more vocational training for social assistance
recipients. I would like to know if you anticipate that the $3.5 million that
they are going to spend will have any affect on, say, a campus like the
Bonavista campus, or the Bell Island campus? Are there going to be discussions
between the Departments of Education and Social Services with a view to
accessing some of these finds?
Another point is: I have been looking through the
Budget and I found a couple of areas where - I am sort of interested in
scholarships - and 2.1.07 I think refers to bursaries and 3.4.02 refers to
scholarships. I am wondering if the electoral scholarships are included in that,
and for what amount? I have a page of these (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Page 179, 3.4.02.
MR. OLDFORD: 2.5.01, Student Support Services,
I have a question about that too.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Perhaps if the Minister might
deal with -
MR. OLDFORD: Okay. You can deal with those and
then I will find those in my....
DR. WARREN: Two or three things, and then I
will ask you to repeat some of the questions. But I will indicate that the White
Paper's implementation is moving along quite well. We did move it up. I
indicated recently that we did move it up because of the fiscal position in the
Province this year. And we just announced last week the interim boards that
would put the new structure in place. We have had an implementation committee,
chaired by Mr. McCormick, and with representatives from a number of Government
Departments working with the colleges to facilitate the implementation.
I might say that what we are doing - and I do not
want to look at any former Ministers here - is fine-tuning the system. I think
Mr. Power realized perhaps that in his period, and Mr. Matthews, who was the
former Minister before I entered the position, they were concerned about some of
the anomalies in the system. And what we have done is try to fine-tune it. It
looks like a rather significant restructuring and undoubtedly some will see it
that way. But I think it is a development of the system, building on the past
rather than a major reform. And we are moving it along quite well, and if you
have any additional questions about timing we are hoping to have new boards in
place this fall. We have interim boards now in place. We have to make some other
decisions in the next few weeks. But it is moving along quite well.
On the social service recipients, I must say I have
not been briefed on that, and I will have to get some information. One thing
that has interested me since I became Minister of Education is the necessity for
various Departments to work more closely than they have in the past, with no
reflection on people here. Health, Social Services and Education - some problems
are problems that require deals or agreements between various Government
Departments. And this is the one that you mentioned. With Social Services, I am
sure our Department people have been involved, but I have not been briefed on
the extent to which what Mr. Efford is planning will impact on the colleges.
Perhaps, is there some - anything else you would
like to add, Mr. McCormick?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: That is the answer. We have a
liaison set up with this Department under the SARs programmes, whatever that is.
Social Assistance Recipients programme, and the others. So we do have a liaison
with Mr. Efford. I think that kind of liaison with other Departments, among
Departments of Government, is essential in the future.
Scholarships: Scholarships are in three or four
different places in the estimates. The K to XII are centenary, electoral. Let me
just say I am pleased to say that last year we changed the scholarship system
very significantly. We increased the amounts of money for the first time in
twenty years or more, and we tripled the number of electoral scholarships. I
guess I would be less than honest if I did not say that I hope in the not too
distant future we can add to the amounts of money and increase them even beyond
$1,000. These are in what subhead? All of these, and the Jubilee, and the
Pearson, there is about $245,000 for these.
Then you have another
section there where you
provide bursaries for students who live away from home. That may be one of the
other sections.
MR. OLDFORD: Okay. Could I have the subhead
number?
DR. WARREN: 2.1.07 is the one where students
leave home and get grants to attend high schools in bigger communities because
they cannot get the programme in their schools.
MR. POWER: I used to get one of them.
DR. WARREN: You got one of those?
MR. POWER: In 1965 (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: I did not get one - I needed it.
And then there are the post-secondary scholarships which are... what number is
post-secondary? The post-secondary is in 133.4.02. These are the post-secondary
scholarships, $133,800. Dr Barnes, Dr. Blackhall, junior senior Jubilee,
sciences, these are all post-secondary, adult education, and then on top of that
we have scholarships under the Canada Offshore Development Funds. I am taking a
period, Mr. Oldford, to focus on that. We have all kinds of scholarships which I
do not think the public know of or are advised of in science and other areas
through the Atlantic Accord Career Development Awards. Sixteen hundred and sixty
from April '86 to May '91 totalling $4.5 million. We have all kinds of awards at
the university level, at the college level in the institutes mostly for science
and technology, offshore related engineering business and so on.
So you are right, this scholarship money is spread
throughout the whole estimates. Perhaps in another year I should try to bring
them together to focus on excellence because scholarships are - we think we have
to reward people who do extremely well. That is a long answer to your question,
Doug, but if you have an addition question that I did not answer, I will try to.
MR. OLDFORD: I have a couple more, but maybe
your officials can answer those for me. 2.5.01 says -
DR. WARREN: By the way, Mr. Oldford was a good
employee. I am sure we all agree on that.
MR. OLDFORD: I did not spend much time in the
Department the last two years.
MR. POWER: He obviously did not do political
science.
DR. WARREN: That was before he asked these
nasty questions, Charlie.
MR. OLDFORD: Yes, I received good training
under Mr. Power here.
Okay, 2.5.01 was the other one: Student Support
Services. In the revised budget for 1990 - 1991 there is a $140,000 contribution
from the Federal Government but yet there is nothing in this year's estimates. I
wonder why that is.
DR. WARREN: I am told that amount was for
student retention programmes from the Federal Government last year, and we are
now finalizing the projects for next year. The amount of money will be added.
The Stay in School Campaign, and I might say that Stay in School Campaign has
been very successful, that and other initiatives including the expanded high
school programme. We have many more students staying, and that was the Federal
money I am told.
MR. OLDFORD: Okay, I have one more point and
that is 3.4.03: Tuitions and Allowances.
DR. WARREN: I would like to say that is the
student aid and grants.
MR. OLDFORD: What I meant is the
Federal/Provincial formula again, and it seems as if you put $1.4 million extra.
DR. WARREN: Well, that could go higher than
that, Mr. Oldford.
MR. OLDFORD: But the Federal contribution did
not change very much and I was wondering is there a set formula for that?
DR. WARREN: No, I do not think so. I do not
know what these Federal amounts are. That is the contribution to the
administration of the fund. These are our dollars, and you might know that last
year it was budgeted at $17.4 million but the actual expenditure was $19.4
million because you cannot determine the amount of student aid, it is an open
ended programme. This year we have budgeted $20.7 million because we expect more
people availing of that, but the amount could easily be as high an increase as
$2 million like last year. But that amount of Federal money is for contribution
from the Federal Government to help the administration of the programme.
MR. OLDFORD: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Oldford. Mr.
Hearn.
MR. HEARN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
have a few questions for the Minister that he should be able to answer within a
couple of hours.
First of all I was looking at a few figures on
teachers salaries. I notice that the teacher salary vote is up about $10 million
this year, does this reflect the freeze or will the freeze have any variance on
the amount budgeted?
DR. WARREN: It reflects the freeze, Mr. Hearn.
MR. HEARN: Okay, so that is pretty accurate.
DR. WARREN: Yes. It would have been much higher
had we not had the salary freeze.
MR. HEARN: Okay. On Sub-head 1302, page 165.
Communications and Publications; salary vote is much the same as last year, just
a small increase. I understand just recently a number of people have been let go
from that section, so does that change the figure?
DR. WARREN: Your colleague asked that question
earlier and I indicated yes, it does.
MR. HEARN: It did. How many more similar
figures are changed because of people being laid off?
DR. WARREN: That was the result of the - and I
will repeat, a couple of things that I said earlier; that was as a result of the
fact that we were trying to balance the total global budget that we have with
our deeds and as I said, the decisions were made, could have been announced two
or three weeks ago, but they were announced last week. We do not anticipate any
significant reduction in the full time staff, there may be some people coming
and going but that reduces the number in the Department to about 302 I think the
figure was, and we figured that would be the complement for the year; no
additional reductions. We now feel we have made the adjustments that will permit
us to live within the global budget that we have as a Department.
MR. HEARN: The people who leave the Department,
does that mean you are not going to replace them?
DR. WARREN: No. There will be people leaving
and there will be replacements for people and it may be that the people leaving
however, may not be replaced themselves. I explained earlier that there may be
people who leave and we fear another priority is higher and therefore we will
re-allocate the work of that person who leaves and perhaps employ somebody else
in a higher priority. I guess the bottom line is that we are given a budget and
last year, thanks to my associates here, I want to pay tribute to them, we lived
within the budget and it is our intention to live within the budget this year;
there may be some who will go and we will replace them with some other people we
think are higher priority.
MR. HEARN: The Minister is unlike many of his
colleagues in that respect. Now how many positions have been lost in the
Minister's Department, in total?
DR. WARREN: Yes, I will repeat these and I hope
I get precisely the same figures that I had earlier. I do not want to appear to
be saying this is good, because any position losses for the individual's concern
is unfortunate.
We had a lot of vacant positions last year and that
is why we could live within our budget and we eliminated about thirty vacant
positions and we laid off about thirteen persons, and that includes the six who
were laid off, so we had a relatively small lay off of actual persons, but I do
not want to deny that we eliminated a lot of vacant positions that were not
filled during the year.
MR. HEARN: How many of these were in the
primary, elementary, secondary section?
DR. WARREN: We can count them up and let you
know.
MR. HEARN: About forty-three?
DR. WARREN: Of the eleven or of the-?
MR. HEARN: Well of both, of the forty-three,
the total.
DR. WARREN: Well thirteen actual persons, but
it was widely distributed; some of the vacant positions were at the school for
the deaf and in others as well there were a number there; we will count up the
number of vacant positions and let you know.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, if any of the
questions under advisement that (inaudible)-
DR. WARREN: We will take that under advisement
Mr. Hearn.
MR. HEARN: You will have to table the
information at a later date, I can appreciate that.
DR. WARREN: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We would incorporate them all;
you could incorporate them all regardless of (inaudible).
DR. WARREN: Sure, we will do that, we will
submit them to you; Is someone taking notes of this? Yes. Okay.
MR. HEARN: For the records, the Minister
mentioned closer liason with the other Departments. I am not sure if the
Minister is aware or not, but the Minister has the disadvantage I suppose or
advantage, whichever way you want to term it, of having both departments, but in
the primary, elementary and secondary
section there were always
interdepartmental committees set up who worked very closely together - I am
thinking about such things as the hospital schools, teacher assistance program
where we worked very closely with social services and so on. These committees
worked very closely together in the past. I do not think it is fair to say the
departments did not work closely together because they did.
The Minister mentioned how he interfered out in
McKay's and St. Fintan's area to basically bring them into line. I am not saying
it is wrong. I am just saying what he said. The Minister has been known for not
interfering or saying that he should not interfere or that he will not
interfere. I can see the position he is in
whereas certain boards and what have
you have certain autonomy, but I believe in the old philosophy also or the old
saying `who pays the piper calls the tune', I think there has to be a certain
amount of accountability. There comes a time when you do not go in and tell
people what to do, you do not have the authority to do it, but you can interfere
to a point and sometimes you have to interfere. I am not saying that is wrong.
But you did basically say earlier that you interfered in McKay's and St.
Fintan's. I am wondering why you would not interfere in some other areas, for
instance one area that certainly comes to mind is the Southern Shore area where
they are having a lot of problems, where from my own personal point of view they
have made a real mess of the attempts to realign up there. I think somebody more
objective than the individuals involved locally should step in. I think the
Department should get involved in something like that to show some direction and
leadership because there is a tremendous amount of waste and poor decisions are
being made all over the place. I do not know how long they can go on.
DR. WARREN: I like the substitute word that you
used that I interfered. I indicated that we became involved in discussions with
the demoninations. Mr. Hearn writes well and sometimes he uses words well in his
songs, but this is not an appropriate term to use to paraphrase what I said. I
will not go back over that, he and I understand each other.
He raises a very important question for any
Minister of Education. It is inevitable that in a shrinking system with school
closures on the horizon, that controversies will develop because often
communities are threatened when schools are closed. We have a rapidly declining
student population. We are down to 127,000, we were at 162,000 twenty years ago,
and now we are going to go down to 100,000 at the turn of the century, this is
our projection. So, we are going to have many other communities where very small
schools exist and the possibility of sharing, consolidating, or amalgamating or
whatever term you want to use is going to be put forth and proposed. Certainly,
the pressure is going to be on Ministers to intervene rather than interfere.
I guess, I would say to you Sir that the law and
tradition has it that school boards make decisions about school closing, about
school restructuring, and we intervene only when some real impasse develops. We
do offer our services in a consultative way. We have people in the Department,
you know the persons perhaps I talk about, who have a wide knowledge of the
situation and sometimes they do provide information. I support this. I support
the practice and the legal position that school boards have the authority to
make the decisions with respect to school restructuring and they should make
these, they know the local situation and if you do not trust the school boards
to make the right decisions then you should change the law. The law at the
present time gives school boards that right. Maybe the Department could get
involved in discussions that would try to facilitate a compromise if - I know
one situation right now in the Province where there is a difficult situation and
our people have been meeting and offering their help in trying to resolve it -
now if that is what you mean by involvement I think that is appropriate. Really,
the final decisions have to be made at the local level with our present legal
situation. They elect members to the board. Let me take the board that you are
talking about -
MR. HEARN: The unfortunate thing about that is
what causes the real problems, and I am saying this quite objectively from
experience within and outside, one of the real problems caused is -it is
changing a little bit because people are becoming aware of the power of school
boards and when an incident occurs then the next school board election you get a
lot of people keyed up and eventually in some areas you are getting very good
boards. St. John's perhaps is an example over the last few years where you are
seeing real battles for school board positions, which is good. But you still
have a tremendous number of areas in the Province where during school board
elections there is very little attention being paid, then you have the appointed
personnel on the board - many of whom are there for a short-time with no real
attachment or in some cases no real knowledge of the areas - they in turn ask
somebody who is going to go along with their wishes maybe to volunteer to go on
the board and board meetings have become nothing but a process of nodding heads
at the recommendations, in many cases, of superintendents. There are areas where
superintendents actually run the total show. I have attended meetings where I
thought the superintendent was the chairman and the only person around, who just
dominated everything, and everybody else said yes. If he is right it is great,
but if he is not or she is not, it is a real problem. I can quote examples, some
of which I have been involved with from both sides of the coin, poor decisions
were made until people got involved themselves and in some cases changed the
membership on the board or in some cases lobbied to the point where people had
to listen and some others had to be put in their places. But we do have systems
whereby the superintendent or strong individuals on the board just dominate,
whatever they want goes. That is unfortunate.
DR. WARREN: I am not trying to be political
here. I have seen a significant change in school board members in the Province.
I have seen, for a variety of reasons, school board members, perhaps because
they were involved in a protest at one point in time, I found school boards are
much more active now. Let us take school closing which causes the most
controversy. We have a set of guidelines for school closing. The board has to
consider a request, it has to announce it, it has to receive information and
briefs, there are guidelines for process -
MR. HEARN: Just let me interrupt for one
second.
DR. WARREN: It is yours.
MR. HEARN: No, no, I was going to say we
brought them in. But I caught a board last year trying to circumvent them. Now I
happened to be at the meeting where they were going to close the school without
notice. Some of them did not even know they existed.
DR. WARREN: Well, there have been occasions
when I had to remind the board we have these guidelines, which you were
responsible for, and I think they are an excellent set of guidelines. They do
provide for public input. Now I think in the last few years our school boards
have acquired a great deal of sophistication when it comes to running it. Now
you might still find examples where the superintendent is a very strong person.
You will find examples where the Chairman or Chairperson of the school board is
a very strong person or you have a person on the board appointed, very strong
and does dominate. Well we know governments in Canada where you do have very
strong people who direct. But I believe we have moved a long way to making our
boards more representative of the people, now not enough, but perhaps we will do
a great service if we did more to encourage more parental involvement in this
Province and more public involvement.
Perhaps, Mr. Hearn, we should look at school
councils much more actively as a training ground, putting in place in this
Province school councils at the school level in a much more formal way so that
would give people an opportunity to get involved at the school level and then
perhaps at the school board level. But I found a tremendous change in school
board members. Many of the school boards are very active. They hold open
meetings, and I think that they are in the best position to make decisions about
school organization, and the law says they shall organize the means of
elementary and secondary education. And as a Minister, I guess, if I received a
formal request for involvement then I would consider it and see if there is some
way we can provide help to help the local people resolve the issue rather than
going in and making the decision for them. I think the local board which is a
corporation - school boards are corporations, they are legal persons and they
have duties, and I think they have the authority to make the decision. The
department is there to help, where possible, and if I receive a formal request -
and I gather I am going to get one tomorrow - then we will look at ways in which
we can help the boards resolve the problems they have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr.
Reid.
MR. REID: Yes, I have a few questions on the
Budget, but I want to continue on this line of thought because I know exactly
where Mr. Hearn is coming from, and I think, Mr. Minister, in my particular
situation as it relates to St. Clare's High School in Carbonear. There has been
study on top of study done in the Carbonear area and there have been assessments
done. Upwards of 90-odd per cent of the people in the community agree with
sharing with the integrated system, and the school board in that particular area
just refuses to even recognize the fact that the population wishes to do that.
We do not have any control over that school board. We have our two
representatives on it that are representative of the group of citizens who want
to do the sharing, but then, of course, the majority of the board comes from
outside of the Carbonear area and we have a superintendent who is a pretty
influential character as, I suppose, Mr. Hearn was referring to and you were
referring to. I think we could take it a step further. I am hoping that when the
new Education Act comes out this year that there are going to be steps towards
making some of the positions on the school boards electable rather than
appointable as a lot of them are now, and I think that we talked about that some
time ago.
The other problem I have with it is that, I believe
in what Mr. Power basically said, and as long as school boards, whether
integrated or Roman Catholic, have that authority to be able to say to the
populace that they represent, that we do it our way and you do not have a say in
it, I think it is going to take a much longer time for this integration process
to evolve and I do not know how you feel about that. Well, I do know how you
feel about it because we have discussed it on a number of occasions, but it is
difficult for me as a politician, and I am sure for you as Minister to have to
deal with these questions on a day to day basis, because as you said, whatever
was happening out there in Newfoundland in the past couple of years or so, it
seems to be a mushrooming effect, not only in the busing situation that we have
now and some problems there which will iron itself out I am sure, but within the
whole idea of integration and shared services. I just want you to make a quick
comment on that and then I am going to get back to some of the other questions.
DR. WARREN: I think parents and the public
generally are acquiring much more power in education in this Province and the
Schools Act, hopefully will enhance that. For example, parents are now involved
in making decisions about placements of their children.
MS. VERGE: Oh?
DR. WARREN: Well, I know lots of schools where
parents are consulted as part of teams who make decisions on how their students
are educated and the new programmes; it is happening and we are hoping to put it
into legislation, by the way.
The former Administration did not, and I do not
want to react to the Vice-Chair person's remark or response, but we hope to put
in legislation the requirement that parents be involved and that parents can
appeal decisions about their children's placement-
MS. VERGE: Some parents have appealed.
DR. WARREN: -but I find increasingly that-
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
DR. WARREN: - and I think Dr. Turpin-Downey
would say that we have teams of people who work together, schools and parents,
to determine what is the best kind of education for children; not in every
community in every school, but I do not underestimate school boards or parents,
we are moving in the right direction. Where some school boards might dictate to
parents, I think parents make their views known now; they contact the media and
sometimes you do not agree with their position, but I think their position is
going to become clear in the future, and as the Provincial Government has to
listen to the public, I think school boards are going to be listening more; more
parents are going to be involved at the school level, more parents are going to
vote, more public members are going to run, and if we have total school board
elections, I think that will encourage more to run and that is a proposal in the
Schools Act, 100 per cent elections.
There is some opposition to that by the way; I was
a little surprised at the opposition we have had to 100 per cent election, but
twenty-five years ago, another Commission of Inquiry recommended a third
election; the Vice-Chair here, I think was the Minister of Education when they
moved to two-thirds, and I am hoping now to complete the cycle to move to 100
per cent school board elections and I think that will give more people the sense
of having some power, you know that they can influence things.
I think 100 per cent elections will enable parents
to feel that they have more support; maybe the Vice-Chair did not go over to
two-thirds but I think she did; so that is a general comment on that.
MR. REID: I want to get off that just for a
second-
DR. WARREN: You would like to ask a question.
MR. REID: Mr. Minister, it has been two years
now, and I have been dying to ask this question and I am honoured to have the
opportunity to sit on the same committee with the last Minister of Career
Development, Mr. Power. I do not know if anyone has asked this question yet, but
I have been sitting here for two years and I want to ask the question I am going
to ask you right now.
For some years we had a Department of Education in
Newfoundland and was the Department of Education and then some years of late we
changed the Department of Education when we divided it into Department of Career
Development and Department of Education.
When you came in two years ago, you changed it or
somebody changed it, whether the Premier or whomever it was and did away with
the Department of Career Development. You have had two years as the Minister of
Education, do you actually see a need of a second department, diversifying or
breaking up your department into a career development department? If you do,
then I am sure you will want to make comments on it. If you stay firm with the
idea of the Department of Education, tell me what has happened to all the money
that was in the Department of Career Development's budget over the years that it
was there and has been gone for the last two years. I am here looking at the
Minister's expenses for example for the Department of Education and the
Department of Career Development for the past ten years. It is surprising to see
the amounts of money that has been spent over the years by two separate
Ministers as compared to one Minister in the last two years. Would you like to
make a comment on that?
DR. WARREN: I will try not to be political. Let
me give my normally conciliatory reasonable answer to that question. Perhaps
there were some advantages to having a separate department for a period of time.
I think when you want to focus on a particular need there may be some reason to
have a separate department. We wanted to focus on career development - he is not
listening - I am giving you the answer. You have been asking the question for
two years and waiting to ask the question. I am going to repeat now what I said,
as the Premier says.
MR. REID: I am sorry (inaudible).
DR. WARREN: Okay, blame it on your colleagues.
I think, Mr. Reid, at times when you need to focus
on a special need there would be arguments for having a special department or a
special division and perhaps four or five years ago there were some advantages
in pulling out the career development and giving it a special Minister with a
special mandate, someone who is new - well, I had better not go beyond that. I
think there are some advantages to what the Government did some years ago, but
my own view is that in a Province like this there should be one Department of
Education because education now takes you from the cradle to the grave, I could
use other terms, and I think it is important that the systems be integrated. It
can be done with two departments but I think there are advantages in having one
Department of Education. It is a big department. I do not criticise the former
administration for having two departments. I think it helped to focus on career
development and the deputy here and others who were working with career
development, I think, had an opportunity to promote the special needs for a
period of time. Now, I favour one department and I think you will find, Mr.
Reid, the trend across Canada now is to move back to one department. It has
happened in two provinces recently and I gather it is contemplated in another at
the present time. I think you will find that the number of separate ministries
in provinces such as this with relatively small populations will decline.
Saskatchewan, I think, may have two departments with one Minister -
Department Official: No (inaudible).
DR. WARREN: No, just one. Alberta still has
two. British Columbia is moving towards one, they have two. Manitoba has one.
Ontario has a number, three. I think in Nova Scotia they just moved to one. So,
there are a couple of provinces that have moved. I will not criticize the former
administration for having two.
Now as to the money, I thought I was spending a lot
of money because I am the first Minister to visit on the average a school a week
in Newfoundland.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: I knew that was going to happen. I
got the expenses too because I heard someone ask this question yesterday. There
were two departments and the amounts of money were more than double what the
Minister is using for transportation and communication.
I think the figure that I got for last year and
this year is about $27,000, but I gather there were two Ministers and two
separate offices so I will not comment on that, other than my travel has been
extensive, but it has been all over this Province. Only two trips were outside
of the Province. I tabled the information yesterday. I have taken my political
staff a few times and some from the other department, but I think, Mr. Reid,
these were two separate departments, and with two separate departments you would
automatically spend more on communication and transportation. My figures are
low, I will say that the figures are relatively low with all the travel I do.
That is all I am going to say, Charlie.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I move now
that we adjourn for ten minutes or so for a break, Mr. Chairman, if you do not I
am having my smoke anyway so it is up to yourself.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CHAIRMAN: I will take the suggestion from
the hon. Member for Carbonear and we will adjourn until quarter of nine. I would
like to ask the Committee to consider the fact that - and I mentioned it to the
Minister earlier - that we would stay on a few extra moments, as we would like
to get the Estimates of Education through this evening if at all possible. So if
we are here until midnight or one o'clock in the morning it really does not
matter, we will continue.
Recess
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
Would you like to say something, Mr. Minister?
DR. WARREN: Yes, during the break we did a
calculation of a question asked by Mr. Hearn. Seventeen of the forty-odd
positions were in elementary and secondary education I have been told by my
officials.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: How many of the thirteen layoffs? We
will get that for you shortly.
AN HON. MEMBER: Of people?
DR. WARREN: People, yes.
None of them, they say, were in Kindergarten to
twelve. The six this week were in communications and information that covered
the whole department, and a number of the domestic workers were at the school
for the deaf, a number of the thirteen; one in school supplies, that is
elementary and secondary.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you, Mr. Minister.
MR. HEARN: Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Hearn.
MR. HEARN: I was wondering just on that? If one
did an assessment of the salary headings in the different divisions they would
find that in most of the areas in primary, elementary and secondary the salary
votes are down considerably, which would lead one to believe that a lot of
positions were axed and I do not think you would find the same in career
development. So I think when an assessment is done there seems a lot more
dollars came out of the salary vote in the primary, elementary and secondary
than in the post-secondary perhaps. That is something to look at within the
departments themselves. That is something we will look at another time.
DR. WARREN: I have a little bit of information in
answer to your question, Mr. Hearn. We did an analysis of the gross current
account for elementary and secondary and the percentage increase over 90 - 91
budgeted was 5.9 per cent and the percentage increase over 90 - 91 revised was
5.5 per cent in this year's and at the post-secondary level the percentage
increase was 2.1 per cent in the current account budgets for post-secondary.
MR. HEARN: Teachers salaries, most of them-
DR. WARREN: Teachers salaries would be a lot of
them, yes.
MR. HEARN: Primary, elementary, secondary, all of
them actually.
DR. WARREN: Yes, a high proportion was teachers'
salaries.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you, Mr. Minister and
Mr. Hearn.
Ms. Verge?
MS. VERGE: Thank you. I would like to bring the
Minister back to our discussion about funding for substitute teachers. He said,
when the Budget was brought down on March 7th, the Government had in mind $10
million for substitute teachers, but within days, through negotiations with the
NTA, there was an agreement to provide boards with the same number of substitute
days next year as this year, and last year that amounted to $12.8 million, so
obviously that means at least $2 million more than the Government originally
budgeted on March 7th.
Has Treasury Board approved an extra $2 million for
the Department or has Treasury Board ordered the Department to find that $2
million from within the total in the March 7th Budget?
DR. WARREN: The answer is that Treasury Board
assumes that as in previous years with a Budget of $415 million for salaries,
that quite often they are plus or minus $5 million, so they assume that that
will be included in the $415 million; it is such a big amount that an extra $2
million or $1 million or so is not considered a significant amount in that
context and also the amount for substitute teachers is never parcelled out.
I think what we said last year it cost $12.2 but that
is within the global budget; it is all included in salaries and approved as a
global budget, that is included; substitutes we costed, but they are included in
the total budget, it is not a deliberate Treasury Board decision to spend a
certain amount.
MS. VERGE: Okay. I have two questions now taking
statistics. First, how many teachers and administrators with professional
certificates will be employed full time in the next school year, in the
1991-1992 school year, and what are the corresponding numbers for this school
year that are full time teachers and administrators?
DR. WARREN: I am going to have to ask my
colleagues to get the exact figures, but we estimate about 133 fewer teachers
and administrators than last year; our initial estimate was that about half the
units would be taken out of central office and the other half from the
classroom.
Now some of the central office units as you know, were
used in the classrooms in the past so they would stay, the total number however
is about 133 fewer; now I guess the numbers would be around 8,000 last year - is
this the actual number here? The actual received this year is 7,989 for
1990-1991, and 7856, 133 fewer; 7,856 for 1991-1992.
MS. VERGE: Okay, the next question. What will be
the average salary for the teachers and administrators in 1991-1992, and what is
the average salary for teachers and administrators this year?
DR. WARREN: I will get that and table it for you;
I will take notice of that.
MS. VERGE: How much of the 1991-1992 teachers
salary budget has been ear-marked for salary increases negotiated for last year,
for 1991, bearing in mind that the collective agreement has not yet been signed.
I assume it will be signed soon and it does provide for increases for last year.
DR. WARREN: I guess I will have to get my people
to do some calculations here. $7 million retroactive at the signing went to
teacher's salaries. Teachers received 3 per cent in the first six months and
then another 3 per cent beginning March 1 in the collective agreement. Of
course, that is frozen for the year. In other words the amounts negotiated for
the next year will not accrue to teachers. The 3 per cent last September, based
on last year, and then the agreement provided for 3 per cent March 1. When they
signed the retroactive payment for teachers was about $7 million, and, of
course, the next year I think there was a 4 and 3 per cent and these are
deferred because of the freeze this year.
MS. VERGE: So, is the answer $7 million?
DR. WARREN: The $7 million was retroactive pay for
teachers, yes.
MS. VERGE: I would now like to switch to the
Minister's plan to amalgamate Fisher Institute with Western Community College
headquartered in Stephenville. Will the Minister explain the Department's
rationale for that merger, and will he say what jobs will be eliminated from the
system, and in what places, as a result of the consolidation?
DR. WARREN: There are a number of reasons which we
annunciated last year for combining the two. One reason is that the
organizational structure was perhaps top heavy in this Province in
post-secondary and we could streamline and reduce the number of boards and
reduce the people at the top level.
MS. VERGE: The Minister will have to tell everyone
here that institute, and community college board members serve without any
remuneration, without even a per diem.
DR. WARREN: Yes, they do, but you still have
senior administrative staff, two presidents, for example, reporting to the
individual boards, but, I think, the major reasons were that we had on the West
Coast an overlapping of mandates. Perhaps one of the former Ministers might be
able to confirm this, or Dr. Winter and Mr. McCormick will confirm if I have it
right, the traditional mandates were that the institutes would offer longer term
programs and the colleges would offer shorter term one year programs. We found,
in this Province, that did not materialize and that we still had colleges
offering two year programs, certificate programs, and we had some of the
institutes offering one year programs. The traditional mandates were not fully
implemented and we felt that we could rationalize the system by combining the
two, reduce the number of boards, and then we would have for a region, say the
West Coast region, we would have one system serving the whole region. The
students could move more easily, you could make better use of planning and
student support services, and programs would be articulated between the colleges
and the institutes. The institute in Corner Brook was a relatively small
institution. There were how many students?
MS. VERGE: About 700 full-time.
DR. WARREN: And in order to provide the student
support services you had to employ perhaps an excessively large number, we felt,
of people or you just could not provide those services. We feel with the one
board, and with the one college, we can justify a more efficient and effective
use of planning and student support services than we can with a small
institution such as Fisher operating independently of Western Community College.
MS. VERGE: How many full-time students are there
at Marine Institute in St. John's?
DR. WARREN: The Marine Institute in St. John's has
about the same number and we are affiliating Marine with Memorial University in
the White Paper.
MS. VERGE: Marine will be kept a legally
autonomous institution, will it not, with it's own Board of Governors?
DR. WARREN: There are going to be some significant
changes at Marine as well.
MS. VERGE: What kind of administrative legal
changes?
DR. WARREN: We will be affiliating the two. There
will be certain programs at Marine and at Cabot which will be with the new
centre for engineering technology combined. What we will be doing is eliminating
the overlapping between Cabot and Marine, so the Marine enrolment may be reduced
slightly as a result of this.
MS. VERGE: Why did you not decide to legally
amalgamate Marine and Memorial by making them into one body corporate with one
board of regions and one president?
DR. WARREN: That is our intention. That is
precisely our intention, and you have indicated that. We have called it
affiliation because we do not want to lose the industry specific nature of
Marine. Ultimately they will be controlled by the one board of regents, and I am
delighted to say that ultimately we will have degrees in fisheries. I have
always felt that in this Province, we perhaps were negligent in not providing,
in addition to the programs offered at Marine, degrees in fisheries, and high
level research in stocks and all the issues in the future of the fisheries. I
think the affiliation that we proposed with the one board of regents handling
all, with Marine having its own advisory board from the industry -
MS. VERGE: That comes as news to me. From what the
Minister has said previously I had understood that Marine's autonomy would be
maintained and that Marine would continue to have a separate board of governors.
DR. WARREN: It will be industry specific with its
own advisory board but ultimately it will be a part of Memorial University.
MS. VERGE: Will that legal change be made at the
same time as the other mergers?
DR. WARREN: We will be introducing in the House
appropriate legislation to make the changes.
MS. VERGE: At the same time as the mergers of
Cabot with Avalon and Fisher with Western?
DR. WARREN: Hopefully, the legislation will be
ready shortly to introduce in the House the appropriate amendments.
MS. VERGE: So, you will be combining Marine with
Memorial through legal amalgamation at the same time as you legally merge Avalon
with Fisher?
DR. WARREN: A portion of Avalon with Cabot and a
portion of Avalon with Eastern, and Fisher and the other.
MS. VERGE: Many people in Corner Brook, including
community leaders, have advocated that the Government, instead of combining
Fisher with Western, look at linking Fisher with Grenfell College of Memorial
University since both institutions, both Fisher and Grenfell are in the same
place, very close to one another, within a stone's throw of each other, and have
more complementary purposes and mandates than do Fisher and Western, and many
people feel that the choice to combine Fisher with Western was motivated through
petty partisan politics and is regressive for the cause of education when if the
true desire is to improve education and to effect some economies of scale the
better choice would have been to link Fisher with Grenfell. I would like the
Minister to respond to that suggestion.
DR. WARREN: I will not get involved in petty
politics but one could speculate about why Fisher was separate in the first
place but I would rather leave that until later and not get involved in that
debate. Perhaps, I should say we are going to do both. We are going to make it
easier for persons to transfer from the institute programs one to another and
from institutes to university and from university to institute. So I think we
are moving in the direction, even with the consolidation on the South Coast, we
are going to try to improve the linkages between programs within colleges and
institutes, it is called a common programme of studies, and in certain subject
areas it will be easier for people to move, and to move from the institutes and
the colleges to the university.
MS. VERGE: I have to interrupt, I am not asking
the Minister about transferability (inaudible).
DR. WARREN: May I finish?
I have a whole series of comments on your questions.
We looked at all the options. We even visited other provinces to look at the
options and one option was to link Fisher and Grenfell, but the Government felt
it was better to link Fisher and Western and then to create more programs so
that students could move back and forth and get some credits.
I might say too that the Government is considering a
change of name to the colleges. I do not think we have announced this, but one:
we are considering a change of name, this will be on the record, the name we are
considering for all of our five colleges now, is Colleges of Applied Arts,
Technology, and Continuing Education.
MS. VERGE: Nice and succinct.
DR. WARREN: Yes, it is descriptive of their role.
MS. VERGE: I say to the Minister that his
rationale for amalgamating Fisher and Western is full of holes. He uses a lot of
jargon such as rationalization and articulation but the two main campuses are
sixty miles apart and surely student services and supports have to be located
where the students are, and if there are 700 students at Fisher Institute in
Corner Brook, the student services and support for councillors have to be where
the students are. It is not going to do the students on O'Connell Drive in
Corner Brook much good if there are wonderful student supports in Stephenville
or in Port aux Basques. However, if the Government had amalgamated Fisher
Institute on O'Connell Drive in Corner Brook with Grenfell College up the hill
on University Drive it would have been very easy to unite residence facilities,
counselling services, the student aid advisory service, student programs,
cafeteria services, gymnasia, swimming pools and other recreation facilities. I
really cannot understand why the Government would turn down such a sensible
option for a merger as Fisher with Grenfell since the two are so closely allied
in function and are so physically close to one another and opt instead for an
artificial concoction which they have embarked upon.
DR. WARREN: The Member and the Minister have had
this argument over and over and let me tell her the Government has made the
decision that this is the most appropriate way to go, and the Member perhaps
does not understand the reason. We have found that the people in the West Coast
do understand, many areas, some in Corner Brook, still prefer to have their own
institution. Western covers Stephenville, Port aux Basques, and Western was
already in Corner Brook, so you had Western in Corner Brook and now we are going
to combine with Fisher. The Western Community College includes a campus in St.
Anthony and the whole West Coast and the Government has made a policy decision.
The Member does not agree with it, there are others who do not agree with it,
but I would emphasize that this is a government decision, Chairperson, and I
think we have gone on and on.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
MS. VERGE: Chairperson, I think what the Minister
said is that Clyde Wells made the decision. I have not debated it the way I
would have liked to because I was locked out of City Hall last October when the
Minister went there supposedly to explain it and defend it in an open forum.
DR. WARREN: The Minister had nothing to do with
the lockout. Mr. Chairperson, the character comments, I think, are unbecoming of
the hon. Member. She knows the truth. The Minister had nothing to do with the
lockout. The lockout was decided by the local people. They decided who was to
attend. The Minister is available to meet with her or anybody anytime and
continues to do it. So, I prefer to correct her statement.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, I do not think we are
gaining a whole lot here dealing with the Education Estimates at this particular
time. We are debating and things are becoming repetitious and the
Vice-Chairperson knows that she has belaboured that point and the Chair does not
want to belabour it any longer so I will move along to Mr. Power.
MS. VERGE: Well, if I might interject Chairperson,
I can use my time however I wish.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Oh, yes, I realize that.
MS. VERGE: I do not think my time had run out.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I gave you sixteen minutes. Mr.
Power.
MR. GOVER: Her time had run out, she had nineteen
minutes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Gover.
MR. GOVER: I agree with the Minister and the
Chairman that we have gone a long way from the Estimates to allegations of petty
politics. In fact, when I look at that geographic representation: the Premier is
from the Bay of Islands District, the Minister of Justice is from Humber West,
and there is a Liberal Member in Stephenville. Certainly the Cabinet Members, I
would suggest, are more closely affiliated with Corner Brook and Stephenville so
I do not know what petty politics is at work there. It boggles the mind. Cabinet
Ministers, if one goes by the traditional mode of operation, you would think
they would be following the Member for Humber East's suggestion if petty
politics as opposed to good educational value had anything to do with it, but
obviously the Cabinet has decided to go with good educational value as opposed
to petty politics but I will leave that aside.
I would like to ask the Minister about a subject of
concern, I suppose, for everybody involved in education, which is the student
retention and drop-out rates. I suppose one of the greatest tragedies in our
society is when students decide to leave school without an appropriate or proper
education to give them a grounding to compete in today's job market either in
Newfoundland and Labrador or indeed elsewhere in the country or in the world. I
wonder if the Minister would take a few minutes to outline what changes have
been introduced by him to ensure that retention is raised and dropout is
lowered?
DR. WARREN: The good news is that the retention
rate has increased very significantly, it is still not high enough, but we are
now at the level of Ontario which has always been looked at as a goal; we want
to improve that, we want to retain 100 per cent, not just 70 per cent, but we
are -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: - really making tremendous progress. I
want to say that this is not as a result of any action specifically. We have
taken a number of actions as had the former administration, the former Minister,
and they expanded the high school programme and for a whole variety of reasons
the retention rate has gone up dramatically. We are increasing the retention
rate in some of the science programmes and this Government is doing something
specific in that area in computer studies and so on, but we are very encouraged
by it.
As you know, education is the best investment a
society can make, and in order to compete, we have to provide people with a good
education and if they do not get a good high school education, then they are not
likely to be able to advance beyond that or even to go back and continue their
education later on, so I could get you the statistics but I think if you were to
take any class from Grade IX through to high school right now, most people reach
Grade IX; from Grade IX through to the end of high school, perhaps 65 per cent
to 70 per cent of our people are completing some kind of high school programme
and by the turn of the century, our goal is to increase that to as close to 100
per cent as possible.
I think there are a number of things that will help
that. Sharing among small schools to provide a broader programme will help in
the future; the Federal Government is helping us with the school retention
programmes, more guidance and counselling in our schools; all of these things
will do a tremendous amount to improve the retention rate, and certainly we have
to make education exciting for students today, we have to provide the broad
programmes, and good teaching is the key, we are working on all of these things.
MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I have another
question which is a general question relating to education and the Minister
perhaps, could give me his views on the comments I am about to make.
I noticed from a review of the budget documents since
we have been in power, that the actual expenditure on education current account
for 1989 when the Government first came to power was $653 million and the
projected expenditure on education in the current fiscal year is $719 million on
current account, which is an increase in expenditure of $66 million for
education on current account. While that has been happening, I notice that in
EPF, a programme to finance health and post-secondary education, federal
transfers to the provinces, that in 1989 the actual transfer to the Province was
approximately $224 million and this year the estimated transfer to the Province
is $210,400,000, a decrease of some $14 million. As well, in 1989 the actual
amount spent on equalization from the Federal Government to the Province was
$942 million,
whereas this year equalization has been projected to go down to
$934 million, a drop of $8 million. So while our Provincial expenditures on
education, and I commend the Minister that in this time of restraint generally
and at a time when transfers from the Federal Government are diminishing, we see
an increase on current account of $66 million and a decline in Federal
transfers, EPF, and equalization to the Province of $22 million. I would like
the Minister's views on how Federal withdrawal, or reductions in the transfers
to have not provinces, such as Newfoundland, are having an impact in the
education field?
DR. WARREN: That is a question that concerns most
of us in Government very much, especially those of us who are responsible for
health, education, and social services. One of the fundamental principles of
this country is equality of opportunity. Even the Constitution states that
people in this country have the right to reasonably equitable levels of service
with reasonably equitable levels of taxation. Now that is in the Constitution,
and if the Federal Government continues on its present direction it will almost
destroy that founding principle of this country. I think there is a difference
between the philosophy of the United States and Canada. In Canada in health care
and education we believe in equality. Irrespective of where a person lives they
should have a basic level of health and a basic level of education, and the
trends that have emerged from the Federal Government recently are totally
inconsistent with some of the founding principles of this country. That is a
philosophical statement which I firmly believe in.
The reductions: in some cases they provided the same
amount of money but the increases have been less, or there have been fewer
increases in actual dollars, and this creates for provinces such as Newfoundland
tremendous fiscal problems. Nearly 50 per cent of our funding has come from
equalization payments and from EPF funding, and other transfer payments. If the
Federal Government continues to reduce its input that will make it very, very
difficult for us to provide the kind of equality of opportunity that is
essential if Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are going to play their rightful
role in this country.
I saw some figures the other day from EPF and I just
happen to have them with me. EPF transfers for post-secondary education in
Newfoundland between 1990 and 1994-95, as a result of the freeze on EPF funding,
we will lose about $81 million over what we would have received had the
increases continued as they were in 1990-91. Now, that is a lot of money for a
Province like this. We have relatively high taxes. We have relative difficulty
in borrowing and we are losing federal transfer payments, and that is a matter
of serious concern for not only me as Minister in this Province, but I have
talked to Ministers in provinces where they receive equalization payments and
they are very, very concerned about what has happened. We understand the Federal
Government has fiscal problems but this is inconsistent with the basic
principles that underline this country and what is happening with federal
transfer payments, so we are going to have to find the money elsewhere. I keep
saying that education is the best investment a society can make and if our
people are going to compete they must be educated. We are going to have to look
carefully at other sources of revenue. We are going to have to certainly try to
streamline the system. We are going to have to be more efficient and that is why
the sharing issue, and streamlining the post-secondary system, implementing the
White Paper, is so important for us to avoid duplication and any excess cost
that result from inefficiencies. We are going to have to do that.
And one other point: Chairperson, I will try to stop
at this point. Health care costs are rising dramatically in this country. Health
care and education are about the same level of current costs right now in this
Province. But in other provinces, and here the health care costs are going up
dramatically, there are more senior citizens, we have an aging population. So we
are going to be under tremendous stress when it comes to competing for those
dollars Provincially. Because health care costs are increasing dramatically, and
will. And the number of people voting. And I would say the competition is going
to be tougher, because the number of people who are voting, there are more
people older and there are fewer families with children. And therefore education
is going to have to compete for scarce dollars much more actively.
So we have to assure the public that we are getting
good value for our money so that we can compete with health and other important
government services for scarce dollars. But the Federal trends are very
disconcerting for a lot of us who are Ministers in provinces that have
substantial Federal transfer payments.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Power.
MR. POWER: I suppose much of what the Minister
says is a matter of
interpretation but I am not sure but I see a fatalistic view
of where education and health are going in this Province. But I suspect it is
very close to a belief in some Ministers' minds. When you question them in the
House, when you talk to them privately, when the Minister says there is going to
be continuing competition between health and education for Federal dollars which
are reducing, less Provincial borrowing power, less Provincial means to raise
revenue. Then what is really going to happen to our system?
Is our system going to get continuously worse? I mean,
I have concerns when I listen to the Minister. I know he says the right things a
lot of the time, but sometimes I know he has to say the right things. He is a
Minister in a Government that has fiscal problems and he has to say them, and if
I was the Minister I would say them. But the reality I believe is that a lot of
the reorganization, a lot of the rationalization, is not necessarily going to
improve the standards of education, it is going to try and save some money. And
when I talk to the Minister of Health in my Opposition Health Critic role I know
when he tells me he is going to have a better health care system, I know he is
not. I know he has big troubles trying to find money to operate a big system and
he is downsizing it. But when you are downsizing it something has to suffer.
My thought process is that when I look at where we are
to in Canada, and I see Newfoundland being less able in years ahead to compete
with Canada, to be able to stay up to the national standards, I go back - and I
have said it before - I think we made a mistake in 1949. When we negotiated our
Terms of Union much the way Quebec is trying to do now I think we gave away the
wrong things and we kept the wrong things. We gave away fisheries' jurisdiction,
which might have helped us, and we kept health and education jurisdiction which
maybe we would reach Canadian standards somewhere down the road. I do not ever
see it happening now, in health or education. And I think that is very sad.
Barring tremendous revenues coming to this Province from some strange source
that has not been found just yet, I think that is where we are to.
To the specifics of the post-secondary system, the
downsizing, I want to ask the Minister: what is likely going to happen to the
smaller vocational schools? What is going to happen to Bell Island, Bonavista,
St. Anthony, Springdale and Baie Verte, for instance? They are small schools,
underutilized maybe part of the programme. I just wondered of some of those
schools are not going to ultimately be closed simply because they are not having
enough participation. And sometimes I think that maybe the private sector, some
of our private schools in this Province, might be able to help. They might be
willing to go into a Baie Verte, a Springdale or a Bell Island and actually,
using the CEIC programmes, be able to better utilize those resources than we are
doing as a government. So I want to ask the Minister about that. The
post-secondary small school systems in particular.
DR. WARREN: Chairperson, before answering this
question, I was interested in earlier comments. I have said consistently that we
need more money for education in this Province. It is underfunded. It has been
underfunded for a long time, it is underfunded now. We have put more money each
year into education. And I might say, as a proportion of the current account
budget, the proportion has gone down from about 27 per cent in the late
'seventies, early 'eighties to about 23 per cent in current account right now.
We are about 23 per cent, and it has levelled off. The last couple of years the
proportion of the Budget going to current account education is about 23 point
something per cent .
We need more money. But I again say that we have to
get better use of the monies that we are spending. And that is why I think
rationalization is important. Rationalizing the post-secondary system, the White
Paper, looking at interdenominational sharing, combining where possible schools.
It is not a matter of saving money, it is getting better use of the money that
we are spending. So I think we have to stress - whether it is school busing or
wherever - getting better use of the money in addition to getting more money.
Because it is going to be hard to get a lot more in the near future, as
important as it is.
Now regarding the small campuses. I am glad the Member
raised that, because I want to allay these fears of some who say that this is
the year of review and these centres are likely to close. I have heard that
said. Our own position is that we are optimistic that they will become very
viable centres. They may become more adult learning centres, with Federal
funding. There is one good thing in the Federal Government that I should have
mentioned to Mr. Gover earlier on. As a result of certain recent legislation, we
are likely to get more funds from the Federal Government - and I thank the
Federal Government every chance I get for additional funds - for retraining, for
CEIC and other programmes. The fishermen's - what is the name of that bill that
retrains...?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: C-21 will provide funds for
retraining. And we think these smaller campuses can become adult learning
centres, drawing on Federal funds, with a core of Provincial funds and perhaps
offering programmes where the fees will pay for themselves. We have offered
programmes in the public institutions where people have been prepared to pay
fees like they do in the private sector -Relatively high fees. Now the private
sector, I could talk to the Member about that, but I do not see them taking over
these campuses, but I see the private colleges continuing to play a major role
in this Province. But I do not see them taking over these campuses. I see these
five or six campuses becoming, as Baie Verte is today and some others, very
active adult learning centres, drawing on other funds as well as Provincial
funds.
MR. POWER: Just one other fairly brief question on
the post-secondary system.
I think one thing that the Minister should remember is
that in all of the downsizing, especially of consolidating of the boards, is
that one of the reasons we did that - and we did it knowing that it had some
extra cost - but we also realized that the rural nature of Newfoundland, and the
fact that community decisions should be made locally, and obviously we had five
community colleges and we had three Provincial institutes - we wanted to get as
much local input as possible. But I hope the Minister does not lose that concept
in putting a large board together for the Avalon.
We were always afraid that some of the smaller places
- will the Marine Institute really get a fair hearing when it goes into the
Board of Regents to look for a bit of money for a new computer or a new
programme or something? And there was always that concern. So I think the idea
of community should always be remembered.
I guess the second brief question I want to ask: one
of the better things I thought we did when we were starting off the system was
first and second year Memorial University courses at the vocational school
campuses. Could you tell me where that is to now? Because I have sort of
forgotten exactly how many campuses receive that benefit. Is it working
successfully? Are the students passing those first and second-years with an
equal or higher standard than they would if they were at the main campus?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. POWER: How many do we have now?
DR. WARREN: Yes, I will answer that. A very brief
comment on your first question. There were proposals a couple of years ago for
one college for the whole Province but the Government rejects that. We believe
in having colleges close to the people so that is why we are retaining the five
rather than - you know, there are some people who suggested one college with
nineteen campuses. We believe that local boards should be close to the people
and we support that principle that the former government enunciated in its
decision.
Now what was your second question dealing with?
MR. POWER: First- and second-year (Inaudible).
DR. WARREN: The first-year programmes have been a
real success. The students coming out of Burin - and the former government
planned the Burin campus to move ahead; we were in power and implemented it - I
am told that the students coming out of Burin are first-class as are the
students coming out of Grand Falls and Lewisporte. And then we reintroduced
Labrador West. And these programmes are first-class programmes. Students compete
very well, they get a lot of individual attention. More students go to first
year in the local communities because they want, before they come to the larger
city or come to St. John's to Memorial, to have a shot at a university
programme. If they do well locally then they continue on to Memorial or some
other university.
And these programmes offered in the colleges are
successes in our view, and we hope to expand them in the future.
MR. POWER: We have four now, do we?
DR. WARREN: We have four, yes. The university in
Lewisporte -
MR. POWER: Doing first and second year, or just
first year?
DR. WARREN: Lewisporte, and in Grand Falls, and
then we opened Burin and Labrador West. And there is pressure for - some perk up
when I say this - other first year programmes as soon as possible. Burin has in
1990, 114 full time students.
MR. POWER: That would be higher than normal
participation rate, I suspect.
DR. WARREN: Yes. Grand Falls, 184; Labrador City,
128; Lewisporte had the smaller number, 67; and of course we have had Grenfell
with 997. So all of these initiatives increase participation in post-secondary.
And we have to decentralize post-secondary education to give people closer to
home the programmes so they can get a good shot at it.
MR. POWER: I was not going to ask any other
questions, Mr. Chairman, just a brief one.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead, Mr. Power.
MR. POWER: Is there a magic number? I think the
costs were somewhere like a half a million dollars to set up for library and lab
facilities. Is there a magic number? Is 67 too small to warrant that? Is 100 the
right number? Have you looked at any kind of ratios?
DR. WARREN: No, we have not, but we know that you
need a certain number to make it viable. They are costly and there are some
people who suggest that in lieu of that we should give the students the money to
come to bigger centres, but we as a Government, support the earlier initiative
of trying to provide more post-secondary closer to the people so that they can
do it not only cheaper but also experiment and try things before they move out
of their own home community. We have not decided on a number but you are
probably right, for a viable program you probably need 100. It depends on the
number of courses you offer. They share faculty between those two programs.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
Mr. Hearn.
MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I listened with some interest to the Minister making
some of his comments, especially when he was talking about the Federal
Government and their lack of attention to education, and their cutbacks. I
wonder if the Minister would tell us how many fewer dollars he is getting this
year from the Federal Government than he did last year?
DR. WARREN: I cannot give the Member the dollars
for equalization payments. I do not have these and the general revenues, but I
know in EPF transfer payments the figures, I think, are $124.8 million in
1990-91, and $125 million in 1991-92. It is going to be about $125 million so
the amount remains stable even though costs are going up, and if we had
continued without the freeze the amount would have gone from $131 million in
1991 to about $150 million, but it is going to remain at about $125 million. The
cuts are in the rate of growth, as I have indicated, and not in actual dollars.
We are getting basically the same dollars from the Federal Government under EPF
transfers for post-secondary education.
MR. HEARN: It is extremely interesting when the
Minister talks about freezes and cuts. When the present Government freezes it is
not a cut but when the Federal Government freezes funding it is a cut. I suppose
the bottom line, regardless of whether it is a freeze or a cut, means fewer
dollars, but to zero in and blame all the problems on lack of improvements in
the education service because of actually not an decrease at all but the same
dollars from the feds, when the Minister himself is chopping in areas of
provincial funding, to me is extremely hypercritical. He talks about the basic
level of education being maintained across the country, and I agree with that.
All our children should have a basic level of education but then the Minister,
himself, his Department, and the present Government, goes out and slashes and
cuts and eliminates the Department and what have you, I wonder how the Minister
feels? Is he embarrassed as he goes around the Province and meets people who
want to talk education, and he thinks back to the months proceeding the last
election, and the election campaigns, when the focus, more so than in any other
area, was on education? The Premier for months zeroed right in on education and
one of the key areas was on equal opportunities around the Province, and
equalization, a program which we developed and brought in, full equalization
immediately. I can still see headlines coming out of Lewisporte. Equalization
was the big thing, universities all over the place. What do we see? We see a
feeble attempt at equalizing, just picking up what was in the Budget already
when the Government took over and there has not been a cent added since. We see
the Department of Education at the primary, elementary and secondary level in
particular slashed to the core, one of those days that is going to cause all
kinds of problems because there will be no real liaison between the field and
the Department at all as is quite evident out there now.
We see school boards with their budgets being cut, not
frozen but cut, because of the declining enrolments they have fewer dollars this
year. We see the school tax authorities which were lambasted by the candidates
in the Minister's Government during the campaign and here in the House when in
Opposition, lambasted out there, embarrassed, the worst thing in the world was
the school tax authorities, and they were going to get rid of them. The Premier
himself hinted at that and wormed his way out of it by putting in 'change
significantly'. Nothing has been done, the Minister has been on his knees every
night praying that the school tax authorities collect more money to take the
heat off him.
We see all of this happening and still it is the
Government that was going to do so much for education. The Department of
Education and the educational progress outside Confederation Building has been
stifled considerably. The only thing I guess that amazes me more than what the
Government has done is the lack of reaction by the NTA who during the time of
the last couple of years preceding the change in government, when they were
getting their improved