There was a concern raised, and it was raised at the last Beaufort/Delta divisional board meeting, about the clause and the offence, then the fine of $500. There was a concern about the permissiveness of the act to persecute people. I hope it's not the intent, because a lot of the people in the communities where this would come into effect ... This may impact a lot of aboriginal people who may not have $500; therefore, may end up being criminals because their son or daughter doesn't attend school regularly.

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I don't think we should mislead or misrepresent the clause to the general public. The clause reads, "is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $500." There's an upper limit that we're setting for those who can be charged. So the fine is not $500, it's not exceeding that. It could be $10, it could be $500, but that's the way it has to be read.

The other thing is that the conviction doesn't necessarily have to proceed or the prosecution, if the district education authority or the community education authority determines that it's not in the interest of the parent or the student for any charges to be laid, that there's a better way of resolving this issue.

The other thing is that there are boards that have raised that particular matter with us and find that it may not be in their interest to fine individuals, but there is another way. This is basically an indication to parents that there is a penalty for parents who do not ensure that their child goes to school. So that's generally what it says, but there are limitations to the proceedings. It is a last resort.

Thank you. Clause 28. Mr. Koe.

I am glad the Minister explained, but the words are there and it is a permissive piece of legislation. As long as the words are there, the $500 stands out. My comments are relaying the concerns I heard from several board members in the Delta region. I am glad it has been clarified. There is considerable onus now on the district education authority to make sure they read section 28.(2) because if they don't, then I presume 28.(1) takes precedence and whoever is a ticket writer is then in charge, if there's such a person. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Antoine, to clause 28 of Bill 25.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In section 28 of this act, with regard to what my colleague is referring to, if a student does not attend school regularly and punctually during the year, the district education authority could start charging the person who fails to comply with section 27.(2). The parent, then, would be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $500. This gives the authority to the district education authority to start fining people. This is another thing that is going to get quite complicated in the community, if this does happen.

I would like to ask the Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, if this is a new section to the Education Act in the north. Thank you.

Thank you. The honourable Minister of Education.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. This is a new section. It was intended as, what you might say, a last resort. It also indicates to the public and the parents how important it is for them to be part of ensuring their children attend school. We have to be aware that, through the support of my colleagues and, certainly the honourable Member, many school counsellors are now doing a lot of the work. What this indicates is there is the ability to lay a charge, but that charge has to be authorized by the community education leadership.

In other words, they cannot lay the fine. They have to agree on the charges before they proceed, so they won't indicate the line. That is left up to the Justice of the Peace or judge. This is a permissive section, but it cannot be enacted unless the community education leadership approves it. As my honourable colleague will recall from our past lives as leaders of the aboriginal community and his term as chief, the communities want to have a greater say in making those determinations first, before charges are laid in any instance. The other thing is, we would recognize the circumstances of the family before we press charges. So, this is trying to give them the authority, plus allowing them the ability to lay a charge, if that's what they thought was in the interest of the charge. That's how we put it in.

Thank you. To clause 28. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you. So this new clause is going to leave it up to the district education authority to start these convictions. My concern is how it's going to work. Do we have to wait until the regulations are developed until this is put into play? Are we looking at another year? We'll be agreeing to something without knowing how it will work, Mr. Chairman.

The honourable Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The honourable Member is correct about the fact that we need to develop the regulations. This is, generally, the framework. What we have consented to do, Mr. Chairman, is to consult with the communities and divisional educational councils on the matter, before we actually implement the process, because they have to be satisfied --at least the communities --that the process is reflective of their concerns and that they know how to participate in it. There's no need for us to lay out the parameters for this prosecution without the communities knowing what should happen. It's our intent to allow it to be permissive. The legislation will come into effect on July 1, 1996 and we will work to resolve these issues. They will also come back to Members of the Assembly, I believe, once those discussions take place.

Thank you. Clause 28. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With this clause and the previous one, we're fining people for not registering their children in school or for not attending school. In effect, what this bill does is give authority to district education authorities to force parents to send their children to school and force students to stay in school, whether they like it or not.

My other concern is, what if the people don't like the school, the teachers in the school, the programs, or if there are problems in that area? What is there to counter the problems I just laid out? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. The honourable Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Education Act, as proposed, allows the student and the parents to work out an arrangement where students can receive educational programs that respond to their needs. If there are problems in schools, the Education Act, as proposed, allows the parents to come to agreement with the schools, whether the programs will be delivered through home schooling or through correspondence. Whatever options are available, those can be done. It can be done to the extent that part of the programming can be delivered at school and part at home. That's really up to the parents, the students, and the district education authority. These things can be worked out under the proposed legislation.

The other thing that is important, though, is that this particular section deals with the matter that most of the Members have argued, and that is: we cannot allow students not to be required to go to school, even to the extent of laying out an educational program to respond to them. This can't be done without us knowing who the students are, or even who those with special needs are, unless we know the program requirements. That's what we're trying to address here.

The other thing is, this is permissive and, hopefully, the local education authority to which we are now giving this power, will put in place the necessary regulations so they respond to the people they're serving, and not the department coming in and enforcing regulations or authorities or dictating the terms of their participation in the school. So we don't want to do that any more. We want the communities to determine that, and my colleague knows, again, of all the arguments that our aboriginal communities have argued on in this area, that they want to say what the rules are and we are trying to be supportive of that.

Thank you. Clause 28. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let's say, for example, that it the district education authority goes ahead and implements this section and starts fining parents whose children miss school or are not punctual or late, they could get fined up to $500 each. Is there an appeal mechanism in this thing where they could deal with it, or do we have to wait for the regulations to deal with that? Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just so we are clear, the district education authority cannot fine a student. They can only lay the charge. The courts themselves would determine whether or not there is a legitimate reason to fine or the extent of the penalty. For that matter, it may not be a fine. The court process will then be used as the basis for the appeal. But they cannot fine an individual; they can only lay the charge and the penalty can then be determined by the courts.

Okay, we are on clause 28. Anybody else? Mr. Antoine, do you still have something to say? Mr. Koe? Is that it for clause 28, then? Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 29.