Mr. Chairman, I have read the motion, and I am articulating exactly what the interpretation would mean. We may have different views about this, but the fact is, if you read it in the context that is proposed, in terms of the initiatives that have been articulated, then that is exactly what happens, because we have tried to get away --and a big debate has occurred for a number years --from separating the certification of our teachers into categories. We wanted to articulate quite clearly that our aboriginal teachers are teachers. They are not aboriginal language specialists, per se. There is recognition for that but those people are clearly as teachers.
The other component is that we have done a number of things, and I guess the issue is if you want to debate those issues, then there's another forum to do it. I want to advise that if you read sections 117 and 118.(1)(k) particularly, it says: "in addition to the school program, develop and deliver early childhood development, adult education, cultural, religious or other programs to enhance learning and hire and employ persons for the programs and charge fees for the programs;". So what you are trying to accomplish here, where you say that you want to be able to hire those other individuals who do not have certificates, we allow for that to happen under section 118. So it's already being considered there. So that's what, I guess, I wanted you to be aware of; that we are already trying to do that in other sections in the legislation.
Again, on the matter of initiatives, all one has to do is look at the teacher training. You have to look at Dene Kede and look at Innugatigiit. These are only two of the types of initiatives that we are undertaking and the amount of efforts that are being made.
The other thing is that there are technical difficulties with clause 44, as proposed. "For greater certainty" is an inappropriate term used to clarify a definition or a statement. "Classroom assistant' is a position that does not exist in the new scheme. In other words, what we are saying is that those individuals are teachers now. They don't exist. They are considered as teachers and will be recognized as teachers.
There is no definition, for instance, for "special skills, knowledge or abilities". Who will judge the qualifications? That's the whole issue, as Mr. Koe earlier argued quite vehemently, about making sure that there are standards and criteria for our educators, making sure that we have quality educators. Here, in the same instance, we are saying that there be a different judgment about the quality of individuals who we are recruiting. I don't think that the aboriginal community or any of the leaders would agree that would be the basis on which we hire people in the schools. It should be based on some criteria and qualifications.
So I look at it in that context, and I have to say that, still, it causes me some concern, and maybe what we need to do is have a look quickly at the other components in the act. But purely on the matter of the amendment, as proposed, I would have to indicate opposition to it in the context that it's being proposed now. So that's what makes it so difficult, Mr. Chairman.