Thank you. The motion is written and translated into the appropriate language, and it is being distributed as I speak.

I understand everyone has received the written motion. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question.

Question is being called. Mr. Antoine.

Mr. Chairman, I just received the motion and I hadn't really had a chance to look at it carefully as it was rammed down our throats.

Sorry about that, Mr. Antoine. To the motion. Mr. Antoine.

It's all right now. Thank you.

To the motion. Mr. Antoine.

I would like to ask the Minister why he is making these changes. Thank you.

Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To make the date and the requirements for the academic or the school year consistent right throughout the bill.

Thank you. To the motion.

Question.

Thank you. Question is being called. All those in favour of the motion? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Clause 27, as amended. Mr. Koe.

Just a question on using the word "16 year." Is that consistent with other clauses?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes.

Clause 27, as amended.

Agreed.

---Agreed

We shall move on to clause 28 of Bill 25. Mr. Koe.

Thank you. This is a penalty clause, and it says that every person who fails to comply with section 27.(2) is guilty of an offence. Section 27.(2) refers to a parent of a student, so I assume that the parent can be fined. Is that the only person who can be fined under this particular clause?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you. Yes.

Thank you. Mr. Koe.

So the parent can be fined if a student is late, is not punctual, or does not attend regularly or punctually. How many times does a student have to be late before a charge is laid? I'm just curious. You get into that whole issue of process, and who sets the process for conviction.

Thank you. On the area of regulation, Mr. Minister.

Thanks. Part of it is set out in the regulations, as well. You have to read it, Mr. Chairman, I don't want the public to be confused. The charges are laid against the parents. There is no definition right now, without us having to work those issues out with the district education authorities and the divisions.

The other thing is that the prosecution for an offence referred to in subsection (1), no prosecution shall be commenced without the consent in writing of the district education authority. There are limitations to whether we even proceed if the community says no, that's not the way we do this, there's a better approach to take. So the community can make those decisions and they will set the rules by which we enforce this particular section because, in some cases they may be different, in others, there may be a consistent process right across the Northwest Territories. But we will share that information as we develop the regulations with each other.

Thank you. Clause 28. Mr. Koe.

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.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 30.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 31. Sorry, I missed somebody. Clause 30. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Chairman, could I ask the consent of the committee to go back to clause 29?

The Member would like to go back to 29. Is that okay?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Okay, we are on 29, then. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

MRS, MARIE-JEWELL: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make a couple of comments with respect to this clause.

The wording in it is pretty specific. Clause 29(2) indicates, "a student record shall include information that affects decisions made about the education of a student that is collected or maintained by the school or an education body and a record of those decisions and any other prescribed information."

First of all, they maintain student records for each student that is registered at any school. Now, I am concerned, and it didn't seem to be clear during the meeting with the Minister, that if information is obtained --for example, if your child requires psychological assessment or if you, as a parent, decide to take your child out for psychological assessment --and you do not want these records to be for school use but only for parental use, can the school, under this particular clause, have access to those types of records, because of the fact that it could have some effect either on the child's behaviour or determine the child's progress in the school or whatever? I just want to know if a principal somewhat demanded those types of records from a parent, either going through the medical centre or going through the parent, is there an obligation on behalf of the parent to provide those for the student records for school purposes? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Marie-Jewell. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can advise the honourable Member, having discussed this particular matter with legal counsel, that information would not be a matter that could be required, requested or obligated to be part of the information. In other words, that is a private matter. The parent may choose to provide the information but if they do not, there is no requirement that information be available to the school for placement on a student record, because that includes the whole matter of medical information. Records and information are protected by other pieces of legislation and they are not matters that could be included, unless again there are medical circumstances that a parent wishes to provide to the school. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Nerysoo. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted that clarification for the record to ensure that this clause is, in fact, interpreted in that manner. I don't want to have irate parents, who may want to take the responsibility personally to get their child assessed, feel in any way intimidated by the school system to have to produce those records for their child's records with regard to determining progress of a child or whatever. So I felt it was fairly important to get that clarification with respect to that particular clause. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Marie-Jewell. You don't have anything else on clause 29? Okay. Can we conclude clause 29 then?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 30. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Mr. Nerysoo.

This is the exception to the other components, section 30(1), (2) and (3). This is the exception where you deal with things like potential abuse, sexual or physical, where the parents may not wish to provide that information, and there may be other personal information that the parents may not want to expose but that the student might want. The other thing is that the teacher, as a result of discussions with the student, may have information that the parent would not want to disclose.

So that was the intention of the exception here to the other information above, those circumstances where I'm not certain if a parent would deal with or want to disclose, particularly where it says, "in the best interest of a student".

Thank you, Mr. Nerysoo. Mr. Dent.

Thank you. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are two specific issues: one dealing with information that is necessary to address the best interests of the student and; secondly, that disclosure is necessary for the establishment of support services. So it's very specific about the basis on which that information can be released.

Thank you, Mr. Nerysoo. Anybody else on clause 30? Are we concluded clause 30?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 31.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 32.

Student conduct, clause 33.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 34.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 35. Mr. Dent.

Mr. Nerysoo.

We may already have it in here, so just give us a second to check a couple of other clauses that may respond to the concern of the honourable Member. Maybe it I could have Ms. Joyce, respond. I believe it's under clause 36.(b)(i).

Maybe we could get the witness just to confirm that, then we'll return to 35. Ms. Joyce.

Mr. Chairman, we did recognize the superintendent --as the Minister is noting --specifically under the expulsion clause, under 36.(1), as the Yellowknife school district requested, because that is actually the practice.

Also under 35.(4) where it states that if a student is suspended for more than five consecutive days, the district education authority or the principal shall designate a person to contact the student. That person could indeed be the superintendent.

The superintendent is also identified under paragraph (5), stating the "...superintendent of the suspension and the reasons for the suspension." Thank you.

Mr. Dent.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you. If I could ask Ms. Joyce to respond, please.

Ms. Joyce.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we have the superintendent identified wherever we can in a consistent manner, but we can't have the superintendent identified as the specific designate for suspension because in all districts; for example, in a division, the superintendent may not be available, each district doesn't have a superintendent like Yellowknife does, but we've written the clauses in such a manner that it can be applied in Yellowknife if the superintendent is that designated person.

Thank you, Ms. Joyce. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Are we finished with clause 33?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 34.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 35. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

I wanted to speak to clause 34, you didn't see my hand.

Okay, Mrs. Marie-Jewell, clause 34 is fine.

Mr. Chairman, I just have some problem with regard to clause 34 and I'm trying to get clarification on it. This particular clause indicates that a discipline policy be developed in accordance with the direction of the Minister and the divisional education council. However, to ensure that they promote a positive learning environment and governing the breach by students of the school rules and the code of conduct for students or the responsibilities of a student under this act or the regulations, I am somewhat concerned that the development of this particular discipline policy does not include the parent advisory councils wherever they're in existence and does not include a representative from the student body. You can say that it does include the principal, but not necessarily so in the event they're participants of the divisional education council, because the principals are generally participants of the local education council or the community education council, not the divisional education council. Therefore, there's a fairly significant consultation process where individuals are affected who are not in the process of developing such a policy.

I'm wondering, if the Minister agrees with this, what ways can this be addressed in order to ... Besides amending the clause, what ways can this be addressed to reflect the need for that particular participation from those areas? Thank you.

Mr. Minister.

Thank you. Under 117.(1)(d), there's a section that says, "consider any comments and recommendations, with regard to a school, that are provided by the students, student representatives, parents and school staff who have an interest in that school.` In other words, the education body shall do that.

This is a component of a discipline policy that affects those and they must consult under another section in the legislation. We are also going to propose a change in the legislation where we have parent advisory committees considered and recognized as well. That will come in a later amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I understand what the Minister is saying, but we are not at that clause yet. It does say that you can consider any type of comments or recommendations of the school. It says an education body shall consider this. However, this particular clause says that in the development of a discipline policy, it will be made, in accordance with the direction of the Minister and the divisional education council. The divisional education council will be a different body from the community education council, whether it is the parent advisory committee, the student body or the principal participating. I am saying the discipline policy reflects a decision coming downward and on the advice, they may consider it. There is nothing that reflects what the community wants in the discipline policy. We are devolving a lot to the divisional boards and we want the authority to lie at the community levels. To be able to state that we are going to develop a discipline policy at the divisional level without consultation from the community level, contradicts what we are trying to do.

I would like to ask our legal counsel how we can address this to reflect the participation of those particular bodies in developing the discipline policy. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Marie-Jewell. Mr. Minister, I wonder if you could respond. There may be some policy that is the underpinning for this clause.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A matter of the discipline policy also emanates from the matter of the school rules, which is (2) at the bottom. You have to tie those into the same clause because school rules also deal with things like codes of conduct, responsibilities of students, at cetera. From that emanates the discipline policy within the school and possibly within the division.

The other point that should be noted is the duties of 117 may be given to DEAs and DECs as well. The fact is that the district education authority may end up with the responsibility of defining the discipline policy within their own schools and then developing a broader policy for the division.

(Microphone turned off) ...to that issue you raised? Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Possibly one way to address this ...I recognize what the Minister is saying; however, this is the way the clause reads. If a district education authority, which is at the local level, develops a discipline policy and if they develop it on the advice of the Minister and the divisional education council, for example, the interpretation of a code of conduct can be defined one way by the divisional education council and yet it could have another interpretation from the district education authority. That is what I am trying to say. They could have different interpretations on student conduct.

Possibly, one way to address this to ensure that the two coincide, are consistent and reflect consultation from the parent advisory committees or the student body. The Minister may want to consider, in the development of his regulations, allowing the district education authority to, in conjunction with the parent advisory council and the student body, assist in developing this discipline policy.

The other possibility may be a ministerial directive indicating the necessity for participation from the parent advisory council and the student body. I would like to ask the Minister's viewpoint on this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Marie-Jewell. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Having heard the comments of the honourable Member, as Minister, I can develop a directive that clearly indicates the matter of consultation, the mandate and the involvement of parents and students. We can do this quickly as part of the process, so we don't necessarily need a change here, but we can deal with that in a directive from the Minister to all boards.

That is clear. Are we finished with clause 34?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 35.

Agreed.

---Agreed