Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I intend to make general comments here and highlight the issues I will be raising as we get into detail later on during the budget process.
In going through the Minister's opening remarks and comments, I have highlighted a couple of areas and hope that they will be able to get the detail when the issues come up during the budget process.
One particular area that I wanted to get some detail on is when we talk about the pupil-teacher ratio, there has been much discussion about that over the years. It has been the point of focus during negotiations with the NWTTA. It has been a highlight that has come to the surface on many occasions.
The government has now instituted and agreed to lowering that rate through that negotiation process, which was a very different tactic that has been taken this time around than in previous governments.
The area I would like to get some specifics on, and not tonight -- if they have it available, that would be good, but if not, then I will go through it when we get into detail and request some of the specifics at that time -- but what were the ratios, for example, back in 1971, in 1981? I can recall my classroom sizes. I have talked to a number of people who have been through the school system. The sizes were quite large. I do not know if we have actually changed in that area, if it has become worse or whatever. The thing that might highlight the difficulty of a large class is that you have more special needs.
I have raised this issue on a number of cases; how we deal with special needs instead of going from, for example, as all studies now point to, you have to get to children before they even hit kindergarten. Those are the critical years. Our special needs program in that area seems to go from K-12. That is an area of concern.
I would like to get some of the actual specifics of the information of previous years, if there has been a decline or an increase in the pupil-teacher ratio, because it has been a highlight for quite some years.
Further in the Minister's comments, he speaks to the Literacy Strategy and makes particular reference to enhancing literacy activities across the North. I hope that would be more than just enhance, that we try to make sure they are focused and the outcomes are going to be measurable.
I am going to use an example that has been of some concern. It impacts in the area of the Schools North Apprenticeship Program. Speaking to some educators in the community I represent, there is some 22 percent of our high school students who are going into their programming. I raised this issue with the Social Programs Committee a while back. It is in the general area. I am not sure what the specific course level is called, but it is 16-26-36 course levels. The credits have been reduced because it is seen as the lower level, compared to a 33 or a 30, or applied or non-applied. The terminology changes quite regularly.
If we are going to work in the Schools North Apprenticeship Program to enhance that on the apprenticeship level, but if we have almost a quarter of our high school population -- and I am speaking specifically from the community I represent -- who are entering a course level that will not even see them being able to challenge pre-trades, that really concerns me. It goes to the whole idea of preparing our children for taking on jobs. If they can go through 12 years of school -- and it is no longer called grade 12. The terminology as I understand it now is year 12, because you could be in year 12 and have a grade 6 area in some of the courses you have undertaken -- that really draws concern to the state we are in.
Hopefully, as we are going to put more money into it, we are also going to line our programs up that will see students, when they accomplish a grade level, or when they accomplish years of schooling, that they can indeed challenge at least the basics out there. If we go to apprenticeship level, the pre-trades exam so they can get into first year carpentry, mechanics and those areas.
There is nothing like going through school your young adult life and coming out thinking you have accomplished something and then when you go to get a job in the trades area, your potential employer tells you "Sorry, young man, young lady, you do not cut it."
You have gone through a system that tells you we are going to prepare for you a study. Do this, do that, follow the rules and we will make something of you. At the end of the day, they tell you that you did not make it. You have to go back for another year. You have to go for upgrading, challenge the GED, or something like that a number of years later when you have become very upset with the system, I guess is a kind way of putting it in some cases. We are talking about young men and women who are at a critical point in their lives, where the next stage from grade 12 is into the work environment.
Those areas are where I am talking about linkages and tying them. Hopefully we will see that with the Literacy Strategy that we are not only going to enhance, but we are going to ensure that in fact they are linked to outcomes and we will see some growth there.
I have raised this in the 13th Assembly as well. We spend a lot of money in education. We spend a lot of money from K to 12, and then we go again through the adult upgrading because the first K to 12 system did not work. For some reason, some place in the process, it did not work, so we have young men and women dropping out of school and trying to get into the work environment. They work for a while, but later on in life they realize they need a better education to get the higher paying jobs. They go back to school for a second time, costing this government more dollars.
We really need to ensure that the K to 12 program is working and is adequate to address their needs and not just address the numbers that we are faced with in trying to meet quotas, or trying to show that we are doing the right things.
There is talk in the Minister's opening comments that we are hoping to improve administrative systems and also anticipating reduced spending in the income assistance program area because of our improved economic situation. We all hope that is a fact, that we will see less income support being drawn when the economic times are better.
There is also a negative impact to having more economics happen. Some people will end up, because there is more money available, some families -- and this was highlighted during the training symposium up in the Beaufort Delta -- about some of the impacts that are not seen initially, or planned for initially, when you have a quick increase in your economic activity like a boom. There is a boom and bust cycle. Everybody looks at the positive side of increased dollars, corporate revenue, taxes, and so on.
However, there is a negative side and some families are impacted by that. Hopefully, we are not going to budget and cut down in that area and find out that we are short. That is a concern I would have.
I have examples of housing where initially in Inuvik, everybody was looking at the housing market and increased rents, and people on income support got hit. However, because people were looking for renters who had employment and two-week paydays, income support clients were put on the bottom of the list and negatively impacted in that area.
These are issues that I will be raising in detail as we get through the Education, Culture and Employment budget. I hope that when we go through the detail, the Minister will have some of that information. I do not expect it immediately tonight, but if he does not have it available now, I will be looking for it as we go through the details. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.