Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it is obvious that it is not good enough for us to speak about the increases in funding that we have been able to give. While it is good, obviously it is not good enough. Maybe the situation was so bad that the improvement we have made has not caught up to the standard we would like to see in our schools.

Let me ask a question, and I have asked this question before in the House. In the pamphlet the department has put out to explain, called Understanding the Pupil-Teacher Ratio, it says in the definition of pupil-teacher ratio that aboriginal language, cultural specialists, teaching assistants and school community counsellors are not counted as part of the PTR.

Maybe we have to look at what is counted and what is not. We use PTR, which I understand is a formula used in all schools in Canada, but I do not think there is any real rhyme or reason as to why. Why I did not include it so the boards are forced to fund these positions, but they are not funded under PTR. However, they still need teaching assistants, heaven knows. We all know every school needs more teaching assistants.

I do not think the problem is about having big class sizes but having more than one teacher.

What I see in Range Lake North School, and I know it is common in other schools in Yellowknife and throughout the Territories, is that there are a lot of combined classes, grades 4 to 5, 2 to 3. I am sure in communities, you have a wider range of grades that have been combined. I do not think anybody is experiencing a problem of having one teacher and two assistants or anything like that. We are still experiencing too many kids for a teacher.

If the additional funding that we are giving is not accomplishing the result then maybe we should look at what positions are necessary that we are not funding now that we should be funding. Is that something the department has ever considered? Is that something we can look at? Is that something the Social Programs Committee could look at?