With that, general

comments. Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to thank the Minister for his detailed opening remarks.

In looking at the budget, I am happy to see a number of things in there. I am happy to see the increase in support for the arts, lots of information on early childhood development schools, official languages. Overall, I am quite pleased with what I see, but there are still some areas of concern.

One of the areas of concern that I have is that in looking at the document, it appears that the number of staff within the department itself is going up by

seven positions, yet I am of the understanding that at least five people in the department have been notified that their jobs are affected and that they potentially are going to be laid off. So when it comes question period, I am going to be trying to seek some clarification and some better understanding of that.

The other area, the area that I have the most concern about, is similar to an area of concern that I had when it came to the Department of Health and Social Services. It is around the fact that the department provides the authorities with a whole lot of money. I haven’t heard the same types of statements such as “live within your means” within the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, but we have been hearing rumours and information out of the authorities, not necessarily from the authorities themselves but certainly employees and whatnot, that there are cuts and major changes to programs which may affect staff. I will be trying to get some clarity around that, finding out what kind of impacts the budget being provided to the authorities is actually going to have.

I also notice that it looks like there are a large number of teaching positions in the authorities disappearing, and I am going to be seeking some clarification and some understanding around that. I was under the impression that we weren’t actually doing too much in the way of reductions in the boards themselves. So similar to Health, I am going to have some questions around what’s going on in the boards and how this budget and these reductions are going to impact on the authority level.

Otherwise, I am quite happy with what I see. I do have some questions about positions. I am really happy to see some increased investment in the arts. We will have some questions on the Childcare Subsidy stuff as well as on the daycare stuff, but otherwise it seems good, and I’m mostly happy with what I see. Thank you very much.

General comments.

Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, am happy to see some of the emphasis being placed on similar areas.

I want to start with early childhood development and child care. I’ll be looking for some of the following points. We need to support the training of early childhood education workers. To be able to do that, we need to pay replacements while that training happens and organize accessible community-based training as well. We need to support a territorial early childhood education association so that the GNWT has someone to communicate with on policy issues like this and that

will help alleviate the shortage of affordable quality child care and ECE opportunities.

We need to review criteria and the process for child care subsidies so that more people can take advantage of this. I know there are cases where we have two-income families who are really working poor and still can’t access these subsidies. We need to ensure that child care centres are also not penalized by late payment of subsidies. This has been a perennial problem. I’m hoping the department has addressed that.

Finally we need to review operational funding so that centres are not penalized when children are sick or otherwise absent, and I’ll be mentioning that again later.

I was particularly pleased to see the increase in support to the arts and cultural programs. Again, just some of the things I’ll be looking for and perspectives that I have on this that I’m hoping are reflected in the allocation of this additional funding and possible future funding. I think culture and the arts are really an economic engine and a real source for economic diversity, one of our goals. Municipalities that adopt culture as an industry have gained positive economic benefits for their communities. Cultural industries create job growth, turn ordinary cities or communities into destination cities, create interconnections between arts and business, revitalize urban centres, attract skilled workers and create spin-off businesses. These are proven relationships.

The arts have been instrumental in facilitating social cohesion, bringing tourism to unlikely places, fostering a sense of belonging and preserving collective memory, basically building community. Arts and culture are powerful tools with which to engage communities in various levels of change. They are a means to public dialogue, they contribute to the development of communities’ creative learning, they create healthy communities capable of action, and they provide a powerful tool for community mobilization and activism that help build community capacity and leadership.

They’re a factor in quality of life and quality of place, and these are priorities that I see are at least as important as economic development. Culture, long overlooked as a tool for garnering quality of life, is now being recognized as the means to community building, encouraging outdoor activity and healthy lifestyles, lifelong learning, increasing accessibility to programs for all levels of society and celebrating diversity and cultural differences. Finally, the ability to engage and motivate children and youth from all socio-economic levels in education and community is a respected strength of arts and culture and particularly relevant to our communities.

On the introductory remarks under Advanced Education and Careers, College Programs, the Minister noted that tens of millions of dollars are being provided towards certificates, diplomas, degrees and trade programs relevant to the NWT labour market. That’s not something I disagree with, but I would say that we don’t want to be just reactive here. It would be nice to be proactive and see not just where the economy is demanding right now but what direction the economy and society are moving in and where the jobs are likely to be given the issues that we’re dealing with today and in the near future. I think there are some obvious ones there.

Under Adult Literacy and Basic Education I see we’re maintaining our support there. We did have a very interesting series of workshops and talks with a national expert in this area.

I think there were some interesting relationships revealed there where we could get even bigger returns from a little bit more of an investment in literacy and adult education.

I’m hoping we can see a gradually increased level of support in this area. I say “gradually,” because sometimes it’s most effective, in terms of building programs, to increase resources very gradually rather than one big lump sum. And then about the time we have capacity built up to use that effectively, we’re taking resources away. But again, based on all I’ve learned — and I know you’ve got lots of experts in the department — that seems like some real potential for some win-wins. I’m going to leave my introductory remarks at that. Thank you for this opportunity.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. We’ll move along to Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair. I have a

number of comments, some of which may have been stated already. But I will restate them, as they are important to me.

First off, I was a little surprised that there’s been an addition of seven positions to the total number of positions for the department. That surprised me a bit. I am very pleased to see the additional funding for the arts. I think it’s long overdue, and I look forward to the advancement of arts in the Territories and arts programs in general. I think it’s an excellent investment.

I was also pleased that the department responded to the committee’s concern in regard to the loss of the wage subsidy program for apprenticeships. I think it’s a bit of a saw-off in the middle — that we’re going to maintain the wage subsidy for small businesses, and particularly municipalities and some of the other small organizations that use apprentices a lot. The fact that it was originally scheduled to be totally deleted, to me, was

definitely not a positive, and I didn’t see how that was going to assist us in training people for the jobs that we need in the North now and in the future. I’m very glad to see that that was reinstated, at least partially.

The statement by the Minister in his opening remarks that we are decreasing the pupil/teacher ratio by 0.5 in this next 2008–2009 year to provide students with trades and technical opportunities…. I’m unsure how reducing the pupil/teacher ratio is going to assist schools in small communities. I would think that there are certainly some that don’t have high school level grades, so I really don’t understand how trades and technical programming in those schools is going to be assisted. Certainly the other portion in communities that do have high school level, but have a very small enrolment…. I’m not sure how reducing the PTR is going to enable them to take advantage of this particular opportunity.

The other thing that I wondered about with this reduction in PTR is whether or not there’s going to be any monitoring by the department to determine if the education authorities are using the extra teachers for trades. It’s entirely possible that they will take the reduction in the PTR and use it for staffing of other programs. I’m wondering whether or not there’s a monitoring program, or at least some method of monitoring how the authorities are using their extra funding?

In reading the remarks and seeing that we’re spending $70 million on income security programs, it kind of blows me away. I am also very surprised that we’re spending an additional $6 million from last year on Income Security, and we’re adding five positions for those programs. So I do have some questions for the Minister when we come to that. It seems like we’re throwing an awful lot of money into these programs, and I wonder if it’s what we should be doing.

In general, the budget…. In the opening remarks it indicates that this budget is an increase of 3 per cent from last year’s budget. It concerns me that there are few reductions in this particular budget. It concerns me also that we’re spending a lot of money on new initiatives when we can’t meet the reduction targets that were set out. I have some questions in regard to initiatives when we get to that point.

Lastly, I’d like to talk a bit about daycares. I agree with the committee report that we need more daycare spaces. I think the department needs to be creative, as is suggested in the committee report, in terms of looking at every building that is being built, or every government-owned building that exists in a community and trying to incorporate, if necessary or if possible, daycares into some of the government spaces that exist. It’s not feasible in every community, but certainly I would guess that we

have buildings that are not 100 per cent utilized, where we could probably offer some daycare space to an organization in a community.

I want to reiterate — I think it’s already been mentioned — but daycares need to have some sort of stable funding, some sort of knowledge of what their funding is going to be on more than a day-to-day basis. Currently, daycares are funded for children who happen to be there; if the child is sick and doesn’t come, they don’t get the funding. It creates a very volatile funding situation for them, and I think the Minister and the department need to seriously consider some sort of long-term, stable funding for daycares, similar to perhaps what the education authorities do. Base the funding for daycares on their last year’s enrolment, or something similar. That’s all I have at this point, Mr. Chair. I will have questions when we get to the appropriate sections. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. We’ll move along to Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. With the budget before us from ECE, I do think that a lot of new initiatives may be premature, but I think they’re good initiatives. I just want to speak specifically on some of the issues impacting my region, my communities.

First and foremost, I know that the department’s working hard on trying to accommodate our teachers and the teacher housing issue. I know that it affects not only this department, but I think they’re working along with Housing and one other department in trying to address this issue. Time and time again, over the last three or four years in one of my communities, particularly Fort Liard, teachers seemingly think that they have accommodations only to show up and find that arrangements have been changed, or else a new issue has come up and the unit’s not available.

For jurisdictions that are looking for new teachers, new professionals, I often, when I’m talking and dealing with people, say, “Well, if the young professionals come north, there are opportunities here.” But our challenge for our professionals now, at least the new ones, is getting accommodations for them and getting that set. I would support anything the government can do in working toward this. I know that in the health field we are taking some special measures for interim accommodations for agency nurses that come up. I don’t see why we cannot do the same for our teaching professionals that come up.

I was in B.C. about six months ago, just before the 2007 elections, and I picked up the paper. They have similar challenges, like I’m sure many northern jurisdictions do. But in northern B.C. what they did was they said that they’re not going to provide accommodations for the teachers, but they’ll provide temporary accommodations. So once

you’re able to do that, I think you’re able to open up a whole different way of seeing things. If we look at that avenue and look at temporary accommodation, that may mean for us to provide the accommodations, of course.

I would urge the government to look at that and start working toward that. It’ll help alleviate them getting, first of all, a foothold in the North, establishing a positive experience. We do want them to stay and make a career in the North. Time and time again, studies have shown that the longer the teacher’s in the community or familiar with the region, they get positive repertoire and a positive learning experience for the students from somebody they know. They gain some level of trust. It shows in the marks and the graduation rates and success rates of all the different classes that are out there. That’s something that I would urge the government to look at.

As well, government has also said the communities have to take the initiative; businesses have to take the initiative. Through Housing they can get a loan and build a house and rent it back to the teachers. But in the small communities, that just doesn’t work. In Fort Liard, we lumped in that, as well, Mr. Chair. It’s just not workable to have one entrepreneur to build one house. For goodness’ sake, even in small communities we’re still approaching probably a minimum of $250,000 or $300,000 for a good two-bedroom house these days. To expect a teacher to pay $1,500 or $2,000 a month is just not doable, if you do it that way, not to mention the utilities and everything else are skyrocketing.

If we’re able to come up with a plan, with a package, for new teachers and they’re coming back…. I know that with Housing, I’ve been working with them to say, “Yeah, we’ve got to do multiplexes, fourplexes, sixplexes.” The reason you do that, of course, is that nowadays it makes sense to share heating and share some of the O&M for buildings. That’s one other way of doing it — to have central heating in those buildings. I believe that’ll bring the costs down, and I think that’s what we should work toward. Many of these teachers are single, or if they’re a couple, they don’t have big families. They’re just a couple starting out, so smaller accommodations and affordable accommodations will work out.

The key thing, once again, is that I would urge the department or government to look at now, and say: “Hey, we’ve got to do our part here. We’ve got to make it a positive experience for when they come, because we do want them to stay, and we want our communities to succeed at education levels.” I believe that we should be working toward that, Mr. Chair.

I think, as well, I’ll just speak a bit about our capital planning. I think in our schools we’ve got 10- or 15-year retrofits. One of my communities, Nahanni

Butte, has been asking about the 15-year retrofit and when theirs is going to be done. When I checked with the department, they said, “Well, Kevin, it’s not on there.” But I believe there’s a reason for having a 15-year capital retrofit, and that’s to extend the life of the building to accommodate any changes in community levels or student levels. I believe that function is worthy, and I just don’t see why it’s not there for one of my smaller communities. At the appropriate time, I’ll be asking about that through the Minister’s office.

It’s not only there, but we’ve got to look at all the other smaller communities as well — at the timing of those reinvestments for the retrofits, especially in Nahanni Butte. I’ve been there, and I’m happy to say it’s one of our growing communities in the North. We were just recently there. Minister Sandy Lee…. We went into the school. She can probably attest to this: it’s kind of cramped and crowded, but they’re making do with what they have, only because that’s all they have. But they’re looking to better accommodate their needs to make a better working environment for the teachers, as well as the students. So that’s got be in the plan.

I’ll ask the Minister again exactly what stage that’s at, because I believe that’s important. With that, Mr. Chair, thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Krutko.

Mr.

Chair, I, too, have several

concerns from the Beaufort-Delta region. Probably one of the most alarming or outstanding issues that you hear from the divisional board of education is the area of accommodation for teachers, especially in the area of housing, and especially in a lot of our communities.

We did have a staff housing program in the past, where we provided housing. But for them the issue isn’t around staff housing in general. They’re looking at parity for teachers. Most teachers are accommodated by way of housing. It’s really the construction of the nurse’s residence, which is part of, usually, the health centre or whatnot. And they’re saying, “If they can get it, why can’t we?” They work under the same conditions in those communities, but yet they have to find their own housing. In the case of nurses, most cases are accommodated with a residence for nurses. For them, it’s a question of fair….

But more importantly, since the government did away with staff housing, which has had a major effect on the recruitment of teachers, especially in the smaller communities, where we don’t have market housing, it’s just trying to…. It’s the cost they have to pay for rent and also the cost they have to pay for groceries, power and everything else. But these are unforeseen costs until they get there. And then they get into these communities, and they are basically shocked at how high the

costs of living in these small isolated communities are. A lot of them are deterred, where they basically quit or move on, and you have to recruit someone else to fill those positions.

I think as one of the fundamental pillars of this government, education is critical. But again, we do have to be able to deliver programs universally throughout the Northwest Territories. If that means reinstating staff housing in certain areas because of certain problems we’re having recruiting because of staff housing, I think we do have to address that issue of maybe looking at getting back into staff housing in those areas where there are no market communities.

I think, also, realizing the importance of the different problems we’re seeing in our schools, with FAS/FAE, the psychological problems we’re seeing in a lot of students…. I think we have to be open to that, because it is a reality in a lot of our communities because of alcohol abuse, substance abuse. It is affecting children in their learning in our schools.

As a government, we have to somehow look at the emotional and physical and mental side of those students, and make sure they also have the appropriate specialists and whatnot that can accommodate those communities. In most cases, the student has to be sent out, evaluated and then basically assessed, where they’re sent back to the appropriate education councils. There is a major cost to that for this government. I think if you can catch it early on — especially for the younger students — if you are able to help that student to basically achieve a very successful life by way of learning and also by being able to partake in that process without feeling they’re left out….

It’s also so important that we do work with groups such as the aboriginal organizations. I know a few people have touched on the trades program they have in Inuvik. Between the Inuvialuit and the Gwich’in, they invest over $1

million in this

program, which is a very creative way of developing programs, but through partnerships. We have to be able to work with those groups. I know dealing with the mine trade centre here in regard to learning centres, the diamond industry, and also dealing with the industry in regard to oil and gas….

I think we have to start putting more focus on post-secondary trades, looking at southern institutions in regard to SAIT and NAIT and all these other groups and organizations that are out there, so that we are able to achieve the results we’d like to see — and also being able to fill those partnerships in which it’s been a proven way of developing your human resource capacity — having these types of relationships with different colleges in southern Canada, but more importantly, through Alberta, in regard to SAIT and NAIT.

I think also the other area I hear a lot of concerns about, especially in my riding, is the area of income support. It’s not perfect. But also we have to realize that we have to do something to be able to work with individuals in the communities to make them not dependent on the system that puts them into that dependency role. If anything, it’s to help them get off that dependency and basically make positive choices through education and career decisions and also to work with them to be able to bring down some of these social barriers that are put on people who are in that income support bracket.

But the problem I see in communities, in talking to the local contractors and whatnot, is that they have very serious problems trying to hire people locally, who can be hired locally, who basically work for these individuals. Because of the connection between their wage and the housing rent subs, as soon as you go to work, your rent increases and you’re cut off income support for three months. For them, it’s a disadvantage rather than an advantage.

Again, there have to be creative ways of keeping people so when they make a positive choice of going to work, getting a job, bringing in some income on their own, they’re not penalized right off the bat. Give them four or five months’ leeway to get back on their feet, generate some income and also be able to work with the local contractors to develop that workforce.

It’s sad to say, but people actually will tell you, “Oh, I

can’t go to work because I’m going to get

penalized.” I mean, that’s the wrong attitude to have.

As a government, if that’s where this Income Support Program is leading us, I think we have to turn it around and send it in another direction, because that was not the intention of how this program was going to be working.

I think, also, another area that we have a real problem with, especially in our smaller communities, is the balance between elderly homeowners and elders who are in social housing — the elders that want to maintain their own independence, their own lifestyle, and also be able to work with their families and sustain that independence as long as they can and hopefully don’t have to leave the community, and can live a full life in their home communities. We have to do whatever we can to sustain them. Elders who are in social housing don’t pay any rent, but for someone who is staying in their own home and wanting that independence, you’re looking at about $18,000 a year.

I

think we have to find that balance between

someone who is in social housing, who’s basically being compensated for $18,000 for free rent, free subsidy or free housing, and somebody who’s in

their own home. How do you balance that and retain that $18,000? Sure, we give them a fuel subsidy; we give them tax breaks. I know there’s a power subsidy. But, again, I think you have to illustrate the benefits for both groups and not have one group feeling that they’re left out and the other group basically feeling guilty for getting something for nothing. I think it’s important that we seriously look at that, in regard to this income support review process, so that you can find a fair and equitable program for all those groups that are involved.

I think another critical part through education is the whole area of dealing with the upgrading and whatnot in our small communities. We have these facilities; we’re able to accommodate these people; but I think a lot of people that do drop out prior to high school and whatnot are going back to school. Especially seeing individuals graduating from our colleges and whatnot, a lot of these people who were out of school for 15 or 20 years went back again to try to get their high school diploma, or to go to post-secondary education or take a program through our college programs.

Again, I think it’s so important that we do everything we can to invest in those programs. I know, a lot of times, that’s usually the first place that you cut, but at these different levels of education, regardless of whether it’s high school or going through adult education to post-secondary education and off to university and college, we have to have a holistic approach to education and realize that we have to have components for everybody to be able to fit into and not leave anybody out.

I think we are trying to make strides here, but it’s in taking advantage of these programs and initiatives. With the amount of potential we have — and I don’t think we’re able to reach the potential by way of the diamond industry now, with the oil and gas expansions — we have to be able to have our people ready to take advantage of those opportunities. More importantly, we need to promote them to make positive choices and not get them into the social rut that we find ourselves in by way of income support and programs that they get into and they just can’t seem to get out of.

Thank you,

Mr. Krutko. We’re going to go to Mr. Ramsay next. But before we do that, I’d like to recognize some visitors in the gallery.

We have with us today Foreign Service Attaché Arctic Tour 2008: 18

attachés from 16

different

countries, along with their wives and spouses. We have visitors from Argentina, France, Germany, the Hellenic Republic, Mexico, the Netherlands, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Israel, Sweden, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

They’re on a nine-day trip of all territories, with visits to Churchill, Rankin Inlet, Yellowknife, Whitehorse, Dawson City, Resolute Bay, and Iqaluit.

Welcome to Yellowknife, and thank you for joining us today.

I’d also like to recognize Tony Whitford, our Commissioner, in the gallery as well.

Now we’ll move along to Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to start off my general comments by thanking the Minister and the departmental staff for the flexibility that they’ve shown with École St. Joseph. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.

Interjection.

Oh, thank you. I think it’s a fine example of government looking for a way to get things done. I think the school board did a lot in that regard, as well, but I do want to thank the department and department officials for making that happen.

I think it’s a step in the right direction, looking at the PTR again, and we’re lowering that from 16 to 15. That’s a good thing.

The Arts Strategy: I remember the first Arts Strategy, and this one seems to be coming with a little bit of money attached to it, so that’s a good thing. Again, I think what needs to happen with funding that’s going into the arts…. Where it’s at all possible, I’d like to see the department include Regular Members in discussions regarding where the best use of funds would be and how to slice that pie up. It’s not a tremendous number of dollars, but I think if it’s spent in the right areas, it could have a huge impact.

I’m concerned over a few things, and I guess the first one that concerns me is the cuts to the wage subsidy programs, and that’s $1.3 million. Instead of just doing away with the wage subsidy program, I think what should happen is we should look at targeting that money into segments of our economy that need some help. That’s something I think that should have been given some thought. I’m thinking specifically about child care workers, tourism, service industry, businesses and folks who are having a tough time keeping employees. I think we could do a better job of targeting that money instead of just cutting it altogether and saying the economy is red hot. It might be, in some cases. Big business might be doing okay, but small businesses are suffering; they’re having a tough time finding employees. If they could pay their employees a little bit more and get some people in the door and train them and have a wage subsidy

program to fall back on, I think that might be a good thing, Mr. Chairman.

Also, the Housing Corporation, in transferring the administration of social housing back to the Housing Corporation, I think that is something…. The last I heard, you were going out and doing some work, trying to identify what the issues were and were going to come back to Members. But it’s been a long time, and I think you’ve heard it a number of times from Members that we want it back at the Housing Corporation. I’m not sure what you could tell me that could make me change my mind. But again, I’m not sure where that is and why we’re taking so long to try to figure out that it was the wrong decision to make in the first place. I’m not quite sure why we’re taking so long.

I’m also concerned about the student child care subsidy as well. I know there might not have been as big an uptake on that program as the department would have wanted, but if it’s designed specifically for people who are attending post-secondary studies in the Northwest Territories, I think it loses a bit. I could see us using that daycare subsidy for students, even if they’re going back to high school, because sometimes young people will get pregnant in high school and have children in high school. In order for them to go back to high school, I think we should make that program available to those individuals as well. So instead of cutting the program, I think we probably should look at the parameters and open it up a bit and then maybe see if there’s a need to cut it. I do have constituents that access that pot of funding, and I’d hate to see it go. I think it’s something we should have there.

I spoke about this before, Mr. Chairman: the need for more physical education in our schools and the need to get children more physically active. There are schools here in Yellowknife where I’m concerned that they’re not getting enough time in the gymnasium. There’s a school without a gymnasium, and that’s problematic for me. We should be ensuring every school built in the Northwest Territories has a gymnasium — that should be a policy that we live by — and we should be getting more than an hour or an hour and a half a week in the gym if you’re in elementary school. I know there could be more funding becoming available to schools, with the lowering of the PTR, and there might be some opportunities for hiring additional staff at the school level. I just think there’s not enough time spent in the gym.

That was about it for my general comments, and I’ll have a number of questions as we go through the details. Mahsi.

General comments,

Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. General comments, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple of things I want to touch on in my general comments. I want to talk about the policy of inclusive schooling that we have here in the Northwest Territories.

I think there are some really good things to be said for inclusive schooling, but not when it’s not adequately resourced. If it is not adequately resourced to allow for classroom assistants and

special-needs assistants, then it puts a tremendous stress on the teacher. You’re going to be, in any case, dealing with students at many different levels of, I guess, development. I want to say “capacity,” but I don’t know if that’s the right word. Any teacher is going to be dealing with a range, a spectrum of kids, you know, everything from gifted children to children who are maybe slightly more challenged developmentally.

To put teachers in fairly large classroom settings without the resources needed in the classroom I think is doing a disservice to the teachers. It’s doing a disservice to the children, the students, and I have concerns about it. This is something I hear quite a bit about from teachers in Hay River, so I am very concerned about it. You can do a certain amount with volunteers in a school, but it is not the solution on a consistent or sustainable basis.

Being from Hay River, where we have a lot of students who do go into areas of trades — and there’s a lot of employment in our community related to the trades.... For anybody who has toured our school, we do have a very good opportunity for high school students in Hay River to become involved, to some degree, in preparation for occupations in the trades. I think we do need more of that. We need more support for what we have in Hay River.

What we have done is pretty much attributable to two particular individuals who have gone above and beyond the call of duty in terms of improvising and using innovative ways to try and create as much opportunity and experience for the students as possible at the high school level. I think we need to become more involved in that opportunity. I think the academic stream is good for some children. I think that other students would be greatly served by knowing and participating in things other than perhaps post-secondary, college or university programs.

The nice thing is that there is a tremendous demand for trades in the Northwest Territories, and right now trades are a very profitable occupation to be in, in the sense that they are very well paid as, say, compared to years ago. The demand for trades is going up, and the amount of money that a qualified tradesman can command in a job is quite amazing. So I would like to see more focus on that.

I think we need versatility in our apprenticeship programs. I know there are students who have embarked on apprenticeship training and then for various reasons wanted to take their theory training in places other than where it was offered in the Northwest Territories. That has been strongly disallowed by the folks at the apprenticeship office, and I think that is too bad. I think that could be a detriment to people realizing their potential in this

area. If it does not cost the government any more money, if it is absolutely cost neutral to the government, I think that students in the trades should be allowed to access that training at NAIT or SAIT or other places. A lot of people in the Northwest Territories do come from other parts of Canada. They have family; they have friends; they have people they can stay with. I think that by prohibiting it, it’s just creating a barrier that could, if it was dealt with, allow a few more people. I think we need to do everything we can to encourage them.

Some of the other issues that Members raised they’ve already covered off, so I won’t repeat them.

I have to say this because a few years ago I made a statement in this House about the amount of homework that children have, and everybody thought what I said was absolutely outlandish. I’ve noticed that some other jurisdictions in Canada have now actually moved to pretty much abolish homework. The position that I had on it at the time was that we send our children to school to learn, and we try to turn parents into teachers. When parents don’t cooperate with the program and become teachers and supervise homework and provide that structure and discipline for their kids at home at night, those students tend to suffer in the school system. No homework: bad student. Issues at home that would distract parents from being able to take that sit-down time with their kids to supervise homework equal the students not learning the same.

I think that if kids go to school from 9 in the morning until 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon, we should be able to take that time — it’s like going to a job or anything else — and make the most of it. I don’t think we should be trying to turn parents into teachers. It’s nice of them to be involved if they can be, but the students shouldn’t suffer if they aren’t. That is just something I’ve thought for many years, having had three children almost go through the school system. I’ve got one that’s got a couple courses yet to go. I think it’s discriminatory too. It sets the child who does not have that level of commitment from the parents to be involved in that after-school and evening support at a disadvantage.

As I said in my statement I made a few years ago in the House, I think life is too short. I think it’s too stressful on kids to have to go home and do hours of homework. You know, maybe there should be more time for some fun. I think that when they’re at school, they should be very focused on their academic training, and their academic training should be very focused on the basics.

I wasn’t a great student. I missed a lot of school because my parents had a business. It’s like kids who go on the land with their parents here in the

North. My parents had a family business, so I went to work in the store. In the agricultural community around where I grew up, if it was harvest time, the kids missed school. But somehow, in spite of all of that, we came away with basic, good education in math and English and grammar, enough to stand us in good stead to participate in life’s experiences. I didn’t have post-secondary education, but it was a solid enough foundation that I could embark on things without too many obstacles, just with that basic foundation.

I would like to see a real focus on the meat-and-potatoes kind of education for the kids during the day. Don’t load them up with homework so that you make them hate school. I just think it’s too much stress on our kids today. You know, if you’re lucky and your parents are already teachers or something, you might just turn out to be a genius by school standards, but for the average family that is dealing with all of the challenges of parenting and working and extracurricular activities that they may want their children to be involved in, I just think a whole lot of homework is not a good idea. I know it’s maybe a strange position to take to those who are in the education field, but it’s a life issue.

I think my point has been proven by the fact that there are jurisdictions — I just heard it in the news the other day — that have actually taken a position to limit homework for children in their education system. So you might want to think about it and check it out in other jurisdictions to see what’s happening. I just hate to see children feel like they are somehow less prepared or that they’re a failure in school because maybe they didn’t have the home situation that had the structure that could get them doing a lot of homework in the evenings.

General comments.

Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll be pretty brief. A lot has been said already, although I may echo a few areas that have already been spoken to. For areas that I do miss, I wouldn’t want people to think they’re less worthy. They’ve been raised quite well by other Members.

I’m just going to follow along with the Minister’s statement. There was early childhood education that I wanted to highlight. I’m a big believer in this. What I’d like to see eventually is that this becomes a more coordinated approach. There are a number of bodies out there operating independently. I think that when the government talks about fiscal restraint and synergies, this is one area we could do a lot more with.

I’ve had the experience with a number of Members from this Assembly to visit Whitehorse. They offer early childhood development opportunities there. They encompass their programs with specialists

who help kids with speech and other developmental issues. I think that’s just the next step in our progression to providing sort of an all-inclusive plan for kids. What I’d like to eventually see is a coordinated approach in this regard, and I think it’s just a matter of time coming. I’m just looking for the spark in the department to respond to it. Whether they get an oral question this week or next week from me or not I can’t say, but I’ll tell you that at least this is their notice that it’s coming. The fact is that I think, like I said, it’s the next progression in the area that we should be getting into and coordinating a little better.

The other thing is that we have a number of organizations, whether they’re individual daycares. I mean, everyone can plug into larger opportunities to ensure that our next generation gets the full strength and support coming into the system and as they progress forward. We need that layer system to work together with them. That network needs to be coordinated and organized, and I guess that’s kind of why I’m highlighting it in that method.

I will highlight the next area, which is the pupil-teacher ratio. It’s certainly a good day for education every time you hear that the department takes a new leap forward in the way of delivering school funding and to ensure that schools can maximize their opportunities. I think it’s a fantastic stride that’s been taken. Principally, although I don’t disagree with formula-based funding where it makes sense — and it certainly makes sense out there — the problem is that we have a small community school in a small community, and you start losing sort of your base. All of a sudden you’ve still got to operate and maintain and tend to staff at a small school.

How it applies in a large centre, as far as I’m concerned, is probably similar but different. I’ve always believed that schools should be funded on the principles of what they are, and they’re a community as well as an education system. As I view it, every community — the school, that is — should have its principal, should have its administrative staff. It should have a gymnasium. It should have a library teacher.

I’ve always believed that these elements need to be the building blocks of each community school, whether they’re in a big centre or a small one, long before you get into the pupil-teacher ratio. With that, you know, you go to one of the schools in my riding, whether it’s Sissons or Mildred Hall, or you go to my colleague Mr.

Jacobson’s school in

Tuktoyaktuk. They will have things like libraries and maybe a science lab teacher to make sure we’re delivering a compatible, comparable education system throughout the North, to make sure that no child is given a lesser opportunity.

I think that’s the formula that I eventually want to see. I don’t expect groundbreaking movement on this, but it’s something I’d certainly hope that the department would see in time: that every school deserves these things, whether it’s a combination of things. I think it really, ultimately, would be a combination of how that goes.

I will highlight one Member in particular here: Mr. Ramsay. He and I both wrote a letter at least a year ago or so for École St-Cyr here in Yellowknife. They’re operating without a gymnasium, and we were the only two who wrote a letter in support at the time. I agree wholeheartedly with his comments saying that no school should be without a gymnasium. The fact is that it doesn’t matter for what lame reason someone didn’t want to come on board with it. Every school needs an opportunity to have their kids have physical education. I think we do them a disservice as to — it’s getting difficulty to hear in here, Mr. Chairman.

Could we have some order in the House, please, to allow the Member to conclude his comments.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. As far as I’m concerned, we do the children there a disservice. When we always talk about the principles of supporting education, it shouldn’t really be a matter of what community you’re from or what region, what big community you’re from or what school system you belong to. These principles are our basis of belief, and they’re the fabric of why we do things. It shouldn’t matter, again, where you’re from, what language you speak, what your background is. The same things, I believe, should be spread throughout.

As far as programming goes within the school, I certainly think there need to be more support mechanisms. I’ve often spoken about the fact that I think school systems — each school district, that is — should have a social worker in there making sure they’re available for the kids. Your teachers are your teachers, whether they’re seen in a good light or in a negative light some days, the enforcement side. The fact is that they’re your teachers; they’re not social workers. I think every school system could benefit from someone like that. When I’ve raised the issue of attendance or whatever problems come in, I think school systems could benefit from something like that. I talked to a couple of districts already, and they think it’s a good idea. I think it’s an evolution, again, of the education system, where we can now offer the best product to our students, and that’s really all I’m after.

Mr. Chair, as time runs out, I’m just going to quickly touch on these things. I won’t go into as much detail. I see there’s a new investment of $500,000 for the Arts Strategy. I’ve spoken in this House about my support for that. I certainly would like to

see an awards-level culture-recognition program, whether it’s recognizing it through a yearly event or whatnot. I think it continues to further strengthen people’s belief in what they do. We can talk about the business of life, but sometimes it’s the quality of life that we tend to forget about. I think the arts always bring quality of life.

Mr. Chairman, as far as college programs go, I’m pleased with the investment that goes to Aurora College. I certainly take no issue with it being in the community of Fort Smith, although it makes you wonder from time to time. My issue really has always been and will continue to be about safety of students and certainly the interest level of students, whether we’re running programs in Yellowknife, in Inuvik, or anywhere else. The fact is that if they’re not subscribed to, I think we have to start to ask ourselves why we’re running them there. To the credit of Fort Smith — and I have said this publicly — they do have good programs running there, so I wouldn’t want it to be thought I can’t recognize that as well.

Mr. Chair, moving on to career and employment development, although I don’t see it here, I’m sure it’s just a matter of a briefing note or two away from mentioning the Foreign Worker Program, that I’ve talked about. I think it fits very well here under the career and development area. I think that will be our next strength, leading into helping bring the North forward in employment strength. We have a number of employers out there that struggle to find technical expertise. It just doesn’t exist in this small market, and we can only keep sending so many advertisements to Edmonton and Calgary and continue not to be able to fill these jobs. Then there are the middle-level or lower-level job opportunities. The business sector is just hungry out there for any opportunity to employ anyone. I think this would be a good bridge-building opportunity for our North to continue to build our base of not just population but our diversity.

Mr. Chairman, even with a foreign worker in the Northwest Territories we still get our grant for Canada on that recognition. They don’t actually have to be a Canadian citizen. They can be someone here on a foreign-worker pass, and we still qualify for that. So our Finance minister, even though he’s on short days, I’m sure knows that it’s money in the bank if we can get them here on our roll call when they do our stats across the territories.

Mr.

Chairman, as I highlighted about Aurora

College, I can’t forget the fact that I’m very supportive of further extending our trades here in the North. Just recently I’ve talked about the cooking school opportunities that exist before us. I would certainly hope that that isn’t missed. The value it can bring is not just in the fact that we could be developing opportunities, but we could be

expecting more from ourselves, which I think is something really interesting in and of itself. We could put a higher demand on the skill level we offer people, and I think the need and desire for that extra skill level is out there.

I’m hearing about mining camps that want trained staff at a higher degree. This is certainly the window of it for cooks. Throughout our city there are a number of Red Seal chefs, and there’s great opportunity to expand this service. Mr. Chair, I don’t think this is a complicated program. I know the Minister has spoken and is, in his words, cautiously optimistic in his way of supporting this. There’s still a lot of ground to go forward before it’s, obviously, embraced fully, and a lot of work still needs to be done before it becomes a real possibility.

That’s it, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to provide those first few comments. I’m pleased with the department and the work the Minister has been doing. Lastly, I’ll say that I’m pleased with the relationship the Minister has had with the committee members both on social programs as well as with individual committee members doing their work. Thank you.

General comments, Mr. McLeod.

I’ll be very brief here. I know the Minister’s been listening to all the comments made from this side of the House, and he’s anxious to respond and say yes to all of our asks, so I won’t take up too much time.

The thing I’ve noticed with this budget — and we talk about a budget of reduction — is the word “increase.” I’ve said that with a couple of other departments, and I will continue to have that view as we’re going through the budget process with the different departments. This is one that is a very important department, because it is the Education department. So with that I can probably see a slight increase. I’ve had an issue with budgets coming before us with the word “increase.”

The one thing that I would like to comment on is early childhood development. The Minister is well aware of the Children First Society in Inuvik continuing to try to get an early childhood facility. Studies and research have proved that if you can catch them at an early age, you have a better chance of developing them and getting through the system and teaching them. That is their idea, and that’s what they want to do.

They’re having an awfully difficult time of it, though. They at first asked for some money to help with the facility, and it was just “No, no, no” to everything. All they’re asking for is just a piece of property to put this building on that they’re going to raise the funds

for themselves. Even at that, they seem to be running into one roadblock after another. We talk about early childhood being important. These are folks that are not just talking about it. They’re trying to do something about it, and it just seems that they run into “no” all the time. We don’t want to have them lose interest in trying to push their project forward. They’re not asking for $20 million or $30 million from the government to put their project up. All they’re asking for is the donation of a piece of property. I think that’s something this department should seriously look at. We can drop millions of dollars on correctional facilities — just bang, like that — and here these people are trying to do something to educate the children when they first get them, and have them go through the system and not have to become wards of the state or clients of a correctional facility.

I think this would go a long way, and I still will continue to push that, as they are pushing it. We’ve had some meetings with the Minister, and it seems like we try to make some progress, but then we’re right back at square one. So that’s one of my big concerns.

Another one is the training dollars. Sometimes there’s just so many different programs out there you almost get dizzy trying to figure out what’s what and where to go and how to access money. You’ve got ten people administering a program that only one or two should be able to do. I have a concern with that. But the training part of it…. The Mobile Trades Unit in Inuvik, I think, was a good investment. It’ll be seen in a few years how much came out of it, but I think for now it was a good investment. It was in partnership — like the Minister likes to mention — with some of the different aboriginal groups. CIBC was actually a partner; the Inuvaluit, the Gwich’in, and some stakeholders in industry were partners with that.

So I’m looking for some positive things coming out of that, because you well know that trades, as a couple of Members have mentioned, are in high demand. The more we can encourage people — youth — to get into the trades…. Not just youth, I’ve seen 40- and 44-year-old apprentices still coming out with their journeymen certificates. Years ago Public Works used to have apprentices. We had a huge maintenance shop. We had 30 to 40 people, 30 to 40 trades and apprentices, and seven or eight alone just in the carpenter shop. The way they offer it now is good, as they get out and do some actual hands-on training. We did have a lot of apprentices, for instance, in the carpenter shop. We didn’t have as much hands-on experience as I would have liked, but there isn’t a door knob in the world that I can’t fix, because we did a lot of door knobs.

Interjection.

A former DPW apprentice knows what I’m talking about.

So I see an opportunity there to really push for apprentices, apprenticeship training. I’m glad to see they reinstated some of the money towards the employers to offset the wages, and I think it’s a good thing. I think apprentices within the GNWT are underpaid. You can make more working at the local grocery store than you can as an apprentice, so that’s something that has to be looked at. But I don’t think it’s this department’s responsibility. I think it’s Human Resources, and it’s got something to do with this plan that we always hear about. So I don’t think it was a fair process.

We try to encourage people to get into the trades, but we don’t make it worth their while. At the end of the day, when they’re certified, they will start to reap the rewards of their training. But until then they have to live on basically next to nothing. I have a concern with that, which leads me to my next point, which is the income support. I am not a firm-believer in able-bodied people being able to collect a lot of money off the government when you see so many people trying, struggling. There are some out there, I know, who need the support, and I fully support that. There are some disabled people, some elders who need the support. I fully respect that. I see a lot of disabled people regardless of their disabilities still trying to go out and work. I really respect that, while too many able-bodied people are sitting at home. Maybe we just made it too generous for them to stay at home. I know it’s not a popular comment to make, but it’s the truth.

I think it’s something we should have a look at. I think we did agree to bump up the level of income support, but some we may have to look at again. There are people who do continue to need it. There are people living in areas where the cost of living is just unbelievable, and they just can’t make the money to keep up with it. But I also think that there is some abuse of the system. I’ve heard it from contractors who find it difficult to find people to work because they are doing better on income support. So I think it’s something we have to look at — if not look at, I think we have to enforce and monitor a lot better. Put these people to work: they can’t just be sitting at home watching TV all day while people are out there working and paying into it by way of taxes and stuff like that. So I think it’s something we need to have a look at, and monitor, and enforce and make sure the money is going where it should be going.

So, Mr. Chair, I think I have pretty well said enough for one day. I’ll be looking forward to getting into the page-by-page. One other comment I do want to make is back in the Minister’s statement, which says that Ministerial colleagues and I have made decisions using the priorities of the 16th Assembly

as a guide. There might be some truth to that, but also the Regular Members weren’t really consulted as much as we’d like. We did come up with a lot of priorities, and we did see some of them…. I can’t remember how many, but I think there may have been a few that have been implemented or put into the budget. But this is some food for thought for the future.

You know, we have to work as 19 Members in here, and we want to make sure that everything that comes in the budget — all the business plans and everything — is a reflection of the views of all 19 Members. At the end of the day, Cabinet has decision-making powers along with the department. I’d like to see Cabinet exercise their decision-maker power a little more over the department, until they get to the point where they realize it’s us on behalf of the people of the NWT that are the driving force behind how government should operate and not just be steered in the direction that the bureaucrats have been steering the government for too long. Maybe this is a good thing; maybe they get to realize now that we have the decision-making power and we intend to exercise that. If it means change…. They have been doing things the same way for so long. They are kind of resistant to change, and I think this is a good example of that. I think it is something that we are going to push quite vigorously on this side.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to make a few comments. I have 38 seconds to go, but I am going to stop here.