Thank you Mr. Chairman. I have a number of comments. These are not in any particular order, but some are in reference to the budget in general and some are in reference to the Minister’s opening remarks.
I would like to start off by talking about there is a statement, I think it is in the business plan, there is a trend to a decreased use of income assistance funds, but I know over the last week or two I have heard the Minister state that the Department of Education, Culture and Employment... Income support is certainly handling more income support claims. So I am a little bit concerned that if the
budget is showing a decrease in income support funding, it leads me to believe that this budget may be underfunded. When we get to that, I will probably ask some questions with regards to that.
We do have an increase, this is working from the business plans and it doesn’t actually show in the mains, but the business plans showed an increase in the department’s total budget of about $13 million, which concerns me. I have said in regards to most budgets when they go up, that I am concerned that we are consistently increasing our budgets and I wonder if we are actually, or if there is real value in what we are doing for the increases.
One of the expenses that is in this budget that I particularly disagree with is the $400,000 that is earmarked for a Nutritious Food Study, and I know in the Minister’s opening remarks that apparently has been redesigned, realigned, reprofiled to now say that this funding will be allocated to support food programs delivered by existing agencies, and goes on to describe a couple of other things. I still believe that we have the supports in place right now, we have the information and the background information, the research has been done and I still believe we should be putting an actual program in place; an on-the-ground program that is delivering foods, whether it be meals or milk into the mouths of our babes, and I don’t feel that this particular expense is going to do that the way it is described and I will have some questions for the Minister when we get to discuss that item.
I’m concerned about board reform. It hasn’t really been mentioned, but I know that there are things going on sort of behind the scenes and I’m a little concerned that there are... Well, I guess I want to know whether or not the department has plans to do any kind of changes within education boards in the next coming year.
I am pleased to see that we have a further increase in money for arts and cultural organizations. It can only stand us in good stead as we go forward. I think we’re up to $2.2 million or something like that at this point and that’s great, it’s good to see.
I’m a little bit concerned about the vague response of the department to the official languages review. There are a couple of things that are mentioned, but I’m not so sure that… We’re starting off with a symposium and, I think, with a language institute and I’m not so sure that those are going to deliver the results that we need in terms of responding to the recommendations from the standing committee in terms of the review of the official languages.
There is an increase in money for early childhood and family literacy, and I think that’s a great thing to see. We should be putting an awful lot more money into our early childhood programs, as far as I’m concerned. I’m a little bit concerned that this may be a one-time affair, and I’ll speak about that when we get to that particular page.
I’m also concerned that there is a decrease in inclusive schooling funding. It’s going down from 19 percent of budgets to 18.5 percent of education authorities’ budgets. So I’m concerned about that. I’ve had an explanation that suggests that it may not be an actual decrease in dollars, but I will speak to that when we get there.
I am pleased to see that the department is branching out in terms of high school, secondary school diplomas and is starting a process to recognize prior learning. The PLAR program, I think, is going to be a good thing. I want to reiterate that I still believe that we need to seriously consider and investigate having two different high school diplomas apart from the PLAR process, but that we need to have an academic and a non-academic high school certificate to make it more clear to students just what programs they’re in and what course they’re taking and what they will be coming out of high school with as they go on to further education.
Good news, from my perspective, on the increase to minimum wage. I’m really pleased to see that in there. I am disappointed, though, and I know that it’s not part of the… This is an O and M budget, it’s not a capital budget, but I am disappointed that there’s no consideration for Ecole Allain St-Cyr phase II expansion. There’s no money in here for planning or anything else, that I can tell.
There’s a mention, I don’t know where, in the Minister’s remarks about apprentice programs and it references two different kinds of programs. I have to say, again -- I think I said this last year -- that I am concerned that we have many different programs for apprenticeships and I think they need to be better coordinated. I think we do the same thing in several different areas, and my question about these two programs are how are they different. So I’ll have some questions when we get to that section.
Lastly, I have to take great exception to the undefined other expense, which shows up on page 10-7. We have other expenses of some $71 million and in that we have another of $2.419 million. That’s a pretty large amount to be undefined. We did get an explanation from the Finance Minister. It tells us that $2.419 is a bad debts expense. So that also is, like, okay, what is a bad debts expense? What the heck does that mean? So I would like an explanation when we get to discussing that page.
Other than that, Mr. Chair, the budget is pretty much a status quo. There are a lot of good things in here. There are some things which I don’t particularly agree with but, in general, I think it’s a budget I can live with. Thank you, Mr. Chair.