EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This morning this section of Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Education and Training. When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 16.(2)(f)(1) on page 39 of the Estimates.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Chair, I had some questions to ask about special needs students under this line. There are a number of lines we could ask it under, but since we are here I wanted to ask about attention deficit disorder and whether the department was considering evaluations of students, as they do in some provinces, before entrance into school. Has it looked at any of those programs in other provinces--I think New Brunswick is one of them--to see whether it might be looking at that as a policy for Manitoba?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): I am advised at this point that they have not examined this as a policy item to this point. We do have an early identification system, as I think the member knows, that has been in place quite a few years, over a decade, and we provide grants to divisions for that early identification and we ask for early identification at kindergarten at the beginning of school. You cannot have early identification once you are midstream. Early identification means just what it says, right at the very beginning. Grants are provided to divisions for that purpose.

Mr. Chairman, just before we go on to the next question, there were some items that were asked for. We have those now and if I could just table them. I will just indicate what they are so the member is aware that we have the costs of the documents that she was looking for, fee-for-service payments and the apprenticeship handbook, the multiyear development plan for distance education, indentured trades, the hub schools, the Portage and Winkler proposal, the home schooling by region, and what is new. I have those here, and I shall put those on the table. I have them tabled for the members' benefit, for their information.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: I thank the minister for those submissions.

Ms. Friesen: I just wanted to follow up on the early identification program. Is this specifically related to attention deficit disorder or is that a general grant for early identification of a variety of problems?

Mrs. McIntosh: We have specifics that we target: vision screening, hearing screening, language delays and, of course, teacher observations bring forward details noticed in the classroom by the teacher. Teachers have the ability to watch for and look for things that will become evident as the child starts school. The obvious ones, of course, would be language delay. It would be very visible. We work as well with the preschool services and we are in the process of developing a preschool-to-school protocol for transition that would pick up some of these things even prior to the beginning of the actual learning experience in a public school.

We give the grant proposals focused on certain areas. I will just indicate some of them to you. We give grants for professional development in areas of identification and programming for special needs students in the early years. We talk about teacher observation and the importance of teacher observation. Grant proposals focused on professional development in terms of the areas of identification are ones that we target.

* (1010)

Also, we have school team meetings for planning for special needs students and for planning modifications to the regular curriculum, and resources and materials specific to early identification as well as the establishment of divisional early years committees to plan professional development and information about resources and monitoring of the EIEP process.

I keep going back to my own division and I do not mean to, it is just one that I have some familiarity with and I am sure that as I become longer in the tooth in terms of my tenure in this portfolio I will begin to know other divisions as much as I do this one particular one, but it does focus on the attention deficit disorder in terms of professional development and resources.

Some other divisions, I am informed, have identified this as a priority as well, and the department puts out four videos for parents and teachers in this regard. We also work with parents. We will have parent information sessions about programming for children with special needs, and we entertain grant proposals for that type of servicing as well. So I do not know if that provides the detail you are seeking. If you need further clarification, I will be pleased to attempt to further clarify.

Ms. Friesen: Yes, that is certainly part of it. The concerns that have been expressed to me have been that it is believed that whereas some divisions do recognize this, not all divisions do, and there is not a sense, in some parents anyway, that the department recognizes it. So I am wondering whether that is the case, first of all, and whether there are plans to look at this in the context of special needs grants.

Mrs. McIntosh: One thing that the member should be aware of is that the Level I funding includes this, inclusive of this particular group of needs, and funding for a Level I targets that particular group of children. So it is there and it is identified in that way, and I am presuming the member is asking, is it over and above that? So my response, in terms of the additional monies that might be available, was an attempt to identify over and above the Level I funding, which of course targets certain groups of children including that group.

Ms. Friesen: The Norwood School Division has experienced some difficulties in having recognition of the Level II grants that it has applied for, and I believe it has experienced a 20 to 30 percent drop in the acceptance of its special needs Level II approaches to the department. I am wondering what the department's response is to that. Is there some special reason why these particular grants have not been accepted this year? As I understand it, the children for whom the grants have been applied for have not changed in their abilities or their needs for special assistance, and I am wondering what the department's response has been to the Norwood School Division.

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member for the question. I am a little puzzled as to how the member can say that funding for Norwood for special needs has been cut, when funding decisions for the division are not finalized until the end of September. I wonder if she can clarify what she means by her question, because I do not know how she is able to say what the final count is going to be at the end of September when we do not have the enrolments in yet.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chairman, my question was related to Level II special needs grants for which applications have been made and subsequently rejected. It was not to the Norwood schools grants. I think I did say Level II special needs, and I am basing this upon a report in the newspaper, in the Lance newspaper which I am sure the minister's staff are familiar with. It was simply that, that Norwood has a number of children--I do not know proportionally how it relates to other divisions, but students for whom Level II grants were available in previous years, the same students when applied for this year with the same level of need in the school's estimation, have not received the funding. That, at least, is how the newspaper reported it, and I am wondering what the department's response has been to that. First of all, is it true? Secondly what has been the response?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, staff have indicated to me that the department has met with Norwood since the appearance of those articles and that Norwood and the staff have agreed that the original decision that they agreed upon prior to the reporting was in fact the correct decision, so I can only assume, with that kind of agreement and the clarification in a subsequent meeting, that the original agreement was the right agreement, that that should allay any misperception that might have been provided to the media.

* (1020)

I have to indicate that each of the students was reviewed and that the agreement was reached and that the funding, if there are other Level II grants being requested, September 30 is the date that they will have as the deadline, and Level II and Level III funding is provided to school divisions to assist in programming for students with severe and profound needs.

In the Norwood example some of the students have progressed. The member indicated that the needs of the students, that some of the students--I will back up a bit here. Some of the students had only been funded for a one-year program to stabilize the programming. That occurred and the member indicates that, in fact, the one-year program put in place to stabilize did not result in stabilization, that the students' needs had not changed, and yet I am advised that the students did, indeed, progress and that was the reason why the agreement struck between the division and the department when they reviewed each of the students came to the conclusion that it did.

Somebody maybe informed the media or gave the media information that was different from saying that the division had agreed with this. Hence, the department met again with the division, and they received a reconfirmation that, indeed, the original decision was a correct analysis of the needs.

Having said all that, the final decisions for '95 and '96 only occur at the end of September so whatever the circumstances were or are, it is incorrect to say that there has been a final decision on special-needs funding when the deadline is still more than three months away.

The member knows that funding is allocated annually and funding decisions for individual children begin in the spring, and the progress continues into the fall. That is in the event that a school receives new children who are eligible or some dramatic circumstance of change occurs.

Low-incidence funding has not been completed for the '95-96 year. The deadline, as I indicated, is September 30, and new students in exceptional circumstances will continue to be considered right up until that date, department staff, in-service, Norwood School Division on the low-incident guidelines in the application process in March, so it is not a recent thing. What maybe happened was there was a premature contact with the media and a gap of communication internal to the division where maybe the person who had the premature contact with the media had not been in communication with others inside the division who could inform of the agreement that was reached.

You know, when all is said and done, the overall funding for Level II and Level III has increased dramatically over the last six years. Since 1989 and '90, the Level II has increased $9.3 million, going from $7.7 million to $17 million, and Level III has increased $6.3 million from $2.4 million to $8.7 million. That is due to increased funding in these areas, as well as the ability to identify better and have increased participation rates, as well. So decisions regarding funding are based on the criteria established for Level II and Level III. There have been changes and improvements that may have occurred over a period of time in a child's education achievement and whether a specialized program above and beyond regular programming is in place.

There is no shortage of funds for special needs as the figures I have just given you indicate. There has been a dramatic increase in funding for Level II and Level III, and in Norwood School Division funding for Level II, their 1994-95 average, is one of the highest in the province. Within a total picture of dramatically increased funding, this particular division, even within that, has had one of the highest average increases in funding for Level II in the entire province. I hope that answers the question, both in a generic and a specific sense.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell me approximately the dates of the meetings that took place with Norwood School Division where they agreed that the original decision had been correct? I was not sure whether the minister said there were two additional meetings or one additional meeting.

Mrs. McIntosh: As I indicated a little bit earlier in my response to this question, there was a meeting that took place in March. That was one that we can identify. Then the staff, in their regular work with the special needs people in the division, have visited the schools, have been onsite, have examined programmings and they deal with the special needs people in the division. My understanding is that it was another individual, not the special needs person who had done all of the work with the department in terms of who required assistance in terms of funding this year. It was not that individual that spoke to the media. It was another individual who had not had the up-to-date communication from the special needs people.

About five or six days after, there was an article that appeared in the media. There was another meeting then held with the special needs expert plus the individual who spoke prematurely to the press without having had the information from the special needs person. The purpose of that meeting was to clarify and to determine if in fact the agreement that had been come to with respect, had been arrived at with the special needs experts and the people in the department who had been doing the onsite visitations and so on, was still in fact appropriate. At the same time, I would imagine updating the individual who did speak to the media so that he would have the updated information and be able to speak with some accuracy as to what had been happening with those in charge of special needs students.

The purpose of the funding, as the member knows, is to have students change and grow. If someone who had not been talking to the special needs experts inadvertently made the assumption that, because there was a child who last year had a special need, that special need would still be needed, and without realizing that there would be changes in funding for those who did in fact change and grow in the year of funding they had received before, if that person made the assumption because the person once labelled special needs at a certain level would always remain at that level, then one could see how that person could make the error.

Hopefully, that meeting to explain that the purpose of the funding that some of those children received was one year to stabilize and to change and grow and that it was in the opinion of the experts who worked with these children and provide funding to those children that in fact some of those changes, some of the goals that were set had been met, I think that was probably clarified for the individual.

* (1030)

Some students are going to need support for a longer time, obviously, and their funding then would be asked to be continued. Others may need only a short-term intervention. At any rate, it does appear that the agreement is there should further funding be needed for other students or changed circumstances. The deadline, as I indicated, is still three and a half months away. I think this is all just an unfortunate circumstance where somebody prematurely, without full knowledge of what had been occurring, made a comment to the media that maybe should have been checked out before it was made.

Ms. Friesen: Just for my own purposes of clarification, all grants are for a year. I am not sure what the minister is talking about when she says this was a special--she did not use the word special, but this was a one-year grant to stabilize. So was this a different kind of grant than any other grant?

Mrs. McIntosh: All grants are for one year, but the member knows and I assume knows quite well that while grants are renewed each year, there are some grants that are put in place where there is an expectation that, if it is a transition period--maybe the member does not know this, I should not be making assumptions. If the division and the special needs person in the division, in conjunction with the others responsible for that child, ascertains the child is going to be in a transition year where they can move from one program to another, and they say we will require funding for student X again this year but it is our expectation that at the end of this year this child would be able to be moved into a different program, then they signal at the beginning of the year that they do not expect it to be automatically ongoing.

Whereas others will be saying we are requesting funding again for child X, it is our expectation that this funding will have to continue on an ongoing basis; we do not at this point see a moment when the child would be able or the student would be able to come off that level.

So the member is correct in the--yes, grants are renewed or not renewed annually, but in some instances those working with the student have a pretty good idea that they are in a transition year. I am advised that in this particular situation that there was in fact that situation existing. I am advised that it was identified in certain instances here in this division that it was the expectation that at the end of the year the student would be able to move to a different program and this would be a transition year.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Chair, there were several grants which were not renewed in the Norwood School Division. Was that the case in each of them that the department had indicated that these were to be transitional grants and then subsequently reapplied?

Mrs. McIntosh: I am advised that every child in the Norwood Division that was brought forward for consideration in this regard was reviewed. They are reviewed against a set of criteria. Those who met the criteria were funded. Those who did not meet the criteria were not. That discussion on the review was something that the special needs co-ordinator--I want to make sure I have the right title here--knew and agreed to as appropriate. I indicate again the massive increase in funding for special needs at Level II that has been put in place over the last four or five years in the province, extremely large increase in funding. As well, this particular division is one of the highest recipients of this kind of funding in the entire province, even in an era of increased funding overall.

The final point I leave with the member is that once again this process goes on until September 30 and that the department is always in a position of examining and re-examining and examining and re-examining the needs of students. It is not a closed-door process where they say, you come in and once you are on, you are always on and you never take it off, or you come in and if you are not on in the beginning, you never get put on. Children move in and out of this system because it is one that responds to identified needs.

* (1040)

Ms. Friesen: I recognize the great increases that have occurred in these areas in funding, and obviously part of it is the increasing number of students who are able to be incorporated into regular schools with this kind of assistance.

The Minister has indicated the scale of the increase over the last few years at Level II and Level III. I am wondering, is she anticipating that there will be caps on this kind of funding?

Mrs. McIntosh: I have not heard of that concept. We have had no discussions about caps and I do not think we have ever had caps on special needs funding. I do not know if that is coming forward as a suggestion or not, but it is not one that we have looked at.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about what I think is, what is called in the Estimates Expected Results in this section 16.(2)(f). It indicates on page 57, site visits to all schools will be conducted to monitor implementation of school plans and funded programs. I am wondering if the minister could perhaps explain this. Is this going to be a regular site visit? Who is going to do the visiting? What kinds of evaluations are being conducted? How are they conducted? Where are they being registered, et cetera.

Mrs. McIntosh: The member is referring, I think, to the regional team, where you were talking about site visits to all schools, on page 57, I think. The regional team's unit, it is called, will administer and is administering and monitoring categorical grants. It will provide information and assistance to divisions and schools regarding departmental policies and guidelines and collaborate with divisions to develop regional initiatives to support implementation of priority areas. It is a supportive and collaborative venture of reaching out.

(Peter Dyck, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

We will continue to administer and monitor categorical grants in low incidence funding, student support grants, English language instruction for native students, early identification and education programming, small schools grants, English as a second language, and in collaboration with school divisions, review and develop annual divisional action plans for the services for students with special needs. Another key thrust will be the interdepartmental interagency collaboration on regional and provincial committees.

We have, in collaboration with school divisions, identified certain regional initiatives, and they will include regionally based training and consultation with specialists and support for programming initiatives in technology, dealing with the emotionally behaviourally disordered students, violence prevention, language arts, early literacy, mathematics, middle years schools and aboriginal awareness. But you note in there, of course, the special needs have been identified as part of our regional initiative that was developed in collaboration with the school divisions, and they indicated then they would like that kind of consultation with specialists and supporters for those particular programming initiatives.

(Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)

Ms. Friesen: Will each school be visited by regional teams on a regular basis?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, the schools will be visited. I should indicate first of all that the consultants are assigned to be a prime contact for divisions in order to provide services, but that prime contact will direct them to school visitations. So they will be visiting all schools where programs are and working with the divisions as regional managers. The managers will be meeting regularly with school superintendents, and the concept here--I have the names of the various regions here, but I think you know them--is an attempt to become more field-based, to be in the field rather than sitting here in a building like this on Broadway removed from the places of activity.

As we reach out, we work in the field with the deliverers of service and have regular ongoing contact with the divisions. We will also then bring back suggestions from the field. You will see us begin to do things. We were talking the other day about the revolving secondments, as opposed to just having a secondment that deals with one area forever and everything else gets neglected, the suggestion of revolving secondments so that needs that are identified can have a turn with a seconded expert.

Those kinds of ideas we can pick up in the field and bring back to place into the mix here and be more properly responsive to what people delivering the service are saying and give them an easier way to reach us than having to write letters that have to go through the delivery of the post office, which is not always the speediest thing in the world and that type of thing. Even phone calls are hard to return sometimes, but with regional people we can achieve a better contact. So schools with categorical grants, as I indicated, are definitely visited, and they are visited one, two, three times a year, as many times as the school requests or as needed, and they are generally visited in order to support the programs that are in place.

* (1050)

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 16.2(f) Program Implementation (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $4,774,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $2,594,100--pass.

16.2(g) Student Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,896,300.

Ms. Friesen: I wanted to ask about the Manitoba School for the Deaf and the changes that the government is planning in the building, in programs, in administration and housing at the School for the Deaf.

Mrs. McIntosh: Does that mean that we are going to skip the one and just go straight to this one? There is another section in there. Do you want to skip over it?

Ms. Friesen: Yes, there is a little discussion there about where we should examine the Manitoba School for the Deaf, and there is a line 16.2, 2.(h), which is specific to the School for the Deaf, but under 16.2, 2.(g) , which I think is where we are, there are also some elements for the School for the Deaf, the residential and day program, for example. It is a mixed grouping.

My question was, there have been some changes in the programming, in the residence, in the housing of the Manitoba School for the Deaf, and I wondered if the government could give us an idea of what their plan is and how that plan has been developed.

Mrs. McIntosh: I thank the member for the question, because this is a particular interest of mine. The School for the Deaf is going to be moving into some very good computer technology type of learning experience. The modifications to the existing building in which the students are housed were estimated, and I am approximating here, to have been about $4 million. The department has been looking for some five years for an alternate site. The one school that they have looked at throughout that whole period of time is Alexander Ross school which, would cost about $2 million dollars to upgrade to the standards desired by the educators. So it is cutting the cost in half.

In April of this year, the Premier announced that the department and the authorities assigned to deal with negotiating had arrived at a decision to relocate the existing student body and staff to Alexander Ross school which is in the St. James School Division. That move is slated for implementation; target date is September '96. In the meantime there are ongoing discussions, particularly with the parents of the students, although they are also bringing in for discussion others who are on the advisory committee which is not necessarily composed of parents, but people who have a keen interest in the School for the Deaf.

Apparently, throughout all the ongoing discussions, there had been some on the advisory committee who, while they all knew, of course, that Alexander Ross school was one of the ones being considered, had not been aware that they had come to an agreement. Some of the parents did, but some of the advisory council members did not. They were wanting to have things to say and those discussions are going on at the present time.

So the change in programming will be technology. The change in site, the housing would be to move from the existing facility over to the Alexander Ross school which is deemed to be an improved facility for the students and their needs. In particular, I think some of the people interested in science are really thrilled with the new science lab at the new school.

The number of people who live in a certain part of the city are very pleased to be in a more accessible location close to the perimeter and Portage, and certainly the people who live in the west end of the city are thrilled because they do not have to go nearly as far. It will be like any move. You will find there will be some who are very pleased and some who would rather stay where they are. The parents, the ones that I have been most in contact with, because I feel it is the parents who will be most affected, have been very supportive, indeed.

Ms. Friesen: I got a bit lost there in advisory committees and who had agreed to what. I am just going to go back over some of it. The minister said that the Premier had assigned authorities to negotiate this move, which I assume is essentially an issue of real estate, to negotiate the move. Could we sort of explain that one for the start?

Mrs. McIntosh: I do not think I said that but maybe with the juxtaposition of the wording it came out that way. I indicated the Premier made the announcement, and the Premier did make the announcement. I suppose, indirectly, everything that happens in government is under the authority of the Premier, but, no, the Premier was not involved at the working staff level where the proper authorities, the people who are assigned to do these things--I am putting it that way because I am not even quite sure who all of the individuals were involved in the negotiating. I know that in anything to do with government buildings and government programs there are authorities within Government Services, within the particular department and, in some cases, crossing departments who are, as part of their duties, assigned the duty of negotiating these types of things.

* (1100)

So I do not know who the people were, the names of the people who did the negotiating, but the proper authorities who always tend to those things and tended to this thing had been working on this for many years. I can remember this being a topic of discussion in 1990, before I was elected. As a person living out in the community I can remember this discussion going on. Will the deaf students be moving to Alexander Ross school? That was the question being asked in 1990, before I was elected as an MLA even. So it has been going for a long time.

I think my sense of it is a large part of the interest in this was to be in terms of the existing building they are in, which is a beautiful building. I think there was a desire to see that there was some appropriate use for the existing building before relocating the current tenants from it to more suitable facilities for them. It is a beautiful building. Running the risk of dating myself, I indicate that I graduated from that building myself when it was called the Manitoba Teachers College. That is where I took my own teacher training in what is now the School for the Deaf.

So it is a beautiful building and I think there was a strong desire not to see it left empty. That may explain, in part, the delay in terms of announcing any decisions. Does that answer your question? I cannot recall the second part.

Ms. Friesen: Yes, that was the first part. I was not clear really what the minister meant by negotiation, but it was really the negotiation of the real estate move.

Now the second area that the minister mentioned was the ongoing discussions with parents. I am assuming that is the advisory committee that the minister meant, or was there a different advisory committee for this transition?

Mrs. McIntosh: I should indicate that there is a difference between the parents and the advisory committee. The advisory committee is--I am not sure if that is its official name--but the advisory committee is made up of a number of people who are interested in the education of the deaf. So you will find, for example, a representative from the Manitoba Association of School Trustees sitting on that council or that committee. That person, the representative from MAST, would of course be interested in the education of deaf students because they are students receiving education in Manitoba. They may not have a personal acquaintance with, live with a deaf individual or someone extremely hard of hearing, and may not have intensive study or knowledge of the needs of the deaf community or even of the deaf culture, but they would be interested in ensuring that education was available and that education be of good quality for those students. So you will find a number of representatives on that council fit into that category.

The parents are a different group. The parents are the people who live with and love these children and have an intense desire to see them properly placed and housed. One has a group that is there as an advocate for the deaf, in terms of this wider group of representatives, and support for the deaf, but not necessarily experts on the deaf or well-acquainted with deaf people.

My biggest concern, and I am certainly glad of the existence of the advisory council and I certainly support what they want to do, but for where the children will be physically housed, my main interest is the response of the parents, because they are the ones who will be sending their children to the new location and looking at transportation, all of the things that parents do with children.

Without trying to make an alienation between the parents and the advisory council, I will listen to the parents first and foremost.

Staff members as well, of course, have a strong interest in ensuring that they have the proper facility. There have been a number of discussions over the past number of years actually, and many of the staff and parents of children at the school knew that they were looking at an improved facility.

As soon as the announcement was made, I went out and invited whoever was willing to come or wanted to come, out to see Alexander Ross school. It was a wonderful, thrilling night, because the science lab, the theatre, the number of things in that school that the students could see and that the parents could see were very clearly to their liking. When they realized that there was a walkway through to the bus stop, of a distance of about the width of two streets, they were really, vastly relieved, because somebody had been telling them they would have to walk two blocks to a bus stop or things of that nature, which were totally untrue.

I think seeing the facility was the thing that really was most important, once all of the understandings that the staff did in terms of what would it cost to upgrade the old school versus what would it cost to upgrade the new school. The new school is completely wheelchair accessible. It has two rooms with risers. It has air conditioning, which certainly did meet with vast approval I must tell you, from a wide number of people. We have had a couple of visits now to the school with a couple of hundred people from the deaf community at each visit. The closer it gets to the warm weather, the more the air conditioning is touted as a really good thing.

They had some concerns, and some I think still do. Some of the concerns that they had in the beginning were it is an inaccessible location, but when they saw the location and realized that it is at the corner of the Perimeter and Portage essentially, and that it has got a bus direct to it that goes--it is an express bus that can be caught at Polo Park from anywhere in the city, and that there is indeed a walkway that takes them right through from the bus stop to the front door of the school, and that it is not behind the race track in the boondoggles, somebody said they thought they had been told. When they saw where it was and they saw that they could get to it around the Perimeter much more easily then they could get to the current location by having to go through the city, they were really delighted.

There will still be some, of course, who live closer to the existing school for whom it will be a further trip and, of course, they would prefer to stay in the existing school because they now will have a longer distance to travel. On the other hand, there are just as many who will have a shorter distance to travel and, of course, they are happy.

We determined that the difference in distance, the longest that any person would have to travel in excess of what they are travelling now I believe was eight minutes from downtown Winnipeg, if they are going by Transit. Of any of the existing students clocking out the Transit routes, for those who currently take the bus to the current Tuxedo location, the extra time added to any one of those students is only eight minutes more from downtown Winnipeg. Of course, there are several for whom it will be much, much less. I mean I have one constituent who lives right in the vicinity of the school. There is another constituent of the chairman's, in fact, who is sitting right beside me, who will be much, much closer. Those two will be certainly saving a lot more than eight minutes by virtue of the new location.

The other thing that people are indicating about the location is that because it is in close proximity to the corner of Highway No. 1 and the Perimeter, that those students who come in from outer-lying regions will be able to--they will go home on the weekends or, if they commute, will be able to get to the school without having that drive through the city. So we are pleased about that.

Another thing that some of the parents have mentioned to me that I thought was rather an interesting point, some of them have said they really liked the Tuxedo location, they really like everything about it, but their incomes are such that finding a home to live in in that particular location was difficult for them. What they have said about the Alexander Ross school, I had one parent tell me this: we really, really like this area, she said, because it has homes that are in our range. We can afford the homes in this area so we now have an opportunity maybe to actually live near the school. We really could not afford the real estate around the Tuxedo school. This is more in our price range.

We have a commitment to have the parents involved. We believe, as you know, in parental involvement, not just in the deaf community but in the wider community as well. We have planned to have parents involved in the process of the move, bringing them in on consultations about the renovations and the program which will be accomplished through an implementation committee structure, and that kind of involvement is going on now.

I regret very much that apparently there were some on the advisory committee who indicated that through these last four or five years, they had not been aware that there had been a move considered for the School for the Deaf. Maybe they were newer members to the committee, or--I mean, it certainly has been known for a long time that a move was coming and why it was coming and that Alexander Ross was high on the list for consideration. It may be that in the final weeks of decision making, the advisory council or committee itself was not notified, but certainly, there were many parents who were quite aware because they had been driving their kids past the school and saying, now, that is where your new school is going to be. So somehow, they seemed to have indication.

* (1110)

We also have another concern that has been raised that I also have complete empathy for, and that is that some members of the deaf community feel such allegiance to that particular building because they have had a history in that site. You know, originally in 1921, that building housed the School for the Deaf. From time to time, it was not the School for the Deaf. The School for the Deaf was relocated a few other times, during the war, and, as I said, I graduated from it as a teacher during those years that it was a teachers' college. So while it has not always been the School for the Deaf, way back in the beginning it was a building that housed the deaf community.

The community around it was different at that time. Certainly, it was not built up as the community of Tuxedo has since built up, the roadways, the bridges, those things that are now--there was no Charleswood Bridge, for example, at that time, and there sure is going to be one now. Once that is open, the convenience of that, not just for the hospitals and the ambulance--I mean, it has not just made Grace Hospital and the people in Charleswood happy that they now will not experience the tragic death on the highway that they did when they could not get the person from Charleswood around to Grace Hospital in enough time, but it is also going to make it more convenient for things such as the School for the Deaf.

So things around the school have changed. The needs of the community have changed. In 1921, when that school first housed the deaf community, there was no need to worry about upgrading the building for computer technology because there was no computer technology. The education for the students has changed. Their ability to be mobile has changed.

So I do understand the attachment they have for that particular building. It is a beautiful building. I love it, too. I think it is a testimony to all of those who have made that site work for the deaf over the years, that they have, some of them, developed an allegiance to the actual bricks and mortar. As with anything, I have gone through school closures far more than I like to remember having gone through in my own division, and I understand the attachment to the bricks and the mortar. I have seen schools close, and I have also seen and can bring forward literally hundreds, if I had the patience and the wherewithal to get on the phone and start calling them all, hundreds of people who would say, you know, Mrs. McIntosh, when they voted to close my school, I was so disappointed; I said my children could never be happy in the new place.

Well, I am here to tell you that they are very happy in the new place, happier, in fact, because the programming that they were able to have in the new consolidated school did, in fact, improve, as we predicted it would, and the taxes did not rise, as we knew they would not.

But that initial knowing that you are going to no longer go to the familiar place that has the memory tucked in the corner where you first did whatever it was you did that made that memory special, that is a sense of sadness that I completely understand and staff completely understands. I can tell you, though, that the last comment made by the last person we sort of said good night to, the last time we were over at Alexander Ross school, and I do not know if the principal recalls this gentleman standing at the door saying, now you promise us you get us this school. You promise us you get us this school, and I said, well, we will do what we can, sir. He said, ah, is better for the kids; you promise us you get us this school. We finally said good night, and we all went home.

I know that the reaction, once people saw some of the things in that building, was, oh, wow, this is what our kids need, and while we will be sad to say goodbye to the bricks and mortar, the opportunities are greater here, and we will always have that special feel for that old building.

Ms. Friesen: I think the minister has identified two issues which are of significance, and one is the emotional attachment of not just the parents at the school but the deaf community in general, generations who have been attached to that school which was founded in the 1920s, as the minister indicated, as a regional centre, not just as a Manitoba centre, and it was an era when Manitoba Education and the founding of that school was very much in the progressive vanguard of education for special needs, and I think the sentiment is an historic sentiment, as well, a sense of pride in what has been accomplished in the deaf community in Manitoba, that is attached to that building, as well.

The second issue, I think, that she has identified is the concerns of some parents at a process which is not perceived to be perhaps quite as the minister outlined, and I wanted to go back over some areas of that.

We talked, first of all, about the building negotiation which came to a head at the beginning of April, and then the minister talked about ongoing discussions with parents and continuing discussions and a continuing role for the advisory council.

* (1120)

I wonder if the minister could tell me, first of all, who is on that advisory council. I am not looking for names particularly, but positions that they represent. For example, the minister indicated there was a person from MASS. Who else is on that committee, and was that committee formed for the express purpose of making this move, or is that advisory council an advisory council to the School for the Deaf, an advisory council for deaf education in Manitoba that advises the minister generally? What is its broader function?

Mrs. McIntosh: First of all, no, it was not struck to deal with the finding of a better facility for the students in the school. It is an advisory council that was set up. Its basic mandate is to provide opinion and ideas and thoughts and advice to the minister on anything to do with the life or lifestyles of children who are profoundly hard of hearing or deaf.

That has a very broad mandate in terms of their looking at everything in a student's lifestyle or a child's lifestyle that will be part of his life experience and education and result in a well-rounded individual whose needs have been met, and so they look at a wide variety of things. It is a broad mandate, not a specific mandate.

I do not think it was envisioned that they would--and I say "I do not think," and I guess maybe I am making an assumption here. I keep saying to the member, do not make assumptions, so I should not do it myself, but I am going under the assumption, from what I understand of the mandate, that they would not be involved in the fine details of particular decisions. They might indicate they want students to be trained for technology, and give that as a piece of advice, but they would not say when, where, and how. Do you know what I am saying in terms of them?

Now, in terms of the members, it is called the minister's advisory board. It has representatives from the School for the Deaf, from community programs, from agencies such as the Society for Manitobans with Disabilities. It has a representative from the parent council of the deaf school. They have a Parent Association for Hard-of-Hearing Children in Manitoba, which includes representatives from rural Manitoba and others from Winnipeg. It has three deaf community representatives, and those would be people who work, for example, in the interpreters' program. We have the Manitoba Association of School Trustees. The interpreters' association has its own formal rep, I am advised, and the Association for Visual Language, and I think that covers it.

Ms. Friesen: And these people are appointed by the minister, except for those who are--well, maybe I should divide that. Some people will be appointed by the minister; some are delegates from their associations.

Mrs. McIntosh: No, they are not appointed by the minister. The minister has one appointee. The rest are selected by their own organizations.

Ms. Friesen: Is this the organization that over the past five years, six years, I guess, has been looking at the issue of the relocation of the deaf school?

Mrs. McIntosh: No, they would not be looking at that type of issue. They would be looking at more along the lines of, do we have enough interpretive services available, those types of things, just to give one small example. But where a building is is not something that--unless it were going to be moved into a completely different location, like to Brandon or something, but not when the proximity is so close.

Ms. Friesen: So it was the department that over the last five or six years had been looking at some alternatives to the existing School for the Deaf, and when the department had found what it thought to be an appropriate other location, it would bring that decision or that proposal before this advisory council as a matter of general policy?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, my understanding is that no, that is not the type of thing that would have gone to the advisory council, except as information, because the interest of the advisory council is in reviewing provincial approaches, resources, the success level of students, making commentary on the bilanguage program, for example, those types of things.

The parents council, though, would be one that would be consulted, because it would be the parents who would actually be affected by having to send the child eight more minutes on a public bus or change the time it takes to get back and forth to a building, so the parents would have the direct interest in the location.

The advisory council would have a direct interest in programming and accessibility, that type of thing, which I think is a given. I mean, if there is going to be any change in accessibility, such as moving it to a different city, that would be a major change in accessibility, but minor adjustments, eight-minute type adjustments, would not really be considered as that much longer, especially when so many have a shorter distance to drive at the same time.

The Advisory Council for School Leadership has been formed since the relocation announcement to provide advice and consultation because it was felt very important that the parents should have some indication and say in how these things evolve. We know we do have a few parents who are saying, but the old school was closer and I have an emotional attachment to the bricks and mortar. We know we have just as many parents, if not more, on the other side saying, the new building will be so much better for the kids and in fact is closer for some of us.

They need to be talking. It is very important. We believe in that and the parents are the ones that we will be talking to.

Ms. Friesen: The minister said earlier that there were ongoing discussions with parents and that they were being involved and that an agreement had been come to. Those discussions go on at the present time.

I do not take notes as quickly as Hansard, but that was what I wrote down from the minister's earlier comment. I am wondering how parents have been involved. We have two kinds of councils here now. We have a parents council that existed before the move and we have an Advisory Council for School Leadership formed since the move. Do those two groups still exist in parallel? How has the minister been meeting with parents and discussing with them? I guess to some extent this also involves the previous minister, because the discussions would certainly have come in the period since Christmas or even earlier, I do not know.

How have those parents been involved? How were they prepared for the suggestions that the government was going to make? What kinds of discussions have there been as follow-up?

Mrs. McIntosh: In terms of my memory of things, I could give you exactly what I know I lived through. I can then pass on to you my understanding of things that occurred when I was not present. I know, and I can only say before 1990, I cannot remember how much before 1990, but I know I was not an MLA, so it had to be back that far, that there was talk in my community, in which Alexander Ross school is located, about the possibility of the School for the Deaf moving to Alexander Ross school. It was well before I was elected.

In fact, I can recall when I was still on the school board discussion coming that the Department of Education was exploring various facilities around and that Alexander Ross school might be an ideal site because of its location close to the Perimeter and Portage and because it was wheelchair accessible and had all of the community attributes that were needed that it might end up being an ideal site for the School for the Deaf. Basically, one of the main reasons was because of the Perimeter and Portage. Easier access, not having to drive right into the city to get at it and yet still very accessible to the city people because of Portage Avenue and the Perimeter--that was seen as very appealing. Being on a direct express bus route, as well, was seen as being very important.

Those conversations were sort of floating around at that time. It could have been back as far as 1988, for all I know. That kind of understanding and that kind of discussion seemed to be floating around for four or five years in a very loose kind of a way. Certainly, because I have friends who have a deaf child who attends the School for the Deaf, I know it was something that they often spoke about. I mentioned a particular--I said, well, there is one parent driving their kid around the school, and that was about a year ago where we had one parent who would, whenever they would be out in that end of town, drive their student past Alexander Ross and say, this is the school that you will be going to some day. But they said that so long I think that student is now due to graduate and will probably never get to go there. That was not new.

That was sort of known and that was known with at least some of the parents who were in that school because I know them and we talked about it at the time as, you know, Mrs. McIntosh, you are the MLA for the area, do you know when the kids are going to come to Alexander Ross? I would say, I have no idea, I do not know. I am not in that department, I do not know what decisions they are making.

* (1130)

When in April '95 it was decided that it was in fact a go, that the school division was willing, there now was a potential tenant for the historic building, which I know from all those who were concerned about the building, they did not want to see that historic building left vacant by virtue of the students relocating to a better, in terms of educational needs, facility, that announcement was made. Because I was MLA for the area, I attended that announcement and was very surprised when one of the people from the advisory council said, we did not realize that this agreement had been reached, and that sort of surprised all of us.

This would be the larger advisory council that I described where you have all of the organizations presenting their own, choosing their own people to sit on it. There was a representative that had been invited by government to attend that and that individual said that she had not realized the agreement had been reached. So we were surprised. Immediately then, from my perspective, we then called a meeting and invited everybody who wanted to come, connected with in any way, shape or form, but especially the parents, to come over to Alexander Ross and tour the school and take a look at it.

Some of the parents of the younger students who were new to the school may not have been aware of the possibility of relocation. I do not know their communication with each other. I do know that some were aware, and some seem to have not been aware that an agreement had been reached, although certainly everybody was aware that the potential for relocation was very real because they knew the costs were almost $5 million to upgrade the existing building to meet the educational requirements, and we certainly wish to provide them with those educational requirements.

To do it for half the price in a facility that better suits their needs we think is good, and while there probably are still some parents that are saying, well, we would like to stay where we are, we love the building, and it is closer to where we live, we know that there is a vast body that feels a different way, now that they--if there was any lack in communication before, it is certainly being made up for now because I have been staying in close contact with people.

In fact, I am off to the Deaf Centre tonight to a meeting there with the interpreters, so I am definitely staying in touch with all of those who, ironically enough, will now fall under my department, as well as in my constituency. I was meeting with all of these people before because as the MLA for Assiniboia, I felt it very important that anybody coming into my constituency--it is just the way I service my constituents, but now I have a higher interest because I am now Minister of Education, and I want to see the very best for these students. I am signing up for sign, and I am getting a little skilled but am still very sad at my performance in that sense. I lack that bilingual ability at this time, although I have been trying and will be taking lessons later.

We will have what we believe will be if not the most outstanding centre for deaf education in Canada, then at least up there with the top two or three, once the renovations at AR are complete. The basic facility itself is extraordinarily appropriate. Once the renovations are in place, it will be, I would be willing to venture, one of the top in Canada.

* (1140)

I come back to say, I understand this attachment to the building. It is a beautiful building, and for those who went there in 1921, and some of those people are still around, it is like selling the family home in terms of leaving, but there does come a point. My mom and dad sold their family home two years ago, two and a half, no, three years ago now, and it was hard to do. It was really hard to do. It was the family home, but moving into the air-conditioned apartment with no problem with stairs anymore and right on the bus route and everything for my parents was the right move, even though it was hard to leave the family home.

That is what I feel this is not unlike, and I have great empathy for that feeling, but the building will not be left vacant. I had one parent right at the announcement say, the building will not be left unattended. I said, not at all, because you will have the Pan American Games people going in, and for them, they will honour the building, and I say honour the building. It is a building that needs to be honoured. It will be taken good care of, and it will not be left to be neglected in any way.

Ms. Friesen: My question was actually directed at how the minister has been working with parents. I remember there were two councils. There was a parents' council which existed before the announcement, and then there was a new council, the Advisory Council for School Leadership. That is why I wanted to clarify advisory council. It is a shorthand which could be applied to both.

My question was, how has the minister been working with the parents? She did mention that shortly after the announcement in April she had invited parents to tour the new school. The two councils, do they exist in parallel? How has the minister met with them, and what kind of input are they having into the decisions?

Mrs. McIntosh: I apologize to the member because I do know that is what she asked when I got carried away here on a different tangent for which I apologize.

There are two groups, and how am I staying in touch with them? The advisory council is the larger umbrella group. We have been trying to set a meeting, setting a date for me to attend one of their meetings, and the one I was hoping to get to is the one next Monday, but due to Estimates--I mentioned the other day my frustrations with the lengthy Estimates process. That is one of them; I will be missing the opportunity to go to an advisory committee meeting because Estimates are on. That is not--I mean, we will find another time. I guess what I am trying to say is for very legitimate reasons, such as Estimates, I have not been able to get to the advisory council meeting. That is the big broader group.

Although I have spoken one-on-one with many members of that council, we have had telephone conversations, we have had visits at various functions at the School for the Deaf one-on-one, but not for me to attend one of their regular meetings which is really what I would like to be able to do. So that is the one group.

Some of those people I see in their other lives, because they are not all--like they are not focused 100 percent of the time on the deaf community. They have other lives. They are sitting there as representatives.

The parent council--which is the second group--I have had opportunity to be with them more regularly I suppose in that some of those members, a couple of us, are personal friends. So I get to talk to them. I have as well attended functions at the school. They have had two meetings I think at the school that I have attended that were large-group meetings. I attended in my capacity as MLA for Assiniboia, and one I just went as a person who went. I have not actually been out to the school since I became Minister of Education, although, as I indicated, I am going tonight to a meeting at the deaf centre with the interpreters and attending their meeting. Those are the two groups.

The third group that we are talking about is the implementation committee, and that is--I think when you are saying are they all running parallel--the implementation committee is the group that will be working on the transition between the old and the new, so to speak, because as I indicated in terms of programming, the trend in education of the deaf is to use technology. The use of technology is--when we say "technology," it is opening doors for wide groups of people. This is one group that it is really important for.

So the implementation committee has not yet been formed. It is about to be formed, and it will have on it parents, representatives from the deaf community who are not necessarily parents, someone from the Government Services staff who will be talking about any renovations they want to do, because they were talking about, you know, where will we put this and where will we put that. We thought that we would really like to have the input from the students, parents and staff as to where they would like to see things going in the renovations. You will have on there a Manitoba School for the Deaf student and a staff member and someone from the advisory board, that board of self-appointed people--I mean, they are not self-appointed. They do not appoint themselves, their groups appoint them.

I have had two meetings. Staff is meeting on my behalf with the parents. They have had a meeting with the parents of children in residence. That is a very important group because there is a residential component to the School for the Deaf. Of all of the groups that need to be consulted, I think that group is important. So staff, on my behalf, have met with the parents of children in residence. They have also had two meetings with the parents' council, and staff have been involved as well in three general meetings including parents, and two meetings with the deaf community as well. Those are sort of general meetings open to everybody in those particular arenas. So they have stayed in touch. I am staying in touch as best I can, given the limitations of my time, by phone and by meeting.

I think that if you were to come back in five years and ask how it is going, you would see a state-of-the-art School for the Deaf with up-to-date technology, a beautiful building in an extremely good location, and parents and students and supporters who say they are very glad that the relocation was able to occur and, probably, the chairman of the Treasury Board will be happy that we saved him $2.5 million at the same time. That is not to be discounted as we move to balanced budget.

* (1150)

This move is the right move regardless of cost, in my opinion. Even if this move were to cost money, it will provide a better facility in which to educate and house these students. We look to try and do things that do not add costs, but rather can maintain or reduce costs. What we feel is that we have, at the same time that we are doing this, been able to actually save money.

We are committed to providing a full range of options for the education of deaf children, and relocating the deaf education program will give students the best opportunity to reach their potential in a modern, technologically advanced school without the disadvantages of an institutional environment.

So we are seeking input from parents, from staff members and from the deaf community to finalize plans for the move and very much appreciate the support we have received so far. We will be working to alleviate any concerns that still might exist amongst some people, make sure that they feel that everything is okay. We are at the point right now that if we were to reverse this decision, there would be an uproar from those who now are eager to go to the new school.

At this point we have a situation where there are some now whose preference is to move to the new location. Those people have contacted me. I have their names, their addresses, their phone numbers. I appreciate very much their personal contact to let me know of this support. These are parents of children in the school. I do appreciate that, and if they ever read this I want them to know that without naming them and respecting their confidentiality, I have been grateful for their quiet indication of support. It helps me.

Ms. Friesen: I am mainly concerned with the way in which parents were able to be involved in the decision. That is why I have been asking about parents councils in particular. Earlier on the minister had suggested that there was a parents council that existed at the school that was consulted before the move, and that after the announcement was made a new council called the Advisory Council for School Leadership, I assume formulated on the same basis as the minister's guidelines, had been created. Then the minister said that her staff had met with parents of children in residence and that there had been two meetings with the parents council.

My focus is upon parents of children in the school and the way in which they have been able to be a part of making this decision. Could the minister perhaps tell me when these meetings took place with the parents of the children in residence and with the two meetings with the parents council. I am assuming that we are talking--I guess I need to know which council we are talking about in that case. Is it the parents council before the decision or the Advisory Council for School Leadership after the decision? Do those two organizations still run in parallel, or do we know have general agreement at the school that there is an Advisory Council for School Leadership, which represents parents? If that is the case, how is the department working with them?

Mrs. McIntosh: Maybe it helps if I put this into a different context. The member is aware that we are asking all schools to have parent advisory councils. I indicated the other day that if schools have existing parent councils and they wish to reform and develop the council according to the framework that we have laid down, we would encourage them to do that. That is what has happened here. We have now an Advisory Council for School Leadership. You will find on that advisory council some of the same people who were on the former parent council. I do not know if that clarifies it for you or not.

I have some information I want to table before we go. I will not do it right now, I am just afraid I will forget. Maybe I could slip it in right now. I do not want to take us off topic, it is just that I do not want to forget to table it.

If I may, Mr. Chairman, the member from Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) had asked to have information regarding 16.2(f), staff changes for 1993 and 1994. I have the information to table if I could just slip that in this dialogue so that it is not forgotten and indicate that it has been tabled and we can go back to the topic we are on.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: I thank the honourable minister for that submission. The Clerk will distribute it.

Mrs. McIntosh: These two groups will continue their work, along with the implementation committee, and the two groups that I am about to indicate to the member are ones we have discussed, the minister's advisory committee for the deaf, and hard-of-hearing. They will continue their work, as will the parents' group, and they will be directly involved in the school advisory council as well.

In terms of the meeting dates, the school principal for the School for the Deaf has just handed me a note that indicates that on May 9, the Manitoba School for the Deaf, home and school final executive meeting was held. On May 10, the advisory council was formed coming out of that, like that restructure took place; and backing up a little bit, on April 30, there was a meeting with the staff and the residents' parents only, just those parents whose students are in residence. May 16, the first meeting of the advisory council. May 30, the second meeting of the advisory council, and the next meeting will be June 19 which is Monday.

Ms. Friesen: I appreciate that. That does help clarify things. But my specific question was, how have the parents been involved? How have they been prepared for this, what eventually becomes quite a dramatic move, so how has the department worked with parents over the last six months, the last three months, the last month? What meetings have occurred, and what preparation has been involved?

Mrs. McIntosh: I just would like some clarification on what is meant by "dramatic" in dramatic move? This is a sincere question, I am not trying to be flip or anything.

Ms. Friesen: Dramatic in the sense that we have been discussing it here today, and that is, a building that has a long-time attachment, and it is a big change for families. I am concerned about how parents have been involved in this decision, and how families have been prepared for it?

Mrs. McIntosh: I thank the member for that clarification. The Home and School Association that was there before, I understand, was not formally consulted as to should we conclude agreements on Alexander Ross school, but they had over the course of the years and months leading up to the agreement received all the indications that were there that there was potential for such a move, and maybe because of the sensitivity surrounding negotiations on such a negotiated agreement, I do not know, but they were not given sort of like an opportunity to vote on should we go ahead and sign the agreement.

Certainly they knew that the potential was there for that agreement to be reached--maybe that is the best way to put it--without knowing that it had been reached until they were informed. So they were informed that the agreement had been reached in April. The fact that there was the potential for such an agreement was known to them. What had not been known to them prior to the announcement was that the agreement had, in fact, been reached. They were not given prior notification. They were told simultaneously with the broader announcement to the public.

Ms. Friesen: What meetings have there been with the parents since then? How has the department been working with parents, meeting with parents, since then?

Mrs. McIntosh: Okay, I do not know if I have all of them here, but I certainly will have the majority of them here.

April 10 there was a tour of the school, an open house of the school. I was there for that one, and I remember it well. April 11 was the home and school general meeting. April 12 was a meeting with the parents and the deaf community. April 13 was a general meeting at the Deaf Centre. Staff was present at all of these. April 18 was the second open house, and I believe I was there for that one as well. May 3 was the home and school executive meeting. As I indicate, staff was at all of those meetings. Those are ones that we can recall from our memories here without going and checking the files.

I guess the indication here is that the staff has worked very hard to try and understand any concerns that are brought forward. I have a very genuine interest in this area.

I felt, on another occasion, and I will backtrack just a little bit to try and help the member understand the commitment that I feel, back to when I was Minister of Housing and we enabled the deaf community to have a couple of our vacant units to transform into a day care centre for children who were either deaf children of hearing parents or hearing children of deaf parents or deaf children of deaf parents, and it is called the Sign Talk Children's Centre, at that time, meeting with those people, coming into my first contact with the deaf community and seeing hundreds of people in one room communicating in a way that was outside my realm of experience--

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being twelve o'clock, what is the will of the committee?

The hour being twelve o'clock, committee rise.