2nd-36th, Volume 59 - Private Members' Business

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS--PUBLIC BILLS

Bill 200--The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act

Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), Bill 200, The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'assurance-maladie), standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Praznik).

An Honourable Member: Stand.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? [agreed]

* (1630)

Bill 201--The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act

Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson), Bill 201, The Aboriginal Solidarity Day Act (Loi sur le jour de solidarité à l'égard des autochtones), standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).

An Honourable Member: Stand.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? [agreed]

Bill 203--The Public Assets Protection Act

Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), Bill 203, The Public Assets Protection Act (Loi sur la protection des biens publics), standing in the name of the honourable member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer).

Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? [agreed]

Bill 205--The Dutch Elm Disease Amendment Act

Mr. Deputy Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), Bill 205, The Dutch Elm Disease Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur la thyllose parasitaire de l'orme), standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).

An Honourable Member: Stand.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Stand? Is there leave that this matter remain standing? [agreed]

Are we proceeding with Bill 202? No?

PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

Res. 14--Reform of Post-Secondary Education

Mrs. Shirley Render (St. Vital): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed), that

WHEREAS the federal government has made the decision to unilaterally reduce transfer payments for post-secondary education in Manitoba; and

WHEREAS students, parents, educators, and other stakeholders are re-evaluating Manitoba's system of post-secondary education; and

WHEREAS the University Education Review Commission has presented recommendations for change in its report “Post-secondary Education in Manitoba: Doing Things Differently”; and

WHEREAS the major recommendations in “Doing Things Differently” have focused on the need for the universities and community colleges in Manitoba to re-examine program priorities, reorganize programs to avoid duplication, identify centres of specialization, explore the development of a process of interinstitutional co-operation, redesign internal management, and improve the process of credit transfers among post-secondary institutions.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all members of the Legislative Assembly support the provincial government in its efforts to implement the necessary changes in Manitoba's post-secondary education system.

Motion presented.

Mrs. Render: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) said, it sounds so good when it is read the second time.

An Honourable Member: Sounds better.

Mrs. Render: Sounds better. In all seriousness, Mr. Deputy Speaker, post-secondary education is a very important subject. I am not too sure that most of us realize just how many people are enrolled at our four universities and our three community colleges. There are some 70,000 people enrolled at the universities, at the community colleges, and, of course, there are a number of trade and vocational schools which also offer courses and certification programs.

Now there are some students who are mature, older than 30, going right up to the '70s and the '80s decade, I am sure, but the bulk of the students at the universities and community colleges are in the age range of 18 to 25, and that just says to me right there that this is our future. So it is absolutely vital that we have a post-secondary education, a higher education system that is going to be serving the needs of these students.

My background, I went to both University of Winnipeg--it was called United College back in the '60s when I attended. Both my undergraduate and graduate degrees are from the University of Manitoba, so I can speak first-hand that the facilities are excellent. But what was happening 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40 years ago, if times have changed? And as the students themselves, in their very, very good booklet that they put out called Path to Excellence, have identified that gone are the days of ample resources, and it is in the light of the harsh--and I am quoting the students here--fiscal reality that universities in our country must re-examine and redefine themselves. Universities, then, are at a crossroads. And they are at a crossroads, and like any institution that has been around for a long time, it is time to examine and make sure that our universities and our community colleges are operating in an effective and efficient way.

That is exactly what we have done. A number of years ago, I am sure all members here will remember that we appointed Duff Roblin to head up a commission. In December 1993, he released a document entitled Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba: Doing Things Differently. Now the commission examined a variety of issues, such as the mission and roles of institutions, scholarship and accountability, accessibility, aboriginal peoples, post-secondary education in northern Manitoba, the educational linkages between business and university, business and industry and of course governance and financial matters, and made a number of recommendations, many of which this government endorsed.

One of the recommendations was to establish a council on post-secondary education. We have introduced earlier this session a bill, Bill 32, The Council on Post-Secondary Education. I think this is a very, very important initiative of this government, because again I am going to refer back to the students. When the students pointed out that at both universities there are a number of duplications, overlapping, and in this day and age when funding is a problem--I am talking not just here at the Manitoba level but about our decrease in funding from the federal government, but there is no point in pointing a finger at the federal government because they are just trying to get their House in order as we here in Manitoba are trying to get our House in order. But, as I say, I was very impressed with the document that the students put out called Path to Excellence, and this was released by David Gratzer, UMSU president, 1995-96, in June 1996. This document was a result of a full--and I am quoting from his letter to the Minister of Education (Mrs. McIntosh).

After a full year of observing and studying the University of Manitoba, I offer 37 tangible recommendations for improving the institution within the context of all the universities in Manitoba. And this paper, on university reform, incorporates the concerns and ideas that our student membership have expressed to us over the past year.

He goes on to say that the student membership is roughly 3,000 students, and it is from these students that these recommendations came about and these students have endorsed this particular project.

* (1640)

Now some of the things that the students recognized was the fact that there is overlap in programs at the universities, and they give a number of very specific examples. I would just like to read into the record some of these examples, because sometimes people think that government does things just for the sake of doing things, but no, we are doing things because they need to be done. After many, many years of not making any changes it is time to make a change. It is time to make sure that our universities are going to be able to cope and produce programs that are going to be valid for the students as they move into the next century.

Now here are some of the problems that the students themselves recognized in the system. Presently, over 38 academic programs are offered at more than one university in Manitoba, 13 of which are offered at all four. This duplication must be addressed, said David Gratzer, particularly between the University of Winnipeg and the University of Manitoba which target similar populations with virtually identical undergraduate arts, science and education programs.

So, as I say, this is not just an initiative that government is bringing in without any consultation with those prime consumers. Those prime consumers are the students, and obviously we consulted with many, but, as I say, the students themselves have identified that there are ways in which we can make our universities better. There are ways in which we can approach the problem, the problem of shrinking or frozen funding, possibly decreasing funding.

One of the recommendations I was very pleased to note was that the province should establish a council on post-secondary education, and it suggested that this council be established in the very near future. It also went on to suggest that this council should facilitate the reduction in overlap in both program offerings and administration.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, we are right on track. This is exactly what we are doing. We are establishing a council. For the first time in Canada a council on post-secondary education is being established. We have taken the initiative here. We are bringing in a formal co-ordinated system of planning and budgeting to higher education through this new council on post-secondary education.

Now the mission of this council is to bring better co-ordination, articulation and planning to the post-secondary education system by having universities and community colleges brought together under a single body. Students, I think, will very much benefit from this legislation as it will lead to increased flexibility for them, as well as having the potential to contain the costs which just seem to go up. Of course, the costs will be contained because, by working together and co-ordinating, we will be able to redo some of this unnecessary duplication.

Now, specifically, the council will co-ordinate and monitor system-wide credit transfer arrangements, and again, I think this is absolutely vital, so that students can move from one institution to another, if the necessity arises. They will not have spent time at one university which could be if they could not transfer courses or transfer credits, that time could be lost so this will, as I say, be a very great benefit to the students.

The council will also develop a strategic plan for the post-secondary education system. The council will also allocate the appropriate level of operations in capital funding to each of the seven institutions. Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think this is very important because too often in the past each was operating in isolation. Again, we cannot do that. We have to remember to look at the global picture; we have to remember that education is not just one small component. It is the overall look at universities, at community colleges, at training, at apprenticeship, and we have to remember that our resources are finite and we have to remember to look at the broad picture, not just focus in on one small area. This fact that we now have one council that will oversee the funding to all seven institutions, I think, will be a great benefit.

Council will also establish a system-wide tuition fee policy. Council will also approve academic programs, develop and oversee the implementation of plans for strategic program specialization. Now, again, when government brings in changes, when government brings in very dramatic changes--and this is a dramatic change, I would suggest--there is often a lot of fear because human nature being what it is, we fear change. People often like to keep doing things the way they have always done things. However, there is support for what is being done.

I cannot remember where I was coming from, but I had CJOB on last spring. I was listening to Professor Tim Ball from the University of Winnipeg. [interjection] Yes, as the member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer) said, he is a very interesting person. I think many have heard him speak. He is a geography professor.

Now listen to his comments, and I quote from Professor Tim Ball, who said: I think universities are medieval institutions that are being dragged kicking and screaming into the 17th Century, and the ivory tower syndrome really exists.

Now those are pretty drastic words from a professor, but there is definitely a grain of truth. As I say, it is very hard sometimes to accommodate change. Regretfully, there are some people who are resisting change because they like the way things are done. They feel that there are always going to be resources and why should we make change. But it is absolutely vital to make change, and, again, we have to remember that universities are there not just for staff, the ultimate consumer is the student. It is the student that we have to remember.

I will just refer once more to the fact that to my knowledge this is probably the first time that the UMSU president has put out such a comprehensive document. I will just name the title again, Path to Excellence, and it talks about what should be happening in universities to make sure that universities survive into the next century.

Now let me just quote another university professor, and this is a university professor from the University of Manitoba. This was in the Winnipeg Free Press on September 25, 1996. He talks about Bill 32, and he refutes what another professor had said who talked against the bill. This professor, Professor Hymie Rubenstein says: What this other professor “fails to mention is that the main purpose of the act is to encourage co-ordination among post-secondary institutions, . . . .” He goes on to say that “other provinces are considering enacting similar legislation, that university standards have been under attack for years, and that institutional and intellectual independence must be reciprocated by accountability to the ultimate shareholders of the universities, the people of Manitoba.”

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have spoken to a number of people at the university, and many of them recognize that change is inevitable and they really do not have a problem with this bill, because they realize that we cannot live in competition with the other universities, that there simply has to be co-operation among the universities if all of them are to survive. So change and innovation is overdue. It is time to make these things happen.

Our secondary institutions here in Manitoba have provided Manitobans with high-quality education for decades. Our universities and community colleges represent a key economic and social asset in our province. They are vital, but they must keep pace with the changing economy and they must provide young Manitobans and the older ones with the same educational advantages of previous generations and, for this reason, change is necessary. For this reason, I urge that all members of the House support this resolution. Thank you.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to be able to respond to this resolution. I want to say, first of all, that I understand where it is coming from. I understand that the mover of this motion has a genuine concern for both universities and colleges and that she is speaking in what she believes to be the best interests of a particular future for those colleges. So I recognize the sentiments as genuine and welcome the member raising this issue for the Legislature.

* (1650)

I think the first WHEREAS, the federal government has made the decision to unilaterally reduce transfer payments for post-secondary education, is also another useful element for the member to bring to our attention, both parts of that WHEREAS, the idea that it is unilateral or was unilateral I think is an important thing to mention in this resolution. It was, I think, unconscionable, and I think most provinces would agree--perhaps Mr. Harris would not agree--but certainly an unconscionable alteration of the nature of Confederation and of the nature of the responsibility that the federal government has taken since the Second World War for the research and for the overall equitable serving of post-secondary education across the country, because I think those were the two principles that they adopted in the 1940s and 1950s, that there should be a national responsibility for research and there should also be some attempt by the federal government to redistribute resources so that young people everywhere across this country had the opportunity for an equal access to, in the first place, an undergraduate education.

So I accept the member's sincerity, and I congratulate her on raising the issue of the unilateral federal withdrawal. It is certainly going to make a different kind of Canada. It has certainly withdrawn money from so many areas of research, from science, from engineering, from medical research, and this makes it extremely difficult, not just for universities but for the economic strategies of particular provinces.

In the case of Saskatchewan, for example, the agribusiness and for the added-value agriculture technology that they have entered into, the addition and federal responsibilities in that I think are being withdrawn, and it is to the credit of the government of Saskatchewan in fact that they are continuing to put their efforts very successfully into those changes and into those focuses at the University of Saskatchewan. I think it makes it very difficult for other provinces to deal with accessibility. It has made it difficult for smaller provinces in particular to continue to deal with equal access or even expanded access to undergraduate education. It makes it difficult for a province like Manitoba, and most governments of Manitoba have centred some of their attention upon medical research and the role that it plays in the economic future of the province. The reduction of federal grants in medical research, I think, will have a significant long-term impact upon the overall economy of Manitoba, Manitoba's ability to continue in the kind of specialties in which it has been so successful and has been enabled in fact to contribute to the national economy in this way.

However, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I welcome this resolution in other ways, too, because in the time-honoured words of the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) it gives me the opportunity to talk about the Roblin commission. The member has raised the issues of Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba: Doing Things Differently, the title of the Roblin commission, and I would have thought that at this stage, at the end of 1996, most members of this government would have been very reluctant to raise the issues of the Roblin commission, because if anything characterizes the attitude of this government to education or to policy development or to strategic management it is the way in which they have dealt or not dealt with post-secondary education.

I often say, in fact, this is the only way in which this government acknowledges R & D, and in most people's parlance, that is research and development, but in the parlance of this government it is review and delay because that is what they have done in post-secondary education, as they are doing in the special education review, as they are doing in so many areas of public policy. Get us past the next election. Let us make another promise. Let us not actually put it into effect and let us just review, respond to the review and then wait a few more months and we will be into another election and we will make another set of promises and nothing has happened.

In the case of the Roblin review, for example, this government came into office in 1988 and in 1990 in the throne speech they announced they were going to create this commission. But it took two more years, from 1988 now we are in 1992, and they created the committee to examine post-secondary education or actually university governance, I think it was originally called, in the June of '92. Now they promised that its report would be in in the spring of '93, but finally--I think it is actually dated December '93; it did not really appear for discussion until January '94--shortly before the election there was the appearance of a review called Doing Things Differently: Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba.

So what the Tory government of Manitoba was able to do from 1988 to 1994 was to have no policy and no changes in post-secondary education. The member for St. Vital uses very frequently in her presentation the language of change, something that Tories seem to equate with improvement. It is not. Change is a neutral word; it does not mean improvement. In the hands of the Tories it generally means a backward step, a narrower and a more secretive and less accountable process and procedures.

However, the government did eventually in 1992 create what they called a blue ribbon committee composed of Duff Roblin, Miss Richardson, Mr. Kavanagh and Mr. Gordon. They did not choose a representative committee of Manitobans. They said very specifically, this is a blue ribbon committee. There were no students, there were no representatives of aboriginal people, there were no staff; there were no professional representatives, there were no research people in the many areas for which Manitoba has been known in research on that committee. The report that they produced, I believe, reflected the concern of managers for efficient, market-driven institutions. That is a narrow view on universities and colleges. It is certainly one view. It is certainly a view that should be taken into account. But we should recognize that when the government finally did appoint a committee, it appointed a committee which would give it the very narrow basis for change that it desired.

Roblin's report was brief. It is about 88 pages. Sometimes, of course, that is a benefit. Sometimes we can welcome a brief report. But in spite of earlier promises, there was no publication of the written or oral briefs. There was no publication of any of the synopses of presentation and, again, this is a strong characteristic of this government.

The desire for accountability that they want in so many other areas of public policy they are simply unwilling to accept themselves. So that sense of a public conversation, a publicly documented discussion where people in Roblin would know what people were saying in Winnipeg and where people in Winnipeg would know what the issues were in The Pas or in Dauphin, that simply did not happen, because the publication was not there and they were not generally available to the public.

So, as in so many areas, whether it is going to be under special needs review, whether it was in the Render-Dyck inquiry, whether it was in the boundaries commission inquiry, we will have no knowledge publicly of what one part of Manitoba told the others.

When you put things into that kind of perspective, you are not, I do not believe, serious about accountability or about stimulating the kind of general discussion which I think the member for St. Vital referred to, and I think she did it in good faith. I think she does want to see that. I think she referred to the citizens of Manitoba as the shareholders of the universities and colleges. It is not the language I would chose, but I think the idea of a public interest and a public concern and a public responsibility for the whole of post-secondary education is an important one.

But if you are serious about that, if you really mean it, then you have a much broader-based discussion about post-secondary education and, at every stage of the way, whether it was in the creation of the Roblin commission, whether it was in the nature of the discussions which they held and the publications which were produced, whether it was in the creation of the interim transition committee, whether it was in the secretness of their deliberations, whether it is now in the nature of the final, appointed post-secondary education council which is proposed in Bill 32, at every step of the way the government has proceeded along the lines of a narrow and secretive perspective upon reform and change.

If we look at the Roblin commission overall, we can see that much of the evidence which was cited in that report, and I know that evidence is not something that most ministers of this particular government are interested in, but the evidence that was mostly cited in the report came from the columns of The Globe and Mail or from the 1990 Smith report on Canadian universities. There was a startling lack of Manitoba evidence, and we understand why this commission was not given a very large research budget. It was not given really the mandate to produce that kind of evidence. It was given a mandate in fact to produce changes in management and governments, and it took that narrow mandate as its first priority.

But I will say, and this is to Mr. Roblin's credit, he went beyond the mandate the government gave him. They gave him the mandate of looking at universities governance, and he said very sensibly, this is not the issue. The larger issue is the issue of post-secondary education in Manitoba, and what he did was to make recommendations on community colleges.

* (1700)

He argued, as I think any sensible Manitoban would, that the most obvious gap in Manitoba's education system lies in the very small number of our students who for the long time this situation has existed, a very small number of our students have gone on to community college. He pointed to the fact that what we needed to do was to expand the number of programs in our community colleges.

The recommendation was made in December 1993, we are now in the end of 1996. I would have welcomed from the member for St. Vital some indication of the first steps, perhaps even second steps of the recommendation of the Roblin commission to double, double, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the number of programs in our community colleges. I know that some steps have been taken in some of the colleges, but I think over three years we would have anticipated that we would have seen much more effort made in that respect. Of course, what we saw was the very opposite. This was the government which took $10 million out of community colleges. This was the government that in the budget two years ago, added $2.5 million and then took it away again with another hand.

So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the sincerity of this government, and I do not doubt the sincerity of the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), but the sincerity and the ability of this government to grapple with and to produce a strategic plan for post-secondary education, I think, has to be very much in doubt.

Mr. Roblin in his report did not provide any planning framework. He did not look at the population of Manitoba in the next generation, and I do not think he had the time or the staff in fact to do that. And so, I see, unfortunately, that my time is up and I have only just begun I thought. My concern is that both the Roblin commission and this government I think are focusing in a very narrow area. There may well be reasons for the government to look at areas of governance, to look at change, to look at tuition fees. I think that is an important area, another one for example where they have done nothing since 1988 and no tuition fee policy yet.

But I do think that the final resolution of this--the final section of this resolution of the member for St. Vital that we support the provincial government in its efforts to implement the necessary changes in Manitoba's post-secondary education system really are not the kind of resolution that I would like to leave on this record. Although I am not proposing an amendment, it seems to me that the way we should be looking at post-secondary education in Manitoba is that we would support a government which was serious in its efforts to make accessible to many more Manitobans the benefits of post-secondary education.

We would support a government which was serious and demonstrated its ability to maintain the high quality of teaching of community service and research in the service of all the people of this province.

Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): I would like to put a couple of comments on the record in regard to this resolution. But in my comments I would also just like to point out to the members opposite, and I say this sincerely, as I sit day in, day out listening to resolutions come forward and the positive things that I see and hear about what are happening in Manitoba, I guess, I would like to suggest that it must be awful to wake up every morning and see the sun shine and figure out a way of how you are going to explain to the people that it will rain eventually and that things are never as good as they appear.

It is something that I have had to learn to deal with since coming to the House, and I guess I will manage to cope with it, but it is something that I will probably never accept as long as I sit in this Legislature or as long as I probably live. I think we are all aware that the federal Government of Canada has made a decision to reduce transfer payments for post-secondary education in Manitoba. I recognize that they are in a position, as we are in Manitoba, of trying to become more and more fiscally responsible. I think the method that we have taken to achieve this goal is probably one that would be perhaps a model for them to follow in the sense of the time and the investment that we have put into the three major categories that are major concerns. I think the people of the province of Manitoba would identify as their major concerns. I think we all know what they are: it is health; it is education; and it is the social services that we provide.

I think that the resolution that has been brought forward today by the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), which I gladly support and seconded, is just that, it is saying to the people of Manitoba, we do respect what you say, we do want to listen to what you have to offer, and when we hear that information, we are going to formulate it into a policy that will provide the services that the people of Manitoba want and need. I think that, as the member earlier had stated, there are a lot of young people in our educational systems, in our universities, of which there are four, and three community colleges.

I, too, had the privilege, I guess, of attending two of the universities in Manitoba as I was going through my university days. I also had an opportunity to attend a university in the United States. When we compare the systems of education and the direction that we are taking with these types of resolutions that are being brought forward, I think that we are going to see a real improvement in the delivery of education and also in the education portion of educating our children or our young adults.

I think that, in order to ensure Manitoba students have access to the best post-secondary education, we have to be responsible with the economics of it, and we also have to be responsive. So I think that the formation of this council is one of the first positive steps to helping us recognize and realize these goals.

The council will definitely help us gain a better sense of our post-secondary education priorities as a community. They will be listening to the stakeholders that are involved in this. I think that for far too long in a lot of areas of government we tend to listen to the people who are closest to us and we do not go out that extra step to get the information. I think this government has probably led the way in consultation and listening to what the people actually want, be it in Education, Health, social services and other departments.

It is the students who will benefit the most from this legislation. It will lead to greater flexibility for them. As I understand, there has been some discussion and some negotiation, and I think the ability to transfer in and out of schools at the same level and not having to worry about the courses that they may be taking in one university whether they are accepted in another--even in our own province, we have to, I believe, have some consistency and some form where students can move freely because that is actually the way the world is going as far the ability to transfer.

I can remember growing up and going to university, and one of the things that was always told to me is, be prepared as you enter your working career, that you will change careers three, four, maybe five times in your lifetime. As much as we said that at that particular time, I do not believe many people really believed it was going to happen. It did not maybe happen as quickly or as fast as we anticipated at that time. I would suggest that in the age of the '90s it is happening, and it is happening far quicker.

We have certainly seen where, as much as we would like to think we have job security, people are always looking for a better way and a better opportunity for themselves. Now they are acting upon those opportunities instead of just sitting and trying to, I suggest perhaps, hesitantly trying to make the decision. Quite often, that time passes them by as it has in the past.

I think that the legislation, which is the first of its kind in Canada, will establish and should establish a single planning and co-ordinating body for colleges and universities. What better way to present the most not only economical and efficient way of education, but it is a system where everybody can offer and probably, I would proffer to the people, that the course and the content will improve because I think you are going to see some specialization. I think that is what this competitive world dictates that we do.

* (1710)

Whenever business finds itself running even with its competition it tends to take one segment of that competition, specialize in it and promote itself that way. I think in this case that education can do that, and when they do we will be providing a better education for the children that are taking it and also a more positive direction for the people that are implementing the education programs.

Although the Roblin commission on post-secondary education examined issued such as the mission and roles of institutions, it examined the scholarship and accountability. It examined the accessibility, aboriginal peoples and post-secondary education. It examined post-secondary in northern Manitoba, post-secondary education linkages with business and industry, governance and financial matters, and I suggest that all these things are important and integral to forming a policy of direction that we must go in the future incorporating all of these issues.

The Roblin commission also recommended the creation of this fully co-ordinated, articulated post-secondary educational system in Manitoba, and I think with this council, the direction that it will go will lead us to that co-ordinated position. We have endorsed the commission's recommendations with the legislation that has been introduced into the House as Bill 32. Today I stand before you to put the several reasons as to why.

Some of the objectives of the council that they would carry out would be to co-ordinate and monitor system-wide credit transfer arrangements. I am a student in the university in Brandon and I want to transfer to Winnipeg because of an opportunity that has been presented to me. Quite often in the past--

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for The Maples, on a point of order.

Point of Order

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): I just want to have some clarification on the rules of the House. If there is a bill before the House for debate on second reading, during the debate on this resolution, should we be referring to that bill and be debating the subject of that matter during this resolution?

Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member for The Maples does have a point of order. The debate on second reading of the bill that is before the House, the honourable member for Turtle Mountain should not be referring to that bill at this time.

The honourable member for Turtle Mountain, to continue.

* * *

Mr. Tweed: I do apologize for the reference. As I stated, no matter where you are in today's world, you are never too old to learn. I have learned something, and I appreciate the information that has been provided.

I think that I would like to talk a little bit about the council and what functions it would carry out, if that is agreeable to all honourable members. The co-ordination and monitoring system-wide credit transfers, as I was suggesting earlier, there was always the threat. To me, I could hardly believe that in a province as small as Manitoba with three universities that credit transfers would not be possible amongst the university systems. To me it only makes common sense. We are trying to encourage our young people to finish their education in our province and yet we are not providing them with the opportunities through transfer to complete courses on the schedules that they have set out for themselves, and I think this council will enhance that.

I think it is imperative that we develop a strategic plan for post-secondary education. I think that anything that goes forward without a plan is doomed to fail, and I think this council will provide the plan that is necessary and will be understandable for all Manitobans to follow through. With the council, with the ability to develop the strategic plans, obviously we will have the ability to allocate the appropriate level of operations in capital funding to each of the seven institutions and, again, I suggest that that is an efficient use of our dollars in the sense that we will not have redundancy in our universities where courses are being offered at three different universities, all teaching the same aspect and perhaps being attended poorly in all three communities or all three universities. This will allow that particular council to make those decisions and certainly offer the courses as the system has demand for it.

The approval of academic programs. I think that we all want to have the best available post-secondary education available possible in Manitoba, and, with the council that we are proposing, this will be possible. Each university will be, I presume, provided with certain academic programs to offer; and, as they see the need to change and develop certain academic courses to suit the needs of the consumer, this council will provide them with that ability to do so. I think definitely when they are involved with this type of organization, they will want to oversee all the implementations of the plan in regard to specialization and academic programs, and certainly want to develop and implement an accountability framework.

(Madam Speaker in the Chair)

That is one of the major things that we have discussed in government is the fact that everyone in today's world has to become accountable. Whether you believe you are doing the right thing or whether some people criticize you for what you are doing, the bottom line is you have to be accountable to the people that you represent. I think that the council will be responsible to implementing the recommendations of the commission.

The council, again, will help us gain a better sense of our post-secondary education and priorities in the community. Through discussing and meetings with the public, we are certainly going to be able to gain knowledge as to what they would like to see coming out of their universities, their community colleges, and I think this provides an excellent opportunity to do so.

The 70,000 students that are attending Manitoba's universities are really the big winners of this council. I think that they are going to see that the ability to change and adapt will suit them, will suit their needs, and I refer back to the honourable member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) in her final resolution that says: I do ask “all members of the Legislative Assembly to support this provincial government in its efforts to implement the necessary changes in Manitoba's post-secondary educational system.” It is necessary. It is imperative that we do it. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to be able to stand in the House and speak a little bit about the resolution brought forward to us by the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render). I want to extend my thanks to her for allowing everyone an opportunity to discuss an issue as important as post-secondary education to the students and the future of the province of Manitoba because the future of the province of Manitoba can be made a lot brighter if we show the necessary support to our students from across our province who would wish to take part in post-secondary education, be that at the universities in Manitoba or our province's colleges.

The one thing that does kind of irk me in the speeches that I have heard so far has to do with this idea that the students of the province of Manitoba are looked upon as consumers rather than as learners. When we start to reduce our young people to the form of consumers, then it tells me that priorities--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am experiencing some difficulty hearing the honourable member for Dauphin.

Mr. Struthers: Madam Speaker, when we reduce our students to the very basest level of being a consumer of education, we are accepting that old notion that says that all you need to do is unscrew the top of their heads and start pouring the information in and it is all going to be consumed and then you just--[interjection] Well, somebody across the way forgot to open up the head and pour it in.

With the post-secondary education, we cannot look strictly at our students as consumers. In that way, what we do is simply think that this is a dollar item and that we can simply cut and cut and cut some more like the Conservatives have done in this province. What we do when we look at education simply from the perspective of consumerism is, we exclude large chunks of our student population from attending universities. We make the almighty dollar the base upon which you enter universities instead of what has traditionally been the entrance requirement for universities, which is good marks, intelligence and hard work.

* (1720)

An Honourable Member: It still is.

Mr. Struthers: The member across way says, still is. I would suggest to him that he get a grasp on what is really happening out there in rural Manitoba. As a school principal, it was my unfortunate experience to talk with many students, very bright, very capable, very hard working students at the school that I was the principal at, at Rorketon, who simply could not go to university because they could not afford to go.

The problem is twofold. Number one, tuition fees under this government have raised and raised and raised and increased over the years to a point where the students find that to be an obstacle to university. If the student does not work hard, then I do not believe they should be there. If a student does not have good marks, then they do not require university. But if a student has good work habits and if a student has good marks and cannot afford to go to university, then this government should step forward to the plate and take responsibility for that. We are putting up against our students so many obstacles that have little to do with an educational basis, and that is absolutely shameful.

The other thing that I want to point out is that this provincial Tory government is not absolutely the only people that are messing up the chances of our young people having a crack at going to university or any post-secondary education.

In the resolution that the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) puts forward, I must fully agree with what she says in the beginning, in the first WHEREAS, where the federal government has made the decision to unilaterally reduce transfer payments for post-secondary education in Manitoba. That is not supporting the students in rural Manitoba that I represent. That is not going to help the kids at school where I used to be a teacher go to university and have a chance to help society by obtaining a higher education and then going out into the workforce and putting that higher education to work.

The success of a nation is at least partly measured by the way we educate our people. The success of a nation is enhanced when you have a society and a population that is well educated, that does know the facts and all the methods by which to apply the facts that humans around the world obtain. By not showing at least the minimum amount of support for public education, whether you be the federal Liberals or the provincial Tories, you reduce our nation's chances of success, you reduce our nation's quality of living.

Madam Speaker, the report entitled Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba: Doing Things Differently, I must say that I do like the title, Doing Things Differently. I think both the federal government and the provincial government have to start doing things differently, or they are never, ever, going to produce the number and the quality of students that we need to have in this province in order to be successful.

The other prime factor that we need to consider when it comes to post-secondary education is the inaccessibility of our universities for rural students. Number one, they cannot pay the tuition fees. Number two, a rural student is faced with the further monetary obstacle of putting out money for room and board when they attend university in the city.

Now, there are some options that this government has in terms of reducing that particular obstacle for rural students, and one of the those is distance education. A distance education option in this province is something that is sorely lacking and something that this government has been dragging its feet on. When you look at the alternatives and the other provinces which have been committed to distance education, you will notice some things differently than what you have in Manitoba. You have a much higher degree of rural and northern students participating in higher education programs in provinces where there are distance education programs that are funded and supported by provincial governments.

This government has a lot to learn when it comes to providing education opportunities for rural and northern students, and just simply pointing a finger at the federal government and whining about the amount of money that is being cut by the federal Liberals is not good enough. The provincial government has to stand up and take responsibility itself for education, not just at the post-secondary level but across the K to 12 level, as well. Manitobans expect a little bit more than the whining and finger pointing that this government in Manitoba has come up with so far.

Madam Speaker, probably the most disconcerting of what I have heard so far, though, has to do with the way we treat our students, particularly in rural Manitoba simply as consumers of education. It is a combination of the federal government and its cuts to transfers to post-secondary education and to health that I think we need to spend some time considering as well, and that part of the resolution before us today is something that I am in agreement with, with the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render).

The part that I find I cannot agree with is how this resolution goes from all those WHEREASes, which actually are not too bad, to the THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED part, that all members of this Legislative Assembly support the provincial government in its efforts to implement the necessary changes in Manitoba's post-secondary education system.

Well, Madam Speaker, on the one hand, this government is being told to do things differently because the people of Manitoba do not accept and do not support the things that this provincial government is doing in post-secondary education, and at the same time, this resolution is saying that we need to implement necessary changes. Well, not all change is necessarily good change, and I will support any change from this provincial government that I consider to be good for the students of rural and northern Manitoba and all students in the province.

But, Madam Speaker, what I have seen come out of this government in the area of post-secondary education is nothing that I would believe is good change. Increases in tuition fees I do not think is good change for the students in Manitoba. I do not think that throwing up more and more obstacles for my students from the Dauphin constituency to attend university is a good change.

So, Madam Speaker, I will not support that. If at some time the provincial government decides that it would implement some positive change that, say, our side of the House would come up with or that other groups from around the province would suggest, then, yes, I would gladly stand and support those kinds of changes. But from what I see so far, I do not believe that the change put forward by this government is beneficial to the students and prospective students in the province of Manitoba.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers) will have three minutes remaining.

The hour being 5:30 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. on Monday next.