Education - Number 1 - Thursday, September 13, 2001

2001 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 37th Parliament
SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
MINUTES AND HANSARD

Present: Wendy McMahon, MLA (Chair); Reni Masi, MLA (Deputy Chair); Elayne Brenzinger, MLA; Tom Christensen, MLA; Richard Lee, MLA; Brenda Locke, MLA; Karn Manhas, MLA; Rob Nijjar, MLA; Sheila Orr, MLA; Richard Stewart, MLA

Unavoidably Absent: Jenny Kwan, MLA

1. As there was not yet a Chair to the Committee, the Clerk to the Committee called the meeting to order at 10:02 a.m.

2. Resolved, that Wendy McMahon, MLA, serve as Chair of the Committee. (S. Orr, MLA)

3. Resolved, that Reni Masi, MLA, serve as Deputy Chair of the Committee. (B. Locke, MLA)

4. The Committee discussed its Terms of Reference. It was agreed that a sub-committee should be created to conduct a detailed review of the Terms of Reference, prepare a draft business plan and a preliminary consultation schedule and report back to the full Committee.

5. Resolved, that a Sub-Committee on Agenda and Procedure be established and comprised of the Chair, Deputy Chair and two other Committee Members. (R. Stewart, MLA)

6. The Committee agreed that weekly meetings would be held on Tuesday mornings.

7. The Committee agreed to send letters to potential stakeholders to invite their participation in the Committee process.

8. The Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair at 10:52 a.m.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE
ON EDUCATION



CONTENTS

		Page

Election of Chair and Deputy Chair		1

Terms of Reference		1

Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure		2

Meeting Schedule		3

Terms of Reference		4

Chair:	* Wendy McMahon (Columbia River–Revelstoke L)
Deputy Chair:	* Reni Masi (Delta North L)
Members:	* Elayne Brenzinger (Surrey-Whalley L) * Tom Christensen (Okanagan-Vernon L) * Richard Lee (Burnaby North L) * Brenda Locke (Surrey–Green Timbers L) * Karn Manhas (Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain L) * Sheila Orr (Victoria-Hillside L) * Rob Nijjar (Vancouver-Kingsway L) * Richard Stewart (Coquitlam–Maillardville L) Jenny Kwan (Vancouver–Mount Pleasant NDP) * denotes member present

Committee Staff:

Wynne MacAlpine (Committee Research Analyst)

K. Ryan-Lloyd: Good morning, members. We'll call the meeting to order. Just a technical note before we get started this morning. You'll see on each of your desks a small speaker console, as well as a microphone. As is the fact in the chamber, the proceedings in this committee room are transcribed by Hansard staff, who are sitting behind me. When the light on your console is lit, that will generally reflect the fact that the Chair has recognized you to speak at that given time. If you want to give it a pause of a couple of moments until you see your light actually illuminated before you begin speaking, that will assist our Hansard staff.

You'll also notice the sign at the back of the room, which notes that the Hansard staff is recording the meeting as it proceeds and that the audio of the meeting is actually being broadcast throughout the building on a television channel. Each of the committee rooms has its own television channel. If you are ever in your office and wish to keep an ear on proceedings in this room or other committee rooms, that's one feature you can enjoy. That's what the on-air sign means. If the committee was meeting in camera today, then that would be noted on the sign at the back of the room.

K. Ryan-Lloyd: To get things started, my name is Kate Ryan-Lloyd. I'm a Committee Clerk here at the Legislative Assembly. Since this is the first meeting of the Select Standing Committee on Education and since there's not yet a Chair to this committee, I hereby open the call for nominations. May I have a nomination for the position of Chair?

K. Ryan-Lloyd: Do you accept the nomination, Ms. McMahon? Are there any further nominations for the position of Chair for this committee? Hearing none, I'll put the question on the motion.

W. McMahon (Chair): Thank you all for your support. I'd like to call now for election of Deputy Chair.

W. McMahon (Chair): In the package that you have in front of you, there is the terms of reference for the committee. If you haven't looked at them, I'm going to give you a minute now to look over the terms.

K. Ryan-Lloyd: Just to clarify, for the benefit of members. As you know, on August 27 the House conferred the terms of reference to this committee. As is the usual practice in British Columbia, committees receive their terms of reference from the House, and their first obligation is always to report the findings of their inquiries back to the House. This committee reports to the Legislative Assembly and to no other body.

The terms of reference state that the committee must prepare a report no later than the end of February 2002 on the results of the consultations which it's about to undertake. It's also interesting to note that because the terms of reference were passed by the House in the second session of the thirty-seventh Parliament, if and when that session is prorogued, the terms of reference will cease to exist. The committee will need to be reappointed in terms of its membership and have new terms of reference issued to it. If by any chance the committee is able to report out before the second session is prorogued — and I think the new legislative calendar indicates that that's going to occur sometime in early February — then certainly there's no need to have a re-referral. If the committee needs to continue its work throughout the final weeks of February to finalize its report, then it will need to have a speedy re-referral and reappointment of members to this committee just to finalize that stage of the process.

Once the terms of reference are issued by the Legislative Assembly, the committee itself is free to interpret the terms of reference as it best sees fit. Although the Legislature has given some broad instructions to the committee through this document here, it is now up to the members themselves to interpret what in fact the terms of reference mean and how best to undertake the consultations described herein.

W. McMahon (Chair): As you can see, we have a very…. Well, actually, I consider it to be a huge mandate in our terms of reference. We'll have a lot of work, I think, to get a report together before the end of February — just through the consultation process with the people listed here.

R. Masi (Deputy Chair): Looking at 1(b) there, it indicates that it's the network of colleges, institutes and on-line learning. That excludes universities — am I to understand that?

W. McMahon (Chair): No. I think anything covered under advanced education would be included. We will confirm that, though.

R. Stewart: I note that 1(a) refers specifically to public education. I would imagine that it wouldn't then include private institutes, but it would include publicly funded independent institutes like independent schools.

S. Orr: Do we have to approve these terms of reference through this committee, or do we just accept them? Is there a motion we should put on the floor to approve them?

K. Ryan-Lloyd: That's an interesting question. In fact, the House has already approved these terms of reference for the committee. So the committee is now tasked with undertaking the terms of reference and fulfilling the inquiry on behalf of the House. No motion, I believe, would be necessary at this point. Generally speaking, the committee might wish to consider appointing a smaller subcommittee today or early at its next meeting to undertake further examination of the terms of reference on behalf of the larger group and also to work with our office to prepare a preliminary business plan for this committee.

I should just say a few words, perhaps, about the role of our office vis-à-vis the support of this committee. Our office, the Clerk of Committees, is the facilitator and coordinator for all legislative committees. We support legislative committees through procedural, administrative and research support. Today at our meeting we have Wynne MacAlpine, a committee research analyst who's been assigned to this committee to assist with any research needs which may come up over the course of the next few months.

We also have within our staff the ability to assist members with any travel arrangements and accommodation arrangements which may be necessary to schedule in support of public hearing schedules around the province. Typically, when committees receive a terms of reference such as this one, which suggests that the committee will need to undertake consultation, our office will assist by preparing detailed itineraries with targeted locations around the province over a five- or six-week term, where members can visit anywhere from ten to 20 communities and consult directly with the public on the substance of the terms of reference. Certainly the travel locations and the dates of those will be something that the subcommittee or this larger committee will have to review very carefully.

Our office will also assist with the preparation of advertisements, communications plans and media releases to support the work of the committee and communicate with the public about the task that's being undertaken. If there are any areas of particular technical expertise in terms of education policy which go beyond the scope of our office, this committee has within its power the ability to appoint additional personnel by way of appointing expert consultants, for example, to assist with the direction of this committee. We would certainly be able to help the members explore any of those options at this meeting or at a later date.

R. Lee: Regarding 1(b), I think it's mentioned that probably independent schools are not included. But there are also other private or semi-private post-secondary institutes in B.C. Are those included in the review of how to strengthen the network?

K. Ryan-Lloyd: Again, I would recommend that the members…. Certainly that would be something for everyone's consideration and discussion today. The terms of reference from the House, as I mentioned earlier, are somewhat open to interpretation by the members as you best see fit to undertake your inquiry. Obviously, it's a very large task that's been placed before each of you today. But the manner in which you undertake that now is one which is open for discussion.

B. Locke: I'm interested in knowing how the work of the committee dovetails with the work that the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Advanced Education are currently doing and how the work of this committee will impact, or not, those two ministries.

W. McMahon (Chair): I've spoken with the Minister of Education, who will be working with this committee and providing some direction for us on what that ministry would like to see us accomplish, as will the Minister of Advanced Education, who has also spoken to me. So we'll be working collaboratively with their ministries to look at some of the issues they want us to deal with that will assist them.

K. Ryan-Lloyd: The Chair has asked me to explain a little bit more about the role of a subcommittee. It's quite typical for legislative committees — especially one of this size, with approximately 11 members or so

— to consider appointing a smaller group, usually consisting of the Chair, the Deputy Chair and one or two other members, to undertake some administrative details and planning on behalf of the larger group at this early stage. The subcommittee could work closely with our office in preparing a preliminary business plan to bring back to the larger committee for review and discussion at its next meeting.

A subcommittee may also wish to give further consideration to the terms of reference and perhaps a preliminary proposal for a travel schedule or public consultation plan of some kind.

If the committee thought that they wish to pursue that route this morning, the process would unfold now by way of a motion to that effect: that a subcommittee consisting of such and such members — three or four members — be appointed to undertake the tasks that I've just described.

R. Stewart: I move that a subcommittee be appointed of three or four members to examine the issues associated with our terms of reference and the preparation of a plan of action for a business plan to move this committee forward.

W. McMahon (Chair): And who shall the committee be composed of? Would we like that in the motion also?

R. Stewart: The committee then would be composed of the Chair, the vice-Chair and two other members designated by the Chair.

W. McMahon (Chair): We'll move on now to the future meeting schedule. I would like to schedule the meetings once a week to start with, initially. I think we have a large group to get input from, and the sooner that we get onto the task the better. Likely December won't be a great month in education, because of what's happening in the schools and with the Christmas break. So I would propose that we meet, and I'm going to throw this open for a little bit of discussion right now. I know everybody's schedule is so busy with our GCCs and everything else.

E. Brenzinger: I've been talking to a few people about how we can schedule our meetings, and a number of people have come with ideas that if we could get as many meetings on Mondays and Tuesdays, that way people — the MLAs and everyone here — would be here for two days of the week for sure. Then we could get all our meetings done and have the time left to go back to our constituency offices and work there.

W. McMahon (Chair): That's a good suggestion. Does anybody else have a preference?

T. Christensen: I was going to echo those sentiments that if we can…. I don't really care what time of day it is, but if we could do it on a Monday or a Tuesday or a Wednesday at the latest, that would be much preferable to Thursday or Friday. Most committee meetings aren't later in the week, so it means coming down twice in the same week or staying here all week for a meeting on this date.

R. Masi (Deputy Chair): I was just wondering about the location of meetings — if it's a necessity to have the meetings in the legislative building rather than perhaps in the offices in Vancouver.

W. McMahon (Chair): We can be flexible with that, I'm sure. If we are meeting with people in Vancouver, it's sometimes just as easy to meet there as it would be here. Most of the committee members are from the lower mainland.

S. Orr: I was just going to say that we do have a lot of meetings — as everyone says — on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. I was just going to throw out that as you are here, if we have heavy schedules, let's even consider meeting in the evenings. People are here working anyway, so let's not make it a nine-to-five clock but extend it into the evenings if we have to.

R. Nijjar: I understand what Reni said. In a previous caucus meeting that we had, we discussed this very issue of having meetings in Vancouver or in Victoria. We had generally agreed through our caucus Chair that we would have our meetings in Victoria because it allows for a system, and so forth, and also that we can do exactly what Elayne said: schedule our other meetings around that. We do need to be at our office sometime to do our work here. I like the fact that we consistently come to one place unless, of course, we're meeting a public body.

I do have a next question. I know my GCC meets — I think all of them meet — on Mondays. Am I right that they're all on Mondays, or Mondays and Tuesdays?

R. Nijjar: Okay. If we can schedule it Monday or Tuesday, I think that would work fine, because we have to come here anyway.

B. Locke: I'm on another committee that meets every Wednesday, as is Richard. So I think Tuesday would be a better day for us, if we can choose Tuesday.

W. McMahon (Chair): We'll try to work for a Tuesday schedule, then, if that's fine.

E. Brenzinger: GCC for Health is on Tuesdays in the afternoon, but it starts at two and finishes at four — so in between.

W. McMahon (Chair): Well, maybe we can make it Tuesday mornings from ten to 12 or something like that. Okay, we'll work on that as an initial meeting schedule, and we'll ask that the committee considering the terms of reference perhaps come up with that as part of the business plan, as a meeting schedule for later on. We'll get more active, I think, as we move into this process.

S. Orr: Madam Chair, on the issue of when we go out and finally meet with the public, is it financially beneficial or…? Is the mandate of this committee that we actually travel to those places and meet with those people so it makes it easier for them? Or is the mandate that we look at it financially and, if it's cheaper — if it's one or two people that want to meet with us — for them to come here? I'm trying to get a handle on the cost of this.

W. McMahon (Chair): What I feel will happen and what I would like to see happen is that a lot of our meetings will happen in Victoria — that people come here to meet with us rather than us go out. There are a number of committees that will be travelling right now anyway, and as we get further into the business plan, when we come forward to the next meeting, we'll have some information to present at that time on scheduling and the types of meetings we have.

I think we have a great opportunity to meet with a lot of stakeholders actually here in Victoria, simply because they are either in Victoria or on the lower mainland, and it's quite easy for them to get here. It would be the parent advisory councils, the parents and the classroom educators that I think we would miss that way, but there are other options for us.

T. Christensen: I would just add to that a thought that certainly to start with, we can get some background information from stakeholders who have some very specific experience and have already developed their views on some of the things we're considering. We can do that at the early part of our mandate and then perhaps schedule a week or two of travel around the province later on, so we've got the background information from stakeholders when we go out to those communities.

W. McMahon (Chair): That's great. I agree. If committee members have stakeholders that they feel we should be meeting with, they could let me or the Deputy Chair know so that we can ensure that we can get them on a list and get an invitation out to them to make a presentation or to meet with us. That would be great.

E. Brenzinger: I just want to add to what Sheila said. I have a concern that we make sure that we see and feel the culture of each district, because districts in Surrey are very different from up north and even from Victoria. I think it's important that this committee understands the differences in each of the districts.

W. McMahon (Chair): And rural B.C. is very different from the lower mainland. I agree.

W. McMahon (Chair): And within the lower mainland they're different too — yes.

R. Lee: Madam Chair, I think this is a very important point. The parents and students are really the major stakeholders in education, so it's important for us to go around to hear what they are saying and what they want in the system.

W. McMahon (Chair): We will consider that when we meet on the terms of reference and bring back a plan to the committee for their endorsement.

B. Locke: I'm sorry to revert to part of the terms of reference, but one of the other areas that I'm not seeing on here, which I'm going to ask you about, is early childhood development and early childhood education. Is that within the scope of our mandate in any way?

We've covered off our future meeting schedule in that we will ask for…. It sounds like Tuesday mornings would be the best time, so we'll see what we can arrange on that and get a notice out to you for the next meeting. Is there any other business you would like to discuss before we adjourn?

S. Orr: I just want it on record when the last Select Standing Committee on Education actually sat. I'd like it on this record. Could we note it, please?

W. McMahon (Chair): I can't give you a specific.… I believe it was 1973, but we'll definitely confirm that and get it into the records. Any other questions?

R. Stewart: Perhaps you could give us a synopsis of everything that's occurred since then.

W. McMahon (Chair): Oh, there's a lot. It will be different from everybody you talk to, too.

R. Lee: Actually, I asked the library to do a search of all the history of this committee. I got some references. I would be delighted to provide you with a copy.

R. Stewart: To what extent, if any, would we be referring to ongoing negotiations that occur in education? I assume not at all.

W. McMahon (Chair): No, we won't be. Really, we're going to be going out there; we're going to be listening. We're going to be gathering information. We're going to be making a report with some recommendations back to the Legislature. The negotiations that are happening between the BCTF and BCPSEA are totally separate from the mandate of this committee.

R. Stewart: To that end, then perhaps I could get some guidance from the Chair as to the way in which we can respond, as members of the committee, when those issues are raised. It ought to be clear to each of us as to the correct response on those issues.

W. McMahon (Chair): We can provide some notes on that, if you like. My response so far, when I've been approached on that, is that it's not the mandate of the committee to deal with those issues. I suggest that they contact the Minister of Skills Development and Labour if they have any questions regarding the legislation that's in place and that our mandate is to travel the province and get input from stakeholders on improvement of the access, choice, flexibility and quality, and those things, in the public education and post-secondary education systems. I think if you focus on the first two parts of our mandate when you're answering those questions, that will get you through that.

E. Brenzinger: I would like to suggest…. I know that early childhood development is not part of our mandate. However, I feel a need for transition somewhere between the committee that's looking at child development and kindergarten so that we have seamless services. I wonder if we could have a little bit of that in partnership with the child development group so that we can work together to ensure that we have seamless services from one ministry to another.

W. McMahon (Chair): I'll be happy to raise the question for you with…. Of course, this mandate has come through the House now. It's been approved. I will ask the question and see what kind of a response we get, but I think that we're very set in our mandate right now.

B. Locke: Looking at the terms of reference, will it be part of our scope to work with industry or to talk to industry to see how advanced education is addressing the needs of industry?

W. McMahon (Chair): Our mandate's broad, and I would definitely welcome input from that group. They're looking for skills. We know we will need a lot of workers coming into the workforce that will be used by the industries. We're lacking in that area right now. So yes.

S. Orr: Hearing what Richard said about the negotiated settlement that's going to be coming down through BCTF…. It meshes into 1(a) of the terms of reference when it says that our mandate is to talk about measures to improve access. Of course, as we know, the access to education is very directly impacted by that contract because of classroom size and access to the school in your district. I don't know how that's going to come out if we don't actually discuss the negotiated contract.

I just want to put that out there. In fact, I'm dealing with that this very week with children in my districts, too, particularly those who don't have access to their classrooms in their schools because of the classroom size that was negotiated under the contract. I'm just going to leave that there. I don't know how we're going to not talk about the contract.

W. McMahon (Chair): Our role is to get information, to receive information. We can look at that as we go through this, and perhaps what we'd do is say: "Make a presentation to us on access." We shouldn't be commenting on the negotiations that are ongoing right now. We'll definitely put that into our terms of reference.

R. Stewart: By my comments I didn't mean to imply that we not discuss anything that is a subject of collective bargaining, only that we clearly ought not to participate in any discussion about the collective bargaining process and the ongoing results of that. Clearly, class size…. Any number of issues at the collective bargaining table will be on the table here as well, because we have to discuss those. I concur with the Chair that those are the things we'll be discussing. I certainly didn't mean to imply that we avoid any discussion of those things.

R. Masi (Deputy Chair): I don't think we're going to have any shortage of topics. I think we'll be inundated by special interests coming forward. When the BCTF comes, I'm sure that the question of contract will be put out. When the B.C. principals arrive, the same thing will happen. Special ed will venture into the area of preschoolers. I think it'll be very hard to avoid hearing all these things.

We'll have a full agenda, believe me. There are so many interests out there in terms of education that the spectrum will be very broad. I think our job probably will be one of filtering through and coming up with recommendations that we're able to do in the time we have.

R. Stewart: I also wanted to understand how information will be provided to the members of the committee — for example, the funding formula whereby schools get their funding, a school-district-by-school-district list of per-student funding and those sorts of issues, which I think will be enormous, speaking from the school district in British Columbia that receives the lowest per-capita funding. What kind of information and in what format — I assume that information is coming — and how will we be able to receive that as quickly as possible?

W. McMahon (Chair): These are some of the issues that I want you to speak to either myself or Mr. Masi about. Let's put them on a list of issues that we should be dealing with. We'll deal with them through the terms of reference. We can easily be briefed on that through the ministry. We'll start that process as soon as we can, as soon as we start identifying some of these issues.

K. Ryan-Lloyd: I can further clarify that for the information of members as well. If there are any particular information requests which you would like to make on behalf of the entire committee, our researcher, Wynne MacAlpine, or I would be happy to contact the Ministry of Education or other public bodies on your behalf and request that information. Once we receive it, we'll distribute it to all members of the committee. We will also be able to, on your behalf, contact any expert witnesses or groups, associations or representatives whom you wish to have appear before you. We will coordinate their appearances as well. So certainly, if you would like to let the Chair or the Deputy Chair or myself or Wynne know of any of these things, we'll keep it coordinated on your behalf.

R. Nijjar: My concern is with making sure that our terms of reference are known by the public. As the Deputy Chair said, there are hundreds and hundreds of different agendas and interest groups within education. I think it's important that when groups speaking before us make their interests known, we quickly give them our terms of reference. Let them know that they must speak to us within the context of points (a) and (b). Otherwise we will try to do everything, and we'll get nothing done. I'm a real keen believer that committees have to really focus on the one or two things that they're mandated to do. Otherwise, we're not going to have a proper presentation on February 28.

So if we can really focus on making sure the public knows what our terms of reference are before they ever come before us….

W. McMahon (Chair): Great. Thank you. What I would like to see is that we send letters out asking people if they would like to make a briefing presentation to us. We list the terms of reference in it so that they know what they will be speaking to us about.

R. Stewart: To the member opposite, I can't imagine anything that isn't covered by these broad terms of reference. School buses affect access. Class sizes, quality…. I mean, there's absolutely nothing in education that the BCTF or anyone else couldn't sit at the end of the room there and argue: "Well, surely that comes under quality or flexibility or anything." So I'm not entirely certain that we'll be able to limit the discussions of this committee.

R. Nijjar: This may be asking you to repeat an answer, and I'm sorry. But can you please tell us exactly what type of research Wynne would be doing?

K. Ryan-Lloyd: Well, perhaps Wynne should further illuminate the committee on that point, but I'll do my best. Basically, our research analyst team — we have one assigned to each committee — will be able to provide the committee with general research support in terms of when there is an information request — for example, particular financial figures as Mr. Stewart outlined. We would, on your behalf, call the appropriate officials in the Ministry of Education to request that information be sent to our office so that we could distribute it promptly to all members of the committee. If there were some highly technical area of analysis that needed to be done in terms of analyzing education trends or giving specific advice to this committee over some kind of education policy or planning proposal, the committee may wish at some point to consider hiring additional personnel with some expertise in that area.

But generally speaking, we're quite confident that Wynne will be able to assist you with most of your general research needs. Did you want to add anything to that, Wynne?

W. MacAlpine: I would just reiterate that we're able to compile information that you'd like and to summarize it into a more condensed form. If there's anything you'd like us to get specifically, we can find that. That goes for background material on specific issues, programs or policies, comparisons with other jurisdictions and the submissions that you're going to be receiving. But as Kate said, if you require specialized research assistance, that can be done by consultants of some kind.

K. Ryan-Lloyd: Further to that, following receipt of submissions in Wynne's summary and presentation of that information back to you, she will also be able to assist with the drafting of the report. The typical process for that is that following the consultation process and the consultations with expert witnesses and key organizations, Wynne will begin to synthesize that material and, at your direction, will shape it into a

draft report which will be presented to you for discussion. Usually committees debate and discuss the contents of that report at anywhere from five to ten meetings, but certainly it would be our hope that we'd be able to assist you with every step of that process as well.

R. Nijjar: Would requests for research work go through the Chair and the Deputy Chair, or can an individual member approach the researcher?

W. McMahon (Chair): I was going to say that my preference would be through the Chair or the Deputy Chair, just so we're getting all of our requests through one area before they go out. That would probably save some time — with Wynne getting ten people asking her the same question. So that would be my preference, and that's the system I would like you to use.

B. Locke: I, too, am concerned about the scope of the terms of reference and just wanted to comment that it may be advisable for us to look at forming two committees of this committee — one to deal with the Ministry of Education, K-to-12, and to separate advanced ed and trades training and advanced education needs. I'm just thinking that given our scope and our time frame, we may have a difficult time dealing with it all together if there aren't people focused in the two areas.

R. Masi (Deputy Chair): Well, I know you are going to comment, so perhaps you should go ahead first, and then I'll comment.

W. McMahon (Chair): My suggestion is that we will have the committee dealing with the terms of reference meet, and we can discuss all of these things and look at the scope and where exactly we think we should be going. We'll bring that back to the committee to discuss.

R. Masi (Deputy Chair): I'm glad you brought that forward, Brenda, because advanced education is just a huge, huge situation in this province. I would say we have many changes coming ahead with the university colleges. There is no university college act; there are the colleges themselves, the universities. They all have representatives and councils. The structure in British Columbia is not confusing at all, but it's somewhat in flux.

These are important topics. I know we tend to focus on K-to-12, but it is an extremely important area — advanced education coupled with the skills training. It is a huge area, and I just thought I'd add a comment that there would be lots to do in that area.

I've received a list of the groups in advanced education from the minister's office, and it is a significant list of stakeholder groups. So I agree; it is huge. We'll definitely bring that forward to the committee to look at.

K. Manhas: I have a question in regards to how we work through specific issues. I understand there's a committee that's going to be struck to delineate the terms of reference a little more. I mean, education is such a broad field. Are we going to be choosing specific topics within the field to deal with at a certain time and deal with all the stakeholders as much as possible in that field at a certain time and then go on to the next? Or are we going to be dealing with the topics as they come and as the stakeholders come? I mean, the issues facing post-secondary education in British Columbia are quite different from the issues that are facing kindergarten and early childhood programs. I'm just wondering how that might work.

W. McMahon (Chair): What I'm hearing you saying is that you would rather spend a week dealing with post-secondary and a week dealing with K-to-12, if we're dealing with the presentations — to separate them rather than mix it all up into one group.

K. Manhas: What I'm suggesting is…. I'm wondering if there should be some kind of a structure in dealing with the stakeholders relating to education, having all of one group dealt with at once, and if there might be some kind of synergy of ideas added by dealing with all the groups in one particular field at a time and sort of graduating it along the way.

W. McMahon (Chair): Let's take that forward to our committee. That makes sense to me. We've got some other comments here.

S. Orr: My understanding is that we're a committee that's going to be sitting and listening to the stakeholders. Once we've received and filtered that information, we put that into a report. So how we receive the information is up to us as to how we break it out and how we report it back. I personally think we should just get on with the next couple of weeks and decide where we're going, let the stakeholders know and start bringing them in. At the end of the day, this is a listening body. Then this body has to take that information and dissect it and put it into some form of a report, making sure that the stakeholders have said exactly what they want to say.

Really, I think we can micromanage this to death. But at the end of the day, they're going to sit there and want to have their say, and we're going to have to listen. We're going to want to listen. I think we're having a good debate here, but we just have to get this thing started and get hold of those people and tell them we're ready to listen. Let's get on with it.

R. Stewart: In that context, though, I think Brenda had a good idea, and it might have got skipped over here. Reni and Karn have both referred to the idea that these are distinct issues — the post-secondary and the K-to-12. It might be best, as we go around to solicit opinions, that there is a committee that can hear from those who are concerned about engineering at SFU,

and that subcommittee might be different from the one that is trying to resolve the issues associated with special needs in grade 3. Then the reports of those subcommittees can…. There's going to be so much work that I think that might be a better way: to divide the two, as Karn has pointed out, to perhaps allow for subcommittees to focus a little bit more closely on those two different issues.

W. McMahon (Chair): We'll have our discussion around our terms of reference in the committee and move forward.

R. Nijjar: Following Sheila's comments, I just want to clarify our terms of reference. Madam Chair, correct me if I'm wrong. Our mandate is not to take all the information the stakeholders present to us and make a report out of it and present it to the House. Our mandate is to make decisions based on how best to go about (a) and (b), by consulting stakeholders, which is a very different thing. I want to make sure we understand that. Our responsibility, I believe, is to make a decision based on consulting the public.

W. McMahon (Chair): To make recommendations to the House is what our mandate is. So we will consult, we will listen, we will develop a report, and at the end of the report we will have some recommendations which we will put forward.

R. Nijjar: So our report will be more than just a reiteration of what the public has said.

R. Lee: It has just come to my mind that, for example, access to higher education sometimes involves grade 12, grade 11 and also post-secondary institutes. I think sometimes we cannot separate the two. So I'm not sure how some of these can be separated. Of course, I think we should listen to all the presentations and make our recommendations. Ultimately, we have to make the recommendations and, after gathering all the information, make some judgment call.

We'll set our next meeting for next Tuesday morning if that's agreeable to everybody.

S. Orr: Next Tuesday I have a whole day with my smoking committee. All our stakeholders are coming. My day is gone. That's okay. We're not all going to be able to be here all the time.

W. McMahon (Chair): As I said that, I'm thinking perhaps we should have our subcommittee work first before we have our next meeting. It's no use having a meeting if we don't have something to bring forward. If that is fine, we'll let you know when our next meeting is.

E. Brenzinger: Can I suggest that we start making sure our calendars are open on Tuesday mornings in the future so that we are all available?

W. McMahon (Chair): Uh-huh. So it won't be next Tuesday. We'll let the subcommittee have their meeting and start to work on the terms of reference and which way we're going to go.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS (Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE
ON EDUCATION