Thank you, Mr. Chair. The money is provided to Aurora College for the implementation of their programs as they, Aurora College, deem fit. Now, as we move into the polytechnic university, the person that is responsible for that will use that funding as that person deems fit to provide for the best services for students and to meet the needs of residents and businesses in the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Ms. Green.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess the only thing that I find surprising is that money is allocated for one purpose and used for another. That doesn't seem to be sound business practice, even for an arm's-length organization. I am wondering why that is. Thank you.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, we provide that money to Aurora College as a contribution and to use as they see fit. They have to provide us an annual report on what they have done with that, but to date, we have never been so prescriptive for the GNWT to say, "You will provide this program, that program, this program, that program." That has always been the autonomy of the post-secondary education.
I am open to feedback if committee thinks that I should be directing the college on what we are doing, but I do think that having that autonomy is the right way to move within our post-secondary education and all education systems. What is the use of decentralizing if we are going to prescribe, "This is you will do with every single cent?" The whole purpose is to actually have the people in the regions or in Aurora College to be able to define how they use their funding to meet their best needs as they deem fit. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Ms. Green.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I realize that the decision to cut the programs was not made by this Minister, but I find the conversation of autonomy somewhat galling. The college was directed to cut those programs, and they did that. While I appreciate the Minister championing the independence and integrity of Aurora College, the fact is that they have been taking orders from the Department of Education, Culture and Employment for a long time, and we have several studies that show that that is the case. I guess I am still trying to reconcile, "They are a fully autonomous organization," with the evidence that we have that is to the contrary. I realize that there is a lot of this that needs to be worked out in governance, but let me just say that I am a big fan of budgeting where you call the rent "the rent," you call the utilities "the utilities." You don't call the Social Work Program "implementation of a polytechnic university"; you call it what it is. I leave those comments with the Minister. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Green. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I am not a big fan of doing budgeting, either. That is not based on some kind of research, calling the utilities, checking what the enrolments were, checking what the needs are. I am going to make the assumption that Aurora College has done that all themselves. We give them the money as a contribution agreement. They provide their budget and then their annual reports as they deem fit. That has been a luxury. The government response says that we are only going to work with them for a couple of years, and the whole focus is to get them independent, because that is a big critique, that we are too entrenched in them. That is why I have committed to working with them and not doing the implementation plan before I hired the right person. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. We need to get a clock at that witness table there. Next, we have Mr. McNeely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I apologize to my colleagues here for being late. I think the understanding is well-received on the airplane electrical problems of yesterday. Anyways, I am here, and I am not sure if it fits this detail here, but if I can be allowed a little bit of flexibility here on my question about resource availability for funding programs or funding for the education system for the Sahtu region on review and efficiencies.
When I look at some of the concerning numbers of our youth's graduation rate, last year, in two of the five communities, there were zero graduates, and looking at the last five years, from kindergarten to 12, we are looking at about 50 percent, and the national average is about 70. The territorial average is around 55, 57. I think that this should issue a red flag and raise the question with the Sahtu Divisional Board of Education if there is funding available for this fiscal coming year on efficiency review on why our graduation rates aren't higher. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. This is not the correct section, but better late than never, Mr. McNeely. If the Minister is willing, I will allow the line of questioning. Minister.
Absolutely. I am allowing the MLA to ask me the question, and I will go to it remembering that he owes me. The graduation rates, yes, it is an issue. What are we doing about it? That is why we are bringing in the child and youth counsellors, to actually provide some mental health support. Mental health support isn't about just: are you okay? If you don't feel good about yourself, you're not going to stay in school, so that's part of the answer. We have the specialized teams that we're going to be sending out to work with people. The distance education in the smaller communities is working. We're expanding on that. Then, our new pathways, our career counsellors, are part of that as well, to try to actually get those students before they drop out.
However, I have to say that it takes a community to raise a child, and one of the biggest things that I'm also noticing is that students are not there. If they miss one day a week, by the end of the year, the amount of learning that they've missed is huge. We need to work with communities, as well. Education has to do our part, but we also need to work with communities, Aboriginal governments, municipal governments, parents, whatever community supports, and try to get kids to attend classes, and that should see some more positive results. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. McNeely.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks for the reply here. I didn't hear an answer to my question of whether there are going to be resources available to do a review on why the declining numbers are for graduates. Are there resources available in this budget to do an operational review, and looking at the Education Act, as well? I'm under the impression that there's supposed to be an operational educational plan for each school, and I'm not too sure if that is done, so that could make up a part of the review to see if there's an operational plan. The question is: are there resources available to have a regional educational efficiency and review with the leadership of the Sahtu, say SSI, and the department getting together and review together the operation plans, the graduations rates, and why they're declining? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Every district or education body actually has to have an operational plan. It's not an operational plan that we do as Department of Education, Culture and Employment. Each educational body does their operational plan. We don’t currently have money within our budget to actually do a regional review of the Sahtu. In fairness, if I did one, I'd have to do all of the regions because that's how I operate. I can speak to the education council, and if the council is willing, then I don't see any reason why they wouldn't meet with their leadership. If the council sees that as deemed necessary, then, by all means, I would support it, but we don't have extra funding within our budget to provide that to one region or all regions at this point. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. McNeely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm glad to hear that the Minister is willing to look at it and work with the regional council. If the Minister could work with me as well, to include me as part of the deliberation toward the reviews? As I mentioned, I'm quite concerned about the graduation rates being zero in a couple of communities, and I'm not too sure this fiscal year, or this curricular year, what we're going to have. If we're trying to deliver a high rate of education, the numbers of zero should raise a red flag, and step back, and we should look at the review. I look forward to working with the Minister on a potential internal-resourced funded review. Thank you.
Thank you. Does the Minister care to comment?
Just a quick comment. Just to say that graduation rates, sometimes, it not just that the students don't graduate. In some of the smaller communities, there are actually no students in those higher grades for various reasons. We have a community with five students, period. Those are the realities of some of the schools that we're dealing with. It's not always because they just don't get through. Sometimes, the cohort of children aged is not at that time yet. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. McNeely.
Yes, Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think, in this case, we do have some children in there, looking back at some of the numbers here. Take Fort Good Hope, for example: there were zero graduates. The year before that, in 2017, there were four; in 2016, there were three; in 2015, there were two; and in 2014, there were six, so there are students out there. We just need to include that as part of the review and seeing why our students aren't graduating. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If the education authority council is willing to take part in that review, we will support him. Again, financially, we do not have the resources in the Department of Education, Culture and Employment to do that in one region or all regions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Next, I have Mr. Thompson.
Thank you. I'd just like to follow up on some questions from Ms. Green here that she proposed to the Minister. The Minister talks about the college being autonomous. Can you give me the definition of what "autonomous" means? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. The Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. "Autonomous," I'm not going to look it up in a dictionary. Maybe my staff. If you really want that, I can get it to you. The reality is that we provide Aurora College $32 million in a contribution agreement. When we did the review, the review stated out very clearly that they felt that Education, Culture and Employment was too entrenched in the college, and it said they need to be arm's length. They need to have their own autonomy to find what they want, grow up.
The government response came back and said that we will be; Education, Culture and Employment will take it over until we can give them the skills so that they can be autonomous, be on their own, arm's length with our support. My humble definition of "autonomous" it's what they need to be. It's not where they are now, although I just met with the new associate deputy minister today, very short. We're meeting again tomorrow. It was the first thing I talked about, was: use us, use the GNWT for a couple of years, as short as you need to, all the supports you need, but the goal is to be on your own. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Next, I have Mr. Thompson.
My understanding, they're not autonomous right now. They're part of the department. We've hired somebody. How does the budget work? How does their budget work? Do they just come to you with a number and say, "We want $32 million," and you guys go out and give a contribution agreement? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. The Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Historically, we've given them $32 million. I don't know when the last increase was. I imagine they'd negotiate certain times. What their commitment is right now is they have $32 million to use as they deem fit. As they do the implementation plan, if there is more money necessary, then, they'll bring it forward to us. Again, Dr. Weegar was already talking about not being so reliant on government, looking at other ways of getting funds such as research, et cetera. Until that implementation plan is done, until the doctor has some time to figure out which way is up, it will stay as it is. Then, the commitment is, when he does that implementation plan and needs more money, we'll be looking at resourcing that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We went to them and told them to make cuts, so we, as government and the Department of Education, told them to make a cut. They've proposed these two things to cut. Now, you're telling me that the money is still there. We've seen the college. They did a review of the social work program, and they said, this is what we need to do to fix it. So why didn't we just say, "Okay, fix it and still implement it?"
It's funny because we're sitting here saying they're autonomous. They're not really autonomous, because we've got to give them two years now. We've told them that we have to make a cut, and then they cut two programs, and then they evaluated one. They went out and evaluated the social work program, and they come out and you're going, "No, that's not good enough." We've got to re-evaluate it. To me, that's not being autonomous. It's saying, if you don't listen to big dad or mom, this is what's going to happen. I struggle with what we're saying. Why don't we just say that this is what we're doing? We're going to fix it the way we like it, and that's the end of it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Absolutely right. When we were looking at funding, I wasn't the Minister then. I am guessing that it was told that you need to find some savings, and Aurora College came and said, "These are the programs that we are getting rid of because they are not cost-effective." It was not ECE. It was Aurora College that originally said that they are not cost-effective.
In the meantime, they are doing a review. I am not sure who did that review. I am not sure if it was the administration that approved that review, because, at the time that it came out, the person who was in charge of that ship had resigned. That review came out without the president actually putting a stamp of approval on it.
I am a social worker by degree, and I see the need for it. My commitment in this House is: I don't want to see a program where students are set up to fail, where students are taking third- and fourth-year courses in their first year. You can never make the honour roll, unless you are really, really super intelligent to get that done. I want to see a college or post-secondary that actually has the first and second years' general studies, like any other post-secondary in the country, where students can get all of that, and then they can actually expand and take earliers. We left the money in there because the political will of all of us was to actually provide the supports. We know that we want to do better. We know that it needs to grow. We have left the money there, that they can use as they deem fit, and then, as they develop their implementation plan, if they need money, and when they need money, at that point, we will be looking at it.
However, I don't feel that it is appropriate for me to go in and say, "This is what you are going to do with your $32 million." I think that that is a step back. I do not think that that is progressive at all. I think that we need to work towards supporting them, so that they can have our support and not feel intimidated and, within the next few years, can actually be autonomous and actually define their own. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you. I appreciate the Minister's passion from that, but when I talked to the board, the former board that is no longer out there, it wasn't the college. It was the department that told them, "You have to cut, and here's where you have to cut."
You have your opinion, and we have another opinion from other people. My concern is: how do we know that this system is going to work this time? The old system didn't work, and we have a college that has $32 million and has no real plan. Did we just give them a contribution agreement because it is what we gave them in the past? What are we doing to make sure that this time it is going to work? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My hope is that the reason it is going to work is because they are going to look from the foundation up. They are going to have a solid game plan. One of the next things that we are doing currently, along with the visioning exercise, is implementing two boards, not just a board with representatives from regions, as our old board was, which was nice. We need a board that has the skills, hopefully regional. One is around governance, how Aurora College is governed. The other board that we are looking at is an advisory board around programs, an advisory board that talks about best practices around the country, and that board will not only be defined within the territories; that is looking at people throughout the country to provide that support.
How will I know that it is going to be different? This time, we are going to have two boards, one directly specializing in best practices of programming for university, colleges, polytechs. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the Minister's passion and drive, and I am hoping that she is right, but we hear about government costs and that. Now we are going to add a second board? Is this not going to cost more money to the system, or are we able to do that with the $32 million that we have right now? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. At this point, like I said, we don't know what the costs are. That is part of the process. We know that we are committed to doing this. This was agreed in the government report.
If Members think that they know the best for how we should be doing this, I am willing to take their feedback, and I will provide that to the associate deputy minister, who does have the credentials to actually move this forward, but I don't think that it is appropriate for us on this floor to be actually defining how the polytechnic university moves forward. We have hired a person to do that, and we looking at an expert team to actually provide those services. Although, if people feel they have the expertise, I am more than willing. If they want to write me a letter, I will provide that to the associate deputy minister. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Thompson, your time has expired. Education, Culture and Employment, labour development and advanced education, operations expenditures summary, activity total, $53,135,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. At the back of this section, there are a number of information items, which we have largely discussed already, so we will just move back to the departmental total on page 29. Education, Culture and Employment, total department, $332,121,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Does committee agree that this concludes our consideration of Education, Culture and Employment?
