And I know we have so many guests that have joined us here today, and I would like to take this opportunity to welcome them all. And they’ll be introduced in due course here this morning. And I want to thank them for coming and attending here today as we really celebrate — celebrate not only our province but our nation, Mr. Speaker, and how our nation has come to be, and celebrate who we are as community, who we are as a province, and celebrate who we are as a nation of Canada.

But I do want to take the opportunity at the outset to introduce three individuals, Mr. Speaker. Starting at the back we have Muhammad Fiaz, who served on the floor of this Legislative Assembly for the constituency of Regina Pasqua. I welcome him today and thank him for his service to the people of Regina and the people of Saskatchewan.

We also have with us from the constituency of Arm River, Mr. Speaker — not armed river; Arm River — also has served on the floor of this Assembly, Mr. Dana Skoropad. Mr. Speaker, if there was a fourth previous MLA [Member of the Legislative Assembly] here by the name of Don Morgan, he would have instructed me to introduce him not as Dana Skoropad but as Slick Scorecard, Mr. Speaker. But a great friend as well and thank Dana for his service, again to the people of the constituency of Arm River, Mr. Speaker, and to the people of the province.

And no stranger to this Assembly for many years, a founding member of this Saskatchewan Party, and a great friend to so many across the province, in particular in the Ukrainian community, Mr. Speaker, the former deputy premier of the province of Saskatchewan, former Finance minister . . . I’d better mention minister of Education as well or he might take me to the woodshed after, Mr. Speaker. But is Ken Krawetz who served for many, many years, over two decades on the floor of this Assembly — much of it in this chair right here being the deputy premier, Mr. Speaker — for the constituency of Canora-Pelly. And I want to thank Ken Krawetz for his service as well to his constituents, and thank him for his service to the province of Saskatchewan that continues to this day in much of the work that he does.

Mr. Speaker, through you and to you to all members of this Legislative Assembly, I would ask us to join in welcoming these three previous members of this Legislative Assembly to their Legislative Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Mount Royal.

Trent Wotherspoon: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a real pleasure to join with the Premier here today to welcome these three leaders, these three former members back to their Assembly.

It’s wonderful to see MLA Fiaz in the Assembly here today. He has a wonderful family. He certainly served his community and his province well. We’re still long overdue for a squash game, Mr. Fiaz. But wonderful to have you here.

Also wonderful to have MLA Skoropad here. Of course he’s looking sharp in a bright blue teal suit here. He always was the sharpest dressed in this Assembly. Wonderful family as well. And somebody that was an exceptional educator as well. And it’s a real pleasure to welcome Mr. Skoropad back to his Assembly here as well. It was nice to visit with him and some of the Moose Jaw students out in the rotunda.

And I’d like to join in the welcome as well of former deputy premier and a minister on many fronts and a leader in this province, Ken Krawetz who continues to lead in many ways, certainly in the Ukrainian Canadian community. This is somebody who has given a whole bunch to his province, a whole lot of heart and soul, a whole lot of care, a little bit of yelling in this Assembly once in a while, Mr. Speaker. This is a man that’s passionate about his province. And it’s a real pleasure to welcome him as well.

I ask all members to join with me in celebrating and welcoming these three very fine former members.

And, Mr. Speaker, I can’t stand up and introduce these three members without touching one other incredible leader and someone that I’m very proud to serve as her MLA. And that’s Carol LaFayette-Boyd, who’s seated in the gallery right here. A legend on so many fronts. Track world record holder in so many events, has broken more world records than . . . Well I don’t know what she’s at here right now, but it’s remarkable. World recognition through the track community as a global success, Mr. Speaker.

And an incredible builder in this community, the African Canadian community as well through her life, through her work, through giving back, through her incredible career. Mr. Speaker, this is a leader in so many ways. I ask all to welcome Carol LaFayette-Boyd to her Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport.

Hon. Alana Ross: — Thank you. I request leave for an extended, extended introduction.

Speaker Goudy: — The minister has requested leave for an extended, extended introduction. Is leave granted?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Hon. Alana Ross: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To you and through you, I would like to welcome a number of guests joining us here today in various galleries to celebrate the introduction of the “from many peoples, strength” Act. Today is a very special day as we have representatives from cultural groups and communities from across our province.

But to keep this somewhat brief, I will recognize the various communities that we have represented with each individual. But please know I know there’s people with tremendous accomplishments who are joining us here today. And we’re so pleased to have you with us.

This morning I welcome representatives from FSIN [Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations], Métis Nation-Saskatchewan, members of the Greek Hellenic community, members from Saskatchewan African Canadian Heritage Museum, the Daughters of Africa Resources Center, as well as UCAS [Uganda Canadian Association of Saskatchewan] & African Descent Professional Associates, Saskatchewan Hungarian clubs, leaders and members of the Islamic community, leaders and representatives from the Sikh community, members of the Jewish community, the Hindu community, representatives from the francophone community with l’Assemblée communautaire fransaskoise, members of the Sri Lankan community, the Filipino community, representatives from the Ukrainian Canadian Congress of Saskatchewan. All are joining us here today. And we also have representatives from the Multicultural Council of Canada bringing with them nominees for this year’s Multicultural Honours Awards.

As we celebrate Multicultural Week this week, also we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Multicultural Council of Saskatchewan. For the last 50 years they have been working with organizations in our province, fostering opportunities for cross-cultural interaction and raising awareness of the benefits of cultural diversity. This is an incredible achievement, and I offer my sincere congratulations and best wishes to them for years to come.

With that said, I ask all members to join me in welcoming these cultural communities, organizations, and representatives to their Legislative Assembly.

And while I’m on my feet, Mr. Speaker, I would also like to recognize another former colleague who has joined us today, and that is Kamel Shazad, former chief of staff in our building. Please join me in welcoming him to his Legislative Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Stonebridge.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave for an extended, extended, extended introduction.

Speaker Goudy: — The member has requested leave for an extended introduction. Is leave granted?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the shadow minister for Parks, Culture and Sport, it brings me great pleasure to welcome everyone to this, their Legislative Assembly today.

So many different groups represented. We have with us, as the minister said, l’Assemblée communautaire fransaskoise, the Greek community, Hindu community, Hungarian Cultural and Social Club, Jewish community, Métis Nation-Saskatchewan, the Islamic community, Saskatchewan African Canadian Heritage Museum, and the Daughters of Africa. We also have with us the Sikh community and the Sri Lankan community. And we also have behind us the Filipino community.

And I’d also like to just point out, as the minister said, the 50th anniversary of the Multicultural Council of Saskatchewan. The Heritage Recognition (From Many Peoples, Strength) Act is certainly something that we all value on our side of the aisle. We’ve been advocating for these sorts of recognitions in the legislature for quite some time, and it’s long overdue.

I taught in a school called Sylvia Fedoruk School, with about 1,000 students, and there was about 40 different countries represented with over a dozen languages spoken. It’s truly a great place for us all to live and raise a family, being here in this cultural mosaic that we call Canada.

So with that being said, on behalf of the official opposition, I’d like us all to welcome these fine folks to this, their Legislative Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Provincial Secretary.

Hon. Jamie Martens: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to do a few introductions today, starting with the Ukrainian Canadian Congress of Saskatchewan. In the House today we have Charlene Tebbutt, Iryna Soloduk, Danylo Puderak, Holly Paluck, Liuba Krupina, Maryna Suprun, Sofiia Hladka, Oleksandr Shevchenko, Oleg Garbuz, and Vasylyna Boiarchuk and children Vladislav and Dymytro.

As well I would also like to welcome the Sikh community from my constituency and the members of the gurdwara in my constituency, and the president of the Sikh association, and that is Balpreet Singh.

I would like all members in the House to please welcome all of these individuals to their legislature. Thank you.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Churchill-Wildwood.

Keith Jorgenson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to join the member opposite in welcoming various members of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and the greater Ukrainian community to their legislature. You know, many of them I consider friends. It’s wonderful to have them here and be able to start the process of codifying a Ukrainian Heritage Month. So thank you so much for joining us in the legislature today, and I would like everybody, all members of the legislature, to join me in welcoming the members of the Ukrainian communities to their legislature.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Moose Jaw Wakamow.

Megan Patterson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To you and through you, it is my honour to introduce Shannon Simpson to this, her Legislative Assembly. Shannon is a resident of Moose Jaw and she has raised three amazing children there. I am proud to call her my friend. She is kind and generous and cares deeply about the city of Moose Jaw and its residents.

And while I’m on my feet, I’d also like to quickly introduce John Iatridis who my colleague will say more about in a second.

So I’d like to ask all members of the Assembly to please welcome Shannon Simpson to this, her Legislative Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Justice.

Hon. Tim McLeod: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And as my colleague indicated, joining Shannon is one of the strongest champions of the city of Moose Jaw that we could possibly have, and that’s John Iatridis. John is the owner of The Mad Greek restaurant in Moose Jaw, Mr. Speaker. I consider him a close friend. He’s a very prominent businessman in the city of Moose Jaw.

As I said, he owns The Mad Greek. But more importantly, Mr. Speaker, he is a supporter of the entire community. He supports the local athletic teams. He’s the greatest advocate we could ask for when it comes to small business in the community of Moose Jaw. And that’s probably what landed him with the title of Citizen of the Year in the community of Moose Jaw just a couple of years ago.

So I would like all of my colleagues to please join me in welcoming John Iatridis to this, his Legislative Assembly.

[10:15]

While I’m on my feet, Mr. Speaker, we have two school groups from Moose Jaw joining us here today. They would certainly be familiar with The Mad Greek as well. Joining us up in the east gallery I believe we have 37 grade 12 students from Peacock Collegiate. They’re brought to the Legislative Assembly today, Mr. Speaker, by their teacher Carrie Kiefer. Ms. Kiefer is no stranger to the Assembly. She’s a regular here in the galleries, bringing students, teaching them about the democratic process and the legislative process. And we thank her sincerely for that, Mr. Speaker.

Also in the east gallery we have 27 grade 11 students from Vanier Collegiate. Speaker’s gallery, pardon me. There they are. Sorry, Mr. Speaker. The 27 Vanier students are joined by their teacher Luke Tkatchuk. I understand that Luke is an alumni of the University of Saskatchewan Huskies football team, so we will all be cheering on his alum this weekend, Mr. Speaker, as the Huskies of course are going to bring home the Vanier Cup.

And joining these 27 students and their teacher Luke is of course their other teacher, my former colleague and good friend Dana Skoropad. Mr. Skoropad of course, as was commented, brings his colourful suits to this legislature. He wears an array of colours, Mr. Speaker, that frankly most of us are simply not brave enough to try on. But not only does Dana wear them, he makes them look good. So I would ask all in this Assembly to please join me in welcoming these teachers, their students to this, their Legislative Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Eastview.

Matt Love: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my honour to rise and introduce a small delegation from Swift Current who joined us here today.

Joining us from Swift Current’s First United Church is Deb Fletcher, Linda Stumpf, and Allie Van Der Ploeg, who’s come all the way from Australia to be here today in the Saskatchewan legislature.

And along with them, from Southwest Pride, we have Theo Houghtaling and Kim Houghtaling. They’re here for a member’s statement later on, and I won’t get too much into the content of that. But they very much would like to meet with their MLA following the 75‑minute debate if the minister opposite has time for that. I’d like to express thankfulness and ask all members to welcome this delegation from Swift Current to their Assembly.

And while I’m on my feet, I’d also like to welcome my constituency assistant. Just a really incredible and talented asset on my team, Sebastian Gardulski is here. Sebastian is a fixture in the Ukrainian community in Saskatoon, an accomplished dancer, who now devotes himself to coaching Ukrainian dance. I think like any good constituency assistant, he knows what I need before I know what I need. I rely on him for so many things — a very talented individual. I’d like to ask all members in the Assembly to join me in welcoming Sebastian to his Legislative Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

Hon. Everett Hindley: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to join with my colleague, the member opposite for Saskatoon Eastview, in also welcoming the delegation from Swift Current who is here this morning and joining us in the east gallery, Mr. Speaker, a number of individuals that the member opposite has already introduced. I want to thank them for making the trek from Swift Current to be here at the legislature today for proceedings. And I’m looking forward to having the chance to chat with them afterwards.

I want to just maybe perhaps point out one that I know quite well, Deb Fletcher, who’s sitting back there. Deb and I know each other quite well from our activities at the Kiwanis Club of Swift Current, which does some amazing work in our community as a local organization fundraising for youth initiatives, for families. We’ve just come through an apple fundraiser drive this fall. And we’re about to start selling some Christmas trees, Deb, I understand here in about a week’s time or so. And thank Deb for her commitment too. She’s also involved with the Meals on Wheels I think with Swift Current as well.

But I just want to thank Deb for her commitment to youth initiatives and to the Kiwanis Club of Swift Current, and through you and to you, Mr. Speaker, welcome all the guests who are here, the Houghtalings, everyone else who’s joined us from the great community of Swift Current. And thank you for being here today.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced Education.

Hon. Ken Cheveldayoff: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I request leave for an extended introduction.

Speaker Goudy: — The minister has requested leave for an extended introduction. Is leave granted?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Hon. Ken Cheveldayoff: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, it’s with great pleasure this morning that I introduce to you no stranger to this Legislative Assembly, Dr. Jeff Keshen, president of the University of Regina. He was just here to celebrate multi-year funding and is here for a very important occasion as well.

He’s joined by other officials from the University of Regina — Haroon Chaudhry, the associate VP [vice-president] international, and I believe others that may have came in as well from the University of Regina. We welcome them here today to their Legislative Assembly as we highlight an example of Saskatchewan’s commitment to education, equality, and global responsibility.

The University of Regina has taken a leadership role in ensuring that Afghan women who face systemic barriers to education can continue their education right here in our province. Their safety and continued access to education is made possible by the University of Regina’s donor-funded Project Resilience scholarship program and its partnership with Women Leaders of Tomorrow, a Canadian non-profit organization.

Through these efforts, more than $816,000 has been raised to support Afghan women students, and three of them are here today, seated in your gallery. And additional cohorts will be joining them as well.

I’m pleased to recognize these three students. If they’d please stand for recognition from the House, we have Nilofar Naderi, Spogmai Hashemi, and Tahmeana Khaliqi. These three women represent resilience and determination. And they’re present here as a testament to what can be achieved when institutions, donors, and advocacy groups work together.

Mr. Speaker, this is about more than education. It reflects Saskatchewan as a strong, safe, and inclusive province. Programs like Project Resilience send a clear message: we open doors. And in Saskatchewan we lead with compassion and opportunity.

Again I ask all members of this Legislative Assembly to welcome this awesome group and encourage great studies here. And we’ll be welcoming more of their cohorts in the future. And a real congratulations for the leadership that the University of Regina has shown.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon University-Sutherland.

Tajinder Grewal: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I join the minister opposite to welcome Dr. Jeff Keshen, president of the University of Regina; Dr. Haroon Chaudhry, vice-president international; and three women from Afghanistan — Nilofar Naderi, Spogmai Hashemi, and Tahmeana Khaliqi. Welcome to Regina and welcome to Saskatchewan.

A week ago I attended a Wingspan gala in Saskatoon, where 200 women from Afghanistan get together for their personal development leadership skills. Thank you very much for coming to Saskatchewan and showing resilience.

I ask all the members to join me to welcome university officials and these students.

While I’m on feet, Mr. Speaker, I want to welcome the Shaheed Sikh Society of Saskatchewan’s executive members, and the members of Islamic Association of Saskatchewan, and the Hindu Society of Saskatchewan, and the many other cultural communities to their legislature. Thank you.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Social Services.

Hon. Terry Jenson: — Well thank you, Mr. Speaker. And to you and through you this morning I’d like to just expand on the Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport’s very brief introduction of somebody that we know very well in this building, Kamel Shazad. Kamel is in your gallery, and Kamel is the director of public affairs for the Construction Association of Saskatchewan.

He’s very much a family-first gentleman. He does a lot of work, so much work, and volunteers to make his community a better place. And he is a familiar face to this building, Mr. Speaker. He’s worked in the ministries of SaskBuilds as well as Social Services and Crown Investments Corporation prior to joining the Construction Association of Saskatchewan.

We’ve become very good friends, so many on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, with Kamel. And we do truly appreciate him being here with us today. So with that I’d like the entire Assembly to join me in welcoming Kamel back to his Legislative Assembly, and hope he has a lot of fun here today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — Well what an interesting place to work. It’s bring-your-friends-to-work day. I don’t think a lot of places get to experience this, but looking up into the balcony and all of the balconies, seeing our friends, this is a great opportunity for us to serve you. And it’s a great day.

And to the Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport and Elias Nelson and your staff, I am very thankful that you’re all here today. I won’t name names, but welcome here. And I hope you enjoy the proceedings and the discussions today.

PRESENTING PETITIONS

Speaker Goudy: — Now we’re going to move on to presenting petitions. And I recognize the member from Regina Rochdale.

Joan Pratchler: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to present a petition calling for our government to step up for Indigenous students here in Saskatchewan.

The undersigned residents would like to bring to our attention the following: that immediate action needs to take place to stand up for Indigenous children and indeed all vulnerable children and students, advocating for the full restoration of the funding that was previously supported by Jordan’s principle.

Jordan’s principle was established to ensure that First Nations children have equitable access to the services they need, including supports in schools. The recent loss of this federal funding will leave a significant gap in Saskatchewan classrooms, especially for Indigenous students who rely on this funding for inclusive education supports to thrive. Instead of stepping up to fill this gap, this year’s provincial budget reduced education funding to less than what is actually in the previous year. This is an alarming move at a time when our schools are already stretched to the breaking point due to chronic underfunding and short-staffing.

I’ll read the prayer:

We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan to stand up for Saskatchewan and advocate for restoration of funding to support the Indigenous students in our schools; to commit to sustainable, predictable, and equitable provincial funding for inclusive education across Saskatchewan; and to ensure education support workers have the resources and the staffing that they need to keep classrooms safe and to support every student’s learning journey.

Mr. Speaker, this petition has been signed by the residents from Lloydminster, St. Walburg, and North Battleford. I do so present.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon University-Sutherland.

Tajinder Grewal: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present a petition calling for equity in education for our students with disabilities.

The undersigned residents of the province of Saskatchewan wish to bring to your attention the following: that in 2023 the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission conducted a review of the policies, programs, and funding models to provide target scores for students living with dyslexia; that according to PISA [Programme for International Student Assessment], Saskatchewan has some of the worst learning outcomes in the country; that access to education is a right under The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code and an untold number of students across Saskatchewan are being denied access to their human right to an education.

With that Mr. Speaker, I will read the prayer:

We respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan call on the Government of Saskatchewan to immediately work with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission to conduct and in-depth review of our public education system, specifically around the policies, the programs, and funding models designed to support children living with disabilities in our public education system.

This petition has been signed by the residents of Saskatoon. I do so present. Thank you.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Nicole Sarauer: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to present a petition calling on the government to reverse the ban on third-party educators from publicly funded schools.

Those who signed this petition wish to bring to our attention the following: that on August 22, 2023 the Saskatchewan government banned all third-party educators from publicly funded schools. The topics that these organizations taught include things like consent, healthy relationships, and child sexual abuse prevention. With Saskatchewan’s worst-in-the-nation rates in intimate partner violence and sexual abuse, the government should be doing everything possible to reduce these rates, including prevention education. And Mr. Speaker, the decision to ban these educators makes Saskatchewan rates of intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and sexual abuse worse, not better.

I’d like to read the prayer:

We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan call on the Government of Saskatchewan to immediately reverse its decision to ban third-party educators in Saskatchewan schools and consult with experts in developing a comprehensive curriculum for all Saskatchewan students.

Those who signed the petition today come from Saskatoon. I do so present.

[10:30]

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Southeast.

Brittney Senger: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present a petition to address the affordability crisis. The undersigned residents of the province of Saskatchewan wish to bring to your attention the following: that inflation is the highest it’s been in more than three decades; that half of Saskatchewan residents were living paycheque to paycheque before transportation and food costs that skyrocketed in 2022. While other provinces acted, the Sask Party government ignored the opposition calls for a gas price relief plan.

I shall read the prayer:

We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan call on the Government of Saskatchewan to meaningfully address the affordability in Saskatchewan.

The undersigned residents reside in Saskatoon. I do so present.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Mount Royal.

Trent Wotherspoon: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to present petitions on behalf of concerned citizens as it relates to the very serious rent increases that they’re facing, making that cost of living so much worse, Mr. Speaker. Of course they identified that Saskatchewan has the highest increases to their rent and that renters deserve and need protection. They’re in a very precarious situation.

I recently sat down with a group of young senior women in my riding in units that are owned by a large out-of-province corporate landlord, and they’re facing increases, Mr. Speaker, of over 30 per cent in just two years. These women have worked incredibly hard through their lives and they can’t make ends meet. They need some rent protection.

The prayer reads as follows:

We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully request the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan call on the Government of Saskatchewan to adopt fair and effective rent control legislation that limits annual rent increases, ensures housing stability, and protects tenants from being priced out of their homes.

These petitions are signed by concerned residents of Regina. I so submit.

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Rochdale.

National Child Day an Opportunity for Reflection

Joan Pratchler: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today, November 20, marks National Child Day, a day to recognize and promote children’s rights.

Adopted by the United Nations in 1989, Canada joined in 1991, making a commitment to ensure that all children from birth to 18 years old are treated with dignity, respect, and that children have an opportunity to reach their full potential by protecting them from harm and ensuring that their basic needs are met and that they have a voice to speak and to be heard.

Children’s rights are human rights. They’re non-negotiable and they’re universal. But in too many places today, children’s rights are being misunderstood, disregarded, denied, and even attacked. To honour children is to honour what makes us human. It might be a good time right now to think of those precious ones in our own circle, family, who need to be honoured and hugged maybe a little tighter the next time we see them.

As legislators, we are the keepers of policies for children. To cherish the preciousness of children and their childhood is one of the highest callings for any adult. May we as legislators answer that call responsibly with compassion and accountability, and extending it to every child in this province in all that we do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Moosomin-Montmartre.

Giving Back through Ronald McDonald House Fundraiser

Kevin Weedmark: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Last night I had the honour of speaking at an amazing event to support an important cause, the second annual Ronald McDonald House Saskatchewan’s House Party. I’ve spoken to a lot of people who have stayed at Ronald McDonald House and who wanted to give back.

Summer Heide and her daughter Mikka from Moosomin were there last night. Summer’s family stayed at Ronald McDonald House when Mikka was in hospital in Saskatoon for surgery. To give back, Summer organized a fundraiser and raised $6,500.

Chris MacPherson of Wapella wanted to give back because his family spent the first few weeks of his daughter’s life at Ronald McDonald House. He had a cattle sale and donated some of the proceeds to Ronald McDonald House.

One heifer was bought by Levi Jamieson of Moosomin whose family stayed at Ronald McDonald House in Saskatoon when he was in hospital after an accident, and the sale of those heifers raised $15,000.

I see the impact of Ronald McDonald House and hear about the urge to give back from lots of people, and I know that giving back makes such a difference. Mr. Speaker, I’m proud that our government shares that commitment and announced earlier this year $10 million in support of construction of the Ronald McDonald houses in Regina and Prince Albert. And I was happy to hear last night that those projects are going very well.

I want to say thank you to Ronald McDonald House Saskatchewan for the incredible work they do. Thanks to all the volunteers, the staff, and the donors. I look forward to those new houses being completed, and I want to thank everyone who contributes in any way. Thank you very much.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Northeast.

Recognizing Trans Rights on Transgender Day of Remembrance

Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a sad day, November 20th. The Transgender Day of Remembrance is an important day that calls on us as a society to remember the lives of our trans friends — or for some, family members — who’ve had their lives tragically cut short as a result of hate-fuelled violence, or of not being able to take it anymore and taking your own life.

1999: Transgender Day of Remembrance was started to honour the memory of Rita Hester, a trans woman who was murdered simply because she was trans. 2012: Canada formally recognizes the day. 2014: Saskatchewan adds trans rights to the Sask human rights code. 2021: 2,500 trans people are identified by the Canadian census as living in Saskatchewan. That’s a small minority. But in 2023 the government passed Bill 137 restricting the rights of trans kids.

We’ve seen a documented rise in trans violence in our province and in reports of wanting to self-harm. Things could’ve been different. There are ways to proceed that don’t add fuel to the fire for those who will not cease to hate and who will use any excuse to hurt. History has told us so. We have a responsibility as legislators to mitigate against potential harm, Mr. Speaker. Let us take this time to remind ourselves that trans rights are human rights and think of the lives lost. Thank you.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Yorkton.

Good Spirit Bible Camp Nurtures Faith

David Chan: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last weekend I had the honour of attending the fundraising banquet for Good Spirit Bible Camp, nestled in the heart of Good Spirit Lake Provincial Park, just 40 minutes from Yorkton. I observed the room packed with grandparents, parents, and youth, many of whom have themselves attended Good Spirit years ago. The camp’s mission, challenging all people to know God personally through his creation and his word, was visible in that room.

Last summer the camp welcomed over 500 children, including many from my constituency. And I heard deeply moving stories from kids, teenagers, board members, and parents, all of whom testify to one truth: there is a loving and holy God, and he sees our children.

I want to extend thanks to the camp director, Luke Prybylski, and his dedicated team of 60 young adults and teen leaders for working tirelessly throughout the summer, and now in the off-season to raise funds for the new dining hall so that even more children and families may be served.

In an age where children are increasingly drawn into devices, social media, and YouTube, Good Spirit Bible Camp offers something profoundly different. It invites kids outdoors — horseback riding, archery, lakeside swimming, community building, and meaningful friendships grounded in creation and God’s word.

This place matters deeply to families in my constituency. I commend Good Spirit Bible Camp for steadfastly providing an environment where faith is nurtured, memories are made, and young lives are transformed.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Eastview.

Call for Repeal of Bill 137

Matt Love: — Mr. Speaker, it’s a great day in Saskatchewan to finally repeal Bill 137.

In the fall of 2023 we watched this deeply harmful and divisive bill pushed through by that Sask Party government. They claimed that they had heard from thousands of people, yet they could only produce 18 letters. Meanwhile our side received hundreds of letters from parents, youth, educators, and community members urging this government to scrap the bill.

We saw massive protests — hundreds of concerned citizens gathering across the province in a loud, undeniable public outcry. We even witnessed the unprecedented resignation of a Saskatchewan Human Rights Commissioner, Heather Kuttai, a powerful stand against discrimination. But the Premier and this government still forced ahead while the safety and well-being of some of our most vulnerable kids was put at risk.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I’ve received a petition from 18 parishioners of the First United Church in Swift Current calling for their MLA and the Minister of Education to make right and repeal Bill 137. I wonder, I wonder, with 18 signatures and their presence in the legislature today, if you will finally make right, take his own constituents seriously, and repeal Bill 137 today.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Moose Jaw Wakamow.

Moose Jaw Recovery Program Helps Keep Downtown Clean

Megan Patterson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the coordinator of the Moose Jaw Downtown Association, Shannon Simpson, who I introduced earlier, runs a very special program that is partially funded by the city of Moose Jaw. That program is called Helping Hands. This program provides individuals in recovery with the opportunity to contribute by keeping our downtown Moose Jaw streets clean from garbage or anything else our prairie winds have blown in that shouldn’t be there.

Workers are provided an honorarium for their effort. The benefits are beyond financial, though. Workers are expected to be accountable and given a sense of purpose. This sense of purpose supports their recovery and gives them hope for their future. The city and our downtown businesses also benefit, as many tourists have commented on just how clean our city is. And this gives tourists the best possible impression of our notorious city and keeps them coming back.

The results of this program are outstanding. This program has led to 70 per cent of the workers obtaining full-time employment and allowing them to transition off of social supports.

I want to thank Shannon, the city of Moose Jaw, and the Downtown Moose Jaw Association for their commitment to ensuring our historic downtown thrives while enabling those in recovery to take steps toward living the life they aspire to. Thank you.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Provincial Secretary.

Honouring Diversity during Saskatchewan Multicultural Week

Hon. Jamie Martens: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This week we celebrate Multicultural Week. This is done to recognize and honour Saskatchewan as the first province in the country to pass multiculturalism legislation in The Multiculturalism Act. This year the Multicultural Council of Saskatchewan is marking the 50th anniversary. Each year they organize Multicultural Week and publicize events in celebration of our province’s diverse culture and ethnic backgrounds.

At the heart of these events in Saskatchewan, Multicultural Week Honours Awards. Now this year this event will take place Saturday, November 22nd with the Lieutenant Governor of Saskatchewan at the Conexus Arts Centre. These awards are presented to very deserving individuals who have made an impact in our province through their work and leadership in support of multiculturalism.

Some of those nominees are here with us in the gallery, and today I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate them — Ricardo Arisnabarreta, Mohana Das, Rena Farajova, Carter Jessop, and Chidinma Favour Anosike — for their nominations in these prestigious awards.

We know from the province’s motto — “from many peoples, strength” — that our diversity makes us stronger, and we continue to support the ongoing work of the Multicultural Council of Saskatchewan. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER

Ruling on a Point of Order

Speaker Goudy: — Just before question period, just a ruling on a point of order from yesterday.

Yesterday, on Wednesday, November the 19th, 2025 the Deputy Government House Leader rose on a point of order, alleging that during question period the member of Regina Northeast yelled across the floor, “You cannot be trusted.” I committed to retrieving the record. The record has been reviewed, and I am prepared to rule on the matter.

Voices can be heard on the video record, and the alleged comment is not discernible. Further, after providing the opportunity to apologize for unparliamentary language, no member came forward. Members know that accusing other hon. members of being untrustworthy is unparliamentary and out of order. In this case there is not sufficient evidence to support the point of order. Therefore I must rule that the point of order is not well taken.

But I do want to say, you know, we all grew up in Saskatchewan, many of us. Some of us came from other cultures, other backgrounds. We all learned what is decorum, what is honour, what’s respect, what’s expected from children let alone from adults. And I don’t mean to sound, you know, like I’m not friends . . . We’re all friends. We’re all peers.

[10:45]

But some of the things that get said on either side, you know, people take them home. People read clips on social media, and offences can start. So I would ask that it’s a very simple thing in future to know what you’ve said, to apologize before a point of order. We have rules. If we need to follow the rules, we follow the rules. But please, let’s show the province what kind of people they’ve elected, what kind of hon. members sit in every one of these chairs. And let’s use this opportunity to have healthy debate without using unparliamentary language, actions, and otherwise. So thank you so much.

With that, we’ll start question period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.

Emergency Hotel Stays Paid by Social Services

Nicole Sarauer: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, after 18 years of this Sask Party government, people in Saskatchewan face higher financial anxiety than anywhere else in Canada. So many people in this province are struggling to pay their rent and put food on the kitchen table. Some have been forced to turn to Social Services for emergency shelter.

Does the Premier think people relying on his government for shelter should be forced to live in deplorable conditions?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Jim Reiter: — Mr. Speaker, we recognize the effect that inflation is having on citizens of Saskatchewan, citizens of this country, and across the world, Mr. Speaker. It’s putting pressure on grocery bills, and it’s putting pressure on housing, Mr. Speaker. But we need to remember Saskatchewan is the most affordable province in the country to live in, Mr. Speaker.

On the rental side, for housing, Mr. Speaker, rents have been increasing, but they’re the lowest rents in the country. We have a number of programs in place, Mr. Speaker, that we believe are helping with that: the secondary suite incentive, Mr. Speaker; also have the first-time homebuyers plan. Mr. Speaker, our housing starts as of last month have been up dramatically, amongst the highest in the country. We believe it’s working. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.

Nicole Sarauer: — Mr. Speaker, not even close to the question that I asked. The reality is, people in Saskatchewan are struggling, and that question was to the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, this week we exposed that the Sask Party ignored warnings from officials — their own officials — to stop placing Social Services clients in a Regina hotel that has cockroaches climbing the walls, bedbug-infested mattresses, and drug deals occurring in plain sight. The Minister of Social Services admitted yesterday that people are still being put up in that very hotel.

Mr. Speaker, is this what the Premier thinks helping desperate people looks like?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Social Services.

Hon. Terry Jenson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And with regards to the Coachman Inn — that is the hotel that is in question here, Mr. Speaker — the Coachman is used as an absolute last resort. It is on the list, Mr. Speaker. It remains open. It’s passed its last public health inspection, so it is still a going concern in the city of Regina.

With that said, Mr. Speaker, Ministry of Social Services works with every individual that comes to our ministry in a time of crisis. We will find that individual some shelter, put a roof over their head while we work with them to get them longer term, stable housing, Mr. Speaker. Under no circumstances will we leave an individual in the cold. That is the irresponsible thing to do, Mr. Speaker, and this ministry takes this extremely seriously.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.

Nicole Sarauer: — Mr. Speaker, let’s be very clear. This is not who we are. This is Saskatchewan. We care about each other. People staying at this hotel report to CTV literally being eaten by bedbugs as they sleep, and there’s footage of cockroaches climbing the walls. I have been in this hotel myself visiting constituents. I have seen the conditions with my own eyes.

If the minister won’t do his job and cut ties with this hotel, will the Premier step in right now and put a stop to this inhumane treatment of Saskatchewan people turning to his government for help?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Social Services.

Hon. Terry Jenson: — Mr. Speaker, as I answered in the previous question, this is something that we take extremely seriously. When it comes to individuals and their safety and making sure that they are not left to their own devices out on the streets, that is the responsible thing to do, Mr. Speaker.

Our ministry works with a number of hotels in Regina. Depending on the vacancies at that particular day, Mr. Speaker, we try to and attempt to house individuals in hotels that are on our list — whether it be the eight rooms that we have blocked or, if those are already in use, we have a three-quote process, Mr. Speaker.

If there are no vacancies in Regina, this hotel is used as the absolute last resort because it’s either that or being out on the streets. And we will not leave anybody on the streets, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Wascana Plains.

Brent Blakley: — Mr. Speaker, this is such deplorable treatment of Saskatchewan people. We’re supposed to care for our neighbours. The Sask Party forgot that somewhere over the last 18 years. Not only is this government mistreating people turning to them for help, but they’re paying tons of money for their mismanagement as well. Today we’re releasing a contract for more than a million dollars paid to two hotels to house homeless people and those on social services. And those are just two that we’re aware of.

Why can’t this minister deliver on actually getting those people real housing and save Saskatchewan taxpayers some money in the process?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Social Services.

Hon. Terry Jenson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, the Ministry of Social Services, we work with a number of hotel providers in Regina, Saskatoon, and really throughout the province, to provide immediate assistance to families and to individuals, to children who are in crisis and in need of immediate support, Mr. Speaker.

You know, when it comes to balancing cost-effectiveness, safety, and availability when securing hotel rooms, Mr. Speaker, we do have the blocked rooms in Regina and Saskatoon. We also have a three-quote process that our ministry does on a regular basis to ensure that we are getting the best value for the ratepayers of this province as well as providing a safe place for these individuals to go in crisis, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Wascana Plains.

Brent Blakley: — Mr. Speaker, talk about cost-effectiveness. There’s more than 2,000 vacant affordable housing units in this province. The government refuses to fix them. They would rather dole out millions to hotels. And as we’ve uncovered, at least one of those hotels is downright disgusting. It’s pathetic really. Is this what the minister considers a housing strategy?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Social Services.

Hon. Terry Jenson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And when it comes to strategies, we just released yesterday our provincial approach to homelessness, Mr. Speaker. This is a $20 million renewal and expansion of the foundational funding that was done in 2023 of $40.2 million, Mr. Speaker.

This government has invested $98 million to date in this area. This is investments that are going to protect the people that need it most, Mr. Speaker. This is ensuring that we have additional supportive housing, Mr. Speaker. This is ensuring that we have enhanced shelter spaces. This is also making sure that we have complex-needs facilities in Saskatoon and Regina and soon to be in other places around the province, Mr. Speaker.

So when it comes to keeping people safe in this province, this is a government, Mr. Speaker, that is going to do that work and we are going to do it well. And we are going to keep partnering with our Indigenous and community partners as well as our municipalities while we do that work, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Northeast.

Rural Health Care Staffing and Provision of Emergency Services

Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Sask Party government has driven rural health care into the ground. They pushed through a dangerous new policy to keep ERs [emergency room] open even when they are not properly staffed. And I fear, as someone who worries about women’s health care, let’s say a woman has a postpartum hemorrhage after birth — which is the number one cause of death — turns up at an ER and finds no physician on site. She doesn’t have 10 minutes, 30 minutes, 40, 60, to wait.

Does the minister realize that a woman could very well die before a doctor even shows up at that building?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Health.

Hon. Jeremy Cockrill: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is a government that is going to put patients first each and every single day. And if the member opposite from Walsh Acres hadn’t ripped up his memo yesterday, he could have provided it to the member from Regina Northeast so she could clearly see what the policy states, Mr. Speaker. For a rural emergency room to operate, there needs to be physician coverage, Mr. Speaker. There needs to be at least two nursing staff in place, Mr. Speaker, and there needs to be lab services, Mr. Speaker.

How the NDP [New Democratic Party], Mr. Speaker, have characterized this debate over the last couple of weeks has been disappointing, Mr. Speaker.

Again, we’re going to continue putting patients first and finding innovations to make sure that care is available closer to home for every patient in this province.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Northeast.

Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have indeed looked at that memo, and it says it can stay open with only one registered nurse on site.

So let’s back up to the pregnancy itself — a critical time for health care to be there for women because there could be fetal distress, umbilical cord problems, or an obstructed labour . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . Hilarious. I can’t, I can’t fathom how the government is listing an ER as open when no life-saving operations could be performed on a pregnant mother.

What does the minister expect rural women to do? Do they book a hotel in the city for weeks or months while they wait to give birth?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Health.

Hon. Jeremy Cockrill: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I’ve said it in the House several times, and I’ll say it again. I think we should all be very proud in this province of the highly trained health care professionals that we have working in our rural facilities right across the province. Mr. Speaker, whether they’re an RN [registered nurse] or an LPN [licensed practical nurse] or an EMS [emergency medical services] individual or a physician, Mr. Speaker, we have some excellent health care providers that are keeping our rural health care facilities open and keeping access to patients right across the province.

Again, if a patient presents that they’re not able to handle at that specific facility, there’s processes in place to ensure that that patient is moved to a facility where they can receive the right care at the right time, Mr. Speaker. Again, we will always put patients first.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Walsh Acres.

Construction of New Yorkton Hospital

Jared Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now the Sask Party has promised and failed to build a hospital in Yorkton for 18 years now. They’re taking Yorkton for granted. There’s no mention of Yorkton in the Throne Speech this year. But hey, at least the Health minister made a video last night talking about maybe building a hospital in the future some time.

The project has been studied to death. It is time to get it done. Why won’t the Sask Party finally build a hospital in Yorkton?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Health.

Hon. Jeremy Cockrill: — Mr. Speaker, this is the government that has committed to building a new hospital in the city of Yorkton, Mr. Speaker. Every single time, Mr. Speaker, every single time this government has committed to building a health care facility in this province it has been built, it has been opened, and it has been staffed. The contrast could not be clearer. The NDP closed 52 hospitals, and this government builds hospitals. And we will be building a hospital in Yorkton.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Walsh Acres.

Jared Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let’s go over the timeline.

Formal discussions for replacing the hospital began in 2011 with plans presented to the public in 2012. The Sask Party made the community fundraise a six-figure feasibility study, and then they shelved it. Thirteen years later, the Minister of Health told media the project is still in the scoping portion but made no commitments to begin construction. In July of 2025 the government announces to develop another business case.

Gosh, this sounds like the most ambitious plan this government has over there, Mr. Speaker. How can the Sask Party defend their record of failing the people of Yorkton?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Health.

Hon. Jeremy Cockrill: — Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s good to see the opposition actually talking about the city of Yorkton. I thought they forgot where it was after the retirement of Mr. Serby, Mr. Speaker.

Again, Mr. Speaker, every single time this government has committed to building a hospital that hospital has been built, whether it’s Humboldt or Shellbrook or the Jim Pattison Children’s Hospital in Saskatoon, Mr. Speaker. When this government says we’re going to build a hospital, we’re going to build that hospital. And the same will be true in Yorkton.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina South Albert.

Increase to Cost of Tire Recycling

Aleana Young: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Now yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I asked the Minister of Environment about his tired tax on tires: an increase of 30 per cent, a tire tax that’s going to cost Saskatchewan people $7 million. Instead of answering the question, he shifted the blame to the Tire Stewardship Board. And now he’s telling us not to worry because it’s not a tax, Mr. Speaker, it’s a fee.

[11:00]

Now, Mr. Speaker, Saskatchewan people aren’t foolish. Does the minister really think word games can get him off the hook for jacking up this tax by 30 per cent?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Travis Keisig: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s $1.50‑per-tire increase in the fee. A hundred per cent of that fee goes directly toward the Tire Stewardship of Saskatchewan which is spent on recycling tires all across the province of Saskatchewan at the request of municipalities all across the province because they did not want tires going into their landfills, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina South Albert.

Aleana Young: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Let’s not forget that under this minister’s mismanagement, the tires are piled up so high in Clavet you can see them from space.

But we heard it again today, Mr. Speaker: it’s not a tax; it’s a fee. Now I’ve heard this before. You know, it reminded me of Justin Trudeau trying to convince people that it wasn’t a carbon tax, it was actually just a carbon levy. We all know, Mr. Speaker, just how very well that worked out for him.

But instead of semantics and retreaded Steven Guilbeault talking points, will the minister do the right thing and scrap this 30 per cent tax increase today?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Travis Keisig: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A $1.50‑per-tire fee increase to assist the Tire Stewardship of Saskatchewan to make sure tires are recycled all across the province, keep them out of our municipal landfills, and encourage recycling all across the province. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Churchill-Wildwood.

Supports for Ukrainian Post-Secondary Students

Keith Jorgenson: — Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, many grade 12 students who came to Saskatchewan fleeing the war in Ukraine are thinking about their future, Mr. Speaker. They need to start applying to universities right now, Mr. Speaker. Many of those students want to study here in Saskatchewan, and they have absolutely no idea if they’re going to be able to afford it, Mr. Speaker. I’ve talked to multiple grade 12 students who are planning on going back to Ukraine, a war zone, because they don’t know if they can afford to study here, a place that they’ve lived for years.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to set the record straight. The CUAET [Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel] visa expires in March of 2029. That is over three years from now. Why won’t the Sask Party simply commit to funding domestic tuition rates for all Ukrainian students who came to Saskatchewan?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced Education.

Hon. Ken Cheveldayoff: — Thank you very much for the question. And I’ll say it again and I’ve said it before in this House: no government across the country — or in the world, frankly — has done more to assist the Ukrainian people as they come here, as they make their lives in Saskatchewan, and as they study in Saskatchewan.

We have been here with a program that is unique in this country to help on the tuition side. We will continue to be there. There’s no cancellation of anything at the provincial level. We continue to talk to our federal counterparts. Yes, there is a program that is coming to an end on March 31st, 2026, and you know, certainly we’re going to be in discussions with them.

But at the end of the day, we’re going to consult with the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. We’re going to consult with the Saskatchewan Ukrainian representatives, as I’ve had discussions earlier this week with them. We’ll continue to do that. And again we’ll continue to put Saskatchewan students first and Ukrainian students first that reside in Saskatchewan. Thank you.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Churchill-Wildwood.

Keith Jorgenson: — Mr. Speaker, this is just plain wrong. The CUAET visa expires in March of 2029. I will send the member opposite a link so he can see that it expires three years from now. There is absolutely no reason to talk to federal counterparts.

Just yesterday, 26 people were killed in the city of Chernobyl — civilians. This is a provincial program. He could make the decision today. It makes no sense why these young people who have lived here for years have to pay a higher tuition than refugees.

Why doesn’t the minister just fix this today so these young people can have certainty about their future?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced Education.

Hon. Ken Cheveldayoff: — CUAET is a federal program, but you know, I would challenge the member opposite. There is always reasons to talk to the federal government. They were involved in this program at the beginning. The CUAET’s program gave us a list of individuals that were eligible for the program.

But again, we’re going to look at this. We’re going to examine all options. We’re going to consult with the Ukrainian people of Saskatchewan. We’re going to look at their recommendations. I’ve committed to them to do that. And you know, work is under way, and again we’ll ensure that those students have every opportunity to thrive in Saskatchewan.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Silverspring.

Access to Addictions Treatment

Hugh Gordon: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, for days we have called on this Minister of Mental Health and Addictions to release the number of people on the wait-list for treatment, and the wait times for getting off a wait-list and into a treatment space, but for days she’s refused to release the numbers.

In Saskatoon the fire department issued a drug alert yesterday due to the high number of overdoses that are resistant to naloxone. It’s time for the minister to release their numbers, and as minister she absolutely must know. How many people are on the wait-list for treatment, and how long are people waiting to get access to care?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions.

Hon. Lori Carr: — Well thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think as we talk about this serious issue in the House, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite made a really good point. These are very dangerous drugs that are out on these streets that are affecting the citizens of Saskatchewan. And he mentioned the drug alerts program that we have. What that does is it actually sends a memo out when we become aware of illegal substances that are out there on the streets hurting individuals.

What we want to do is get those drugs off the street. And through the programs that we are developing with the mental health and addictions branch, we want to get them into a program, get them into recovery, Mr. Speaker, get them a space to get them help so that they can actually get to a life where they can live a healthy life in recovery, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Silverspring.

Hugh Gordon: — Again, Mr. Speaker, still no answer on the wait-lists. Now either she knows the numbers and is scared to tell the people of Saskatchewan what they are, or as minister responsible she has failed to look into it. Perhaps she could call a treatment centre today to find out what those wait-lists look like.

And while we see drug alerts in Saskatoon and Regina, why won’t the minister just answer this question. How many people are on the wait-lists for treatment? How long are people waiting to get access to care?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions.

Hon. Lori Carr: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, helping people overcome their addiction and supporting recovery to save lives, heal families, and strengthen communities is a priority for this government.

We are moving towards a central intake system. It’s actually within our mental health and addictions plan. This central intake system will be a very coordinated effort that we will be able to work on. It’s part of the funding that we are spending, actually funding that has tripled since the members opposite had the opportunity to lead this province, Mr. Speaker.

So with that central intake system, we will be able to track individuals better. It’ll be a coordinated effort between all of our services — treatment centres, outreach programs, in-patient, out-patient, virtual, Mr. Speaker. There will be several opportunities for us to be able to do that under this central intake system. It’s well under way, and we’re looking forward to it starting up.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Addressing Interpersonal Violence

Nicole Sarauer: — Mr. Speaker, Saskatchewan has the highest rates of intimate partner violence in Canada. This has been the case now for the 18 years that the Sask Party has been in government. Saskatchewan is a rich province. We shouldn’t be in last place when it comes to protecting women and children.

When will we see a real plan from this Sask Party government to address intimate partner violence in Saskatchewan?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of the Status of Women.

Hon. Alana Ross: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is no place for any form of violence in Saskatchewan, and violence against women affects every one of us. Our government remains dedicated to supporting survivors and breaking the cycle of violence. We will continue to take action through funding, programming, and legislation under the three pillars of prevention, intervention, and accountability that address all forms of interpersonal violence. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Nicole Sarauer: — Mr. Speaker, after 18 years this Sask Party government isn’t listening to what survivors of intimate partner violence are calling for. We need programs that change offender behaviour, stronger laws and training, tailored services in rural areas, improved infrastructure like internet and emergency transport to keep communities safe. And, Mr. Speaker, we need preventative education back in our schools.

We have the highest rates of intimate partner violence in Canada, Mr. Speaker. When can survivors expect a real, concrete provincial strategy to address intimate partner violence from this Sask Party government?

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of the Status of Women.

Hon. Alana Ross: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I have said previously, our government takes interpersonal violence, violence of any type, very seriously. And that is why we will continue to invest under the three pillars of prevention, intervention, and accountability to combat this challenging issue. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

Bill No. 41 — The Heritage Recognition (From Many Peoples, Strength) Act/Loi sur la reconnaissance du patrimoine (Nos origines multiples, notre force)

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport.

Hon. Alana Ross: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that Bill No. 41, The Heritage Recognition (From Many Peoples, Strength) Act be now introduced and read a first time.

Speaker Goudy: — It’s been moved by the Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport that Bill No. 41, The Heritage Recognition (From Many Peoples, Strength) Act be now introduced and read a first time. Is it the pleasure of the Assembly to adopt the motion?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Speaker Goudy: — Carried.

Principal Clerk: — First reading of this bill.

Speaker Goudy: — When shall this bill be read a second time?

Hon. Alana Ross: — Next sitting of the Assembly.

Speaker Goudy: — Next sitting.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the Government Whip.

Sean Wilson: — I wish to order questions no. 17 to 20.

Speaker Goudy: — Questions no. 17 to 20 are ordered.

SEVENTY-FIVE MINUTE DEBATE

Speaker Goudy: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Significance of Bill No. 137

Nicole Sarauer: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Happy to rise today and enter into the debate, and at the conclusion of my remarks I will be moving the motion that we will have the opportunity to discuss. And I do think it’s a good opportunity for us to take a step back and think about what’s happened over the past year since this legislation was introduced — it’s been just over a year now, Mr. Speaker — the effect that it’s had on the community, the people of Saskatchewan, in particular vulnerable youth, and the implications of the decisions that were made at that time.

And the hope is, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that at the conclusion of this debate, that members opposite will see the arguments that are being made by not just members on this side but people across the province and across the country, that this was a bad decision that was made, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It was a hurtful decision and the wrong decision for government to make, and the hope is that government then makes the right decision and repeals this legislation, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

There are four particular topics that I want to cover. I’m going to try to hopefully pay attention to the time so that I can at least cover a little bit of each one of them. I know I have a few other colleagues who are going to be joining in on the debate that will also be adding quite a bit of information on their side as well.

The first topic I want to talk about is the effect that this bill had, Bill 137, on youth and in particular on vulnerable youth, Mr. Deputy Speaker, trans youth. It’s a very, very, very small percentage of the population but an incredibly important one, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and one that should be protected.

[11:15]

One thing that we heard concerns about at the time when the legislation was being debated was that the passage of the bill would increase bullying and decrease safety for these students in particular, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It would make them . . . And they did feel less safe when the legislation was being debated and then passed.

Since then it’s been a year now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and we have heard from families that those fears were made reality. Not just during the course of that debate, but since that legislation was passed, there has been an increase in bullying of vulnerable youth, of trans youth in Saskatchewan that can be directly linked to the debate and the passage of this legislation, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

As you well know, we are leaders here, and the things that we do in this Chamber and the things that we say in this Chamber matter. The passage of legislation is the government’s ultimate tool to explain to the public what are our priorities and what they see as priorities for the province, Mr. Deputy Speaker. By passing this legislation, it was a signal to not just vulnerable people but the population at large that the voices of these vulnerable youth didn’t matter, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and the families who were working to try to protect the rights of these vulnerable youth didn’t matter.

I just recently, a few weeks ago, heard a story from a dad who has a trans daughter who is 13 years old. And he spoke to me about his family’s personal experience since the passage of the legislation and the increase in bullying that his child has experienced over the course of the year, that there were several years where his child was going through the school system and it was never an issue in terms of how this child identified themself in the school population. But after the passage of this legislation and with the rise in public discourse as a result of the passage of this legislation, it increased substantially the amount of bullying that this child was facing. And this dad was of course devastated.

I think one of the most basic things we should be doing here, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is questioning ourselves and the decisions that we’re making and wondering whether or not what we’re going to do legislatively will cause harm to children. I think that’s one of the most basic things we should be doing. If the answer is yes, we should be taking a step back and thinking if that’s really the right decision that should be made.

The other topic I wanted to make sure that I touched on briefly was the effect of using the notwithstanding clause on vulnerable people, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We, at the time of the passage of the legislation, talked about how problematic it was to use the notwithstanding clause to encroach on the rights of vulnerable people. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms was created to ensure the protection of the minority against the majority.

And you can see instances for sure where perhaps the notwithstanding clause would be appropriate. There have been historical consequences where we have been supportive of its use, Mr. Deputy Speaker. But when it is used to infringe on the rights of vulnerable people — and in particular on the rights of vulnerable children — we feel that’s problematic and we cannot support that, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

And since that legislation was passed and since that clause was used, what have we seen since in the last year, Mr. Deputy Speaker? A floodgate essentially opening in terms of governments throughout the country feeling more comfortable using the notwithstanding clause for a variety of reasons, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Once you pull that escape hatch, it’s sure a lot easier to use against other rights, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We saw it just very recently in Alberta, where Premier Danielle Smith used the notwithstanding clause to infringe on workers’ rights and order them back to work, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

This is something we also heard about when we were talking about this legislation a year ago — concerns that were raised at that time that, with the passage of the legislation and the use of the notwithstanding clause, whose rights were going to be attacked next, Mr. Deputy Speaker? And that was largely dismissed as fearmongering by folks on the other side, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

But now we see it today, just recently in Alberta. And we’re seeing it used more and more frequently, to the point where one wonders if the Charter of Rights and Freedoms means anything to governments of a certain political bent, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And it’s alarming for folks. That’s for sure.

The other thing I wanted to talk about was the other thing that happened during the course of this legislation that was being discussed. And at that time — and we’ve discussed it a few times; I presented a petition on it today — not only were there restrictions placed on children being able to use preferred names and preferred pronouns, but the government made a decision to remove all third-party educators from schools, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Now I have been critic for Justice and Corrections and Policing for a long time now. It’s been a decade, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have spoken with a lot of CBOs [community-based organization] who do this work, really great people who have been doing it for decades: the sexual assault centres of Saskatchewan; PATHS [Provincial Association of Transition Houses and Services of Saskatchewan]; the Regina Sexual Assault Centre; the North Battleford sexual assault centre, who’s recently had to change their name in the hopes that perhaps the government will find them less threatening and let them go back into schools to educate children, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The YMCA is another great example.

All of these third-party educators, Mr. Deputy Speaker, have gone into our schools for decades to teach children topics like consent, like healthy relationships, like sexual abuse prevention. I think we should all be supportive of having the children of Saskatchewan learn what a healthy relationship is. And sadly enough, but the reality is not every child in Saskatchewan can look at their home as an example. Sometimes this needs to be learned somewhere else, and those children certainly are not going to be taken to a library to hear this from somebody, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

There is a real important piece in preventing gender-based violence that includes preventative education. You can look at any of the reports. You can look at the government’s own domestic violence death review reports. They talk about the importance of preventative education, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and this government made the choice to remove that from the education system. They said at the time that they were going to work on creating a comprehensive curriculum plan, something that everybody could get on board with, that could perhaps — I don’t know — allow third-party educators back in or maybe . . . I’m not sure what the plan is. I’m not going to assume.

The reality is nothing’s been done since, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Any of the people who have been doing this work for decades have not been consulted. And they have asked. They have asked time and time again, please let us be involved in this; we are experts in this; we really want to get a comprehensive curriculum in; we know how important it is that children are learning this topic. But we still see a government that continues to refuse to allow third-party educators in the school.

This is a public safety issue as well, Mr. Deputy Speaker. If there’s any concern from members opposite about crime rates or policing or any sort of issue about how we can be addressing public safety in Saskatchewan, you talk to police and you ask them what their most frequent calls are. You can bet it’s going to be domestics, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It’s gender-based violence, Mr. Deputy Speaker, continues to rise in terms of calls in Saskatchewan.

And again, how do you prevent that? Let’s try to prevent it rather than just building a ton of shelters. Education, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It all lands on education. So to have this government make that decision over a year ago and still no change, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is incredibly disappointing.

And I know there are members opposite who care about gender-based violence, Mr. Speaker. I know that. This is not a partisan issue and it hasn’t been. I’ve been very honoured to work with members opposite throughout the course of my career to have legislation and provisions passed to support survivors of gender-based violence. I urge them to push cabinet to reverse this decision because it’s problematic on so many different levels, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

But moving back to Bill 137 itself, one thing I really wanted to touch on that I hope members opposite can also stew on a bit, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is the fact that despite this legislation being passed over a year ago — and I know my colleagues are going to go into detail about the harmful effects of this legislation, and I’m thankful to them for that — I wanted to talk about the litigation a little bit.

Now I’ve never been on government’s side. They can correct me if I’m wrong. I believe we’re around budget deliberation time right now, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And I’m sure there are many members opposite who have a lot of things they want to put forward for their communities, projects they would love to see get completed.

Every year — I want them to know — every year hundreds of thousands of dollars are going to litigation for this piece of legislation, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This is litigation that likely won’t even finish before that legislation expires. I don’t know if members opposite realize this, but when you use the notwithstanding clause, it’s not a get-out-of-legislative-drafting-jail-free card. Every five years you have to renew it, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

So this is going to come up as an issue again. But in the meantime, hundreds of thousands of dollars every single year is going into litigating this bill. Government won’t even give us the details on how much it’s actually costing Saskatchewan taxpayers to litigate on this piece of legislation, Mr. Deputy Speaker, which is interesting. You’d think that they’d be so proud and confident of the fact that they passed this legislation that they would be able to stand proudly in justification of how much it’s costing to defend their decision to pass this bill and the litigation that it would cost.

They claim solicitor-client privilege, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but they’re the client. They can waive solicitor-client privilege, Mr. Speaker. The Saskatchewan taxpayers have a right to know. And so do members opposite, because if there’s something that they’re trying to push that they’re not able to get through, know that there’s a lot of money sitting right here that would be much better used in their communities, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

With that, I’m going to move my motion. I move, Mr. Deputy Speaker:

That the Assembly calls upon the government to repeal the amendments to The Education Act brought into force by Bill 137.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — It has been moved by the member for Regina Douglas Park:

That the Assembly calls upon the government to repeal the amendments to The Education Act brought into force by Bill 137.

Is the Assembly ready for the question? I recognize the member from Kelvington-Wadena.

Chris Beaudry: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Today I rise, not just as a member of this Assembly, but as a father, a coach, and someone who has spent most of my lifetime in Saskatchewan communities seeing first-hand what strengthens our children and what weakens them.

And the conviction that sits at the centre of my heart is simple: family is the foundation of society — not government, not political parties, not policies or programs, but family. If you look across cultures, across continents, across history itself, you’ll see the same truth reflected again and again. From Indigenous teachings here at home to farming families across the prairies to cultures throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe, children thrive when they’re anchored to their parents. Family is the first school, the first sanctuary, and the first place a child learns how to be in the world.

In Canada, where we welcome people from every corner of the globe, you see something remarkable. You can have different traditions, different languages, different faiths, but every culture places the family at the centre. That tells us something. It tells us this foundation is not political — it is human; it’s universal. Family is the top of the pyramid of support and family is the bottom of the pyramid of support. It is the vision and the safety net. Everything else sits in the middle — important but not primary.

[11:30]

Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is not just a cultural observation. It is grounded in science. It is grounded in the work of Dr. Gordon Neufeld and Dr. Gabor Maté, two of Canada’s most respected voices on childhood development and mental health. Their message is clear: children thrive through the adults they’re attached to.

A child’s brain literally develops best when it is close to the people who love them the most. The science of attachment shows us that when a child is held, seen, heard, and guided by their parents, their nervous system settles. Their stress response lowers. Their prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain responsible for reasoning, emotional regulation, and identity, grows stronger. Their resilience increases, their confidence increases, and their capacity for learning increases.

A securely attached child learns not because they are pushed, but because they feel safe. A securely attached child explores not because they are forced, but because they know they can return to the arms of someone who loves them.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, in traditional families around the world this was simply how life worked. Children were at a parent’s side during the most important years of their development. They learned by watching, by listening, by helping. They absorbed values, identity, responsibility, culture, and emotional maturity through their connection to family. You did not need a program to teach belonging because belonging was built into daily life.

Gordon Neufeld teaches that in traditional societies children grew up with an unbroken hierarchy of attachment. Parents, grandparents, extended family, and community elders formed a protective circle around them. This circle helped children know who they were and where they came from.

Gabor Maté’s work shows the same thing. He reminds us that children’s brains are shaped most profoundly by the emotional closeness and presence of their primary caregivers. When that bond is strong, children gain the internal stability they need to explore their identity. When that bond weakens, children look to peers, screens, and outside influence for identity, which creates confusion and insecurity.

As a father of three young girls I’ve watched this with my own eyes. As a coach I’ve seen the difference between children who feel anchored at home and those who feel adrift. I’ve spent time in schools, rinks, community centres, and homes. I see one truth again and again: when children are grounded in family, they flourish; when they are not, they drift.

This brings me to Bill 137. This bill simply reinforces that parents are partners, that parents are partners in their child’s education. It states openly what every culture has known and what modern development science confirms: children need their families involved in the most important conversations in their lives.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, in my constituency I have seen incredible things happening in our schools. We have a brand new school in Lanigan. We have a renovated school in Kelvington that’s bringing new life to the community. We have a brand new school playground in Rose Valley that families worked tirelessly to make possible.

These are not just buildings or playgrounds; these are anchors of community life. These are the places where our children grow, learn, and build friendships. And they are strongest when families are part of them. I have seen parents fundraising, volunteering, coaching, helping with homework, and standing up for their kids. Parental involvement is alive, strong, and essential in my constituency. And Bill 137 honours that.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to speak briefly to what is actually contained in the parental bill of rights, because there has been a great deal of fear, but not a great deal of clarity. The reality is simple. This bill puts into law what most parents already assume is happening.

It confirms that parents are the primary decision makers for their child’s education. It ensures that parents can be informed about attendance, behaviour, and academic performance. It allows parents to access their child’s school file, to understand the code of conduct, and to know when disciplinary action is taken. It gives parents the right to be consulted about learning challenges, attendance issues, or concerns about their child’s capacity to learn.

These are not extreme ideas. These are the basics of partnership. The bill ensures that parents are informed before any medical treatment is provided at school. Again not controversial, simply respectful. On sexual health education the bill requires two weeks’ notice, transparency about what will be taught, and the option for a parent to withdraw their child if they choose. That is parental involvement, not parental interference.

And yes, if a child is under 16 years of age, the bill requires parental consent before the school staff begin using a new gender-related name or identity. That is not exclusion. That is connection. That is ensuring that people who love the child the most are part of one of the most sensitive and emotionally complex areas of development.

These protections support families. They do not harm children. They simply affirm the natural role of parents, because when you follow the signs and when you follow the lived experience of parents, it becomes clear: children do best when parents are included, not excluded. They do best when their family is part of the journey. They do best when the adults who love them most are at their side during the most sensitive areas of growing up.

Dr. Neufeld warns of peer orientation, the idea that children look to peers rather than parents, for guidance and identity. When this happens, children become more anxious, more confused, and more vulnerable to outside pressures. Dr. Maté speaks about the deep emotional wounds that come from disconnection. Trauma, he says, is a disconnection from self that happens when children do not feel seen or supported by the adults closest to them.

Mr. Speaker, identity is one of the most complex and emotionally loaded areas of childhood development. We do not help children by cutting parents out. We help children by drawing parents in. We help them by strengthening the bond that holds them steady. We help them by ensuring home and school work together, not against each other.

We must also address the concern that some children do not feel safe at home. That is real and it deserves compassion. But we already have child protection laws in place for genuine cases of danger or abuse, and those laws remain untouched. They exist to protect children who truly need intervention. That is the proper and responsible way to handle those situations.

Repealing this bill would not create safety. It would create confusion. It would create distance. It would create exactly the conditions that Neufeld and Maté warn about. Children deserve better, families deserve better, and our communities deserve better. I will stand with parents. I will stand for the bond that shapes a child heart and future more than any government decision ever could.

So today I cannot support the motion to repeal Bill 137. I will stand with families. Thank you.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Eastview.

Matt Love: — Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m incredibly proud to stand in support of this motion, just like I was when I stood in this Assembly and spoke for seven hours straight over two days against this dangerous and harmful piece of legislation.

And you know, at that time, when I reflect back with our team on this side, it brought us together in a way, because we knew that we were standing up for children in this province whose rights matter and whose rights need to be protected. And that didn’t happen in this space. And it was a shameful day in the history of this province.

And I want to begin by reminding this Assembly — we have many members opposite who were not here — Saskatchewan was the first province in Canada to bring in human rights protections. We were the first. We were a leader in this country to protect human rights. And we were the first province in Canada to take human rights away from a protected group under the human rights code. That had never happened until it happened right here in this room just over two years ago.

And here we are two years later. My intentions this afternoon are to go over some of the evidence — is it still morning? — this morning. My intentions this morning, to go over some of what happened before, during, and after this legislation came forward. It’s been two years and I’ll tell you, there’s some evidence coming in, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on the impact of this dangerous legislation.

You know, when this bill was introduced we were told that no child would be impacted in a negative way. We were told that no child would be harmed. We in fact even voted on that clause at one point. I’ll get to that later. And that simply has not been the case in this province.

Families. We heard a member opposite talk about families. Families are being harmed by this legislation. Children are being harmed. And this government had every warning sign imaginable to know that that was going to happen. The evidence simply has not stood the test of time for why this government brought this legislation forward.

It certainly wasn’t an emergency, the first emergency debate this Chamber has seen in nearly a quarter century. While we have hallway medicine and schools falling apart. A waterfall pouring through the school in my community of Saskatoon. And what was an emergency? Not safe learning conditions or not adequate health care. What kids call each other on the playground. They called us back in here for the first emergency debate in 25 years.

And the evidence that they presented didn’t stand the test at that time, and it certainly doesn’t stand up today. At that time the Premier said, the Premier of this province, said that 100 per cent of his cabinet supported the bill. He said that — 100 per cent. Well that didn’t stand the test of time, did it? Once one of them was out of the grasp of the Saskatchewan Party government and running for mayor in Saskatoon, he was pretty clear: he didn’t vote for the bill because he didn’t support it. He said, “I think that indicates the fact that I wasn’t supportive of the legislation in the way it was and the way it was brought forward.”

Now I’m talking about not just anyone. A long-time member of this Assembly, a former MLA, a former minister of Education, a former deputy premier saying he did not support. So it makes me wonder how many members opposite today do not support this legislation. I’d sure like to know because they shouldn’t support it.

So that’s what the Premier said at the time. We know now that the facts are contrary to what he said. And we also can look back at what happened at that time that this debate was brought forward. We had, and some of the members here might remember, the milk crate that’s on the floor of the Assembly to my left. I brought in here 47 copies of a ruling from Justice Megaw in the Court of King’s Bench. And I attempted then — I won’t now — to distribute those 47 copies . . .

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I’m disturbed by the fact that yesterday we had a ruling from the Speaker in regards to props used in the House. Merely the mention of the crate that sits on the floor is really disturbing to me. And I’d ask the member that you take that crate and take it out of the House before you continue any further in your speech. The speech will not continue until that prop is removed.

Matt Love: — Mr. Deputy Speaker, the point is I brought 47 copies of a ruling by Justice Megaw, accompanied with 47 copies of a report by the Advocate for Children and Youth, an independent officer of this legislature, that presented damning evidence of what this bill would do. Not a single member opposite took me up on that offer. There was no curiosity about who would be harmed by this legislation. They didn’t do their homework at that time, and they haven’t done it yet.

This is a dangerous bill. It will harm children. It has harmed children. It has impacted families. I am happy to discuss either of those documents with any members opposite any day that they’d like to. What they did do, what this government did do, is they took a ruling from the Court of King’s Bench, a justice of this province, that said that this policy has the potential to cause irreparable harm to children, and they invoked the notwithstanding clause to get around that. They had a justice say that this bill could cause irreparable harm to children, and they pushed forward and they said, judicial overreach.

[11:45]

They talked down from one level of government to another about the overreach of the courts and what they had to say about the potential for this legislation to cause harm. And they’ve gone forward with extended legal cases that are costing our province thousands of dollars.

Now since that time we’ve also had the College of Law at the University of Saskatchewan produce a report called Saskatchewan Speaks Up for Trans Youth. In it, it says, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that:

Bill 137 is harmful and poorly designed educational policy. Writers emphasize that Bill 137 would harm all students by undermining inclusive education and removing critical resources. The policy was developed without consultation with experts or affected communities, and contradicts existing best practices in education and health.

This is what the public, this is what experts say about this legislation. And if members opposite would like to discuss that document, I am happy to have that conversation any day, because the evidence is in. Whether it’s from the courts, the Advocate for Children and Youth, the College of Law, experts in education, experts in mental health, the evidence is in: this is a damaging, damaging piece of legislation.

Now one of the things that this legislation does, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is it also removes third-party educators, folks who have for decades come into our schools to teach not just about sexual health education but about abuse prevention — abuse prevention — and the spread of sexually transmitted infections.

I will remind the Assembly that our province has the highest rates in the entire country of STIs [sexually transmitted infection] and the highest rates of interpersonal violence. You would think with numbers like that, any government would be interested in lowering them through education. They’ve gone the opposite direction and they’ve removed these third-party groups from our schools.

I’ll point to the words of a leader in this area from the city of North Battleford, who said:

I don’t understand what is so scary about teaching children that their body is their body, and to tell an adult if someone is hurting them. I don’t understand why people are so afraid of teaching children that.

That’s a very good question, Mr. Deputy Speaker. But that is the action of this government, to take that type of education to prevent abuse, abuse to children, and remove that from our schools. To that I say, shame.

Now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I heard a member opposite talk about families. On this side we support all types of families in our province. I grew up in a family with one mom. I’ve got friends and families raising kids with two moms. We support families with one dad, two dads, or zero dads. And yes, we support families with children who are trans and gender diverse. And we’ll do that every day in this Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, to the members opposite I say, why stand on the wrong side? On this side we will stand on the side of exclusion instead of exclusion. We will stand on the side of curiosity instead of closed-mindedness. We will stand on the side of safety instead of danger. And we will always stand on the side of love, because it always wins out over fear.

So to love, I say thank you to the Assembly. I’ll conclude my remarks and support the motion brought forward by my colleague from Douglas Park.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Weyburn-Bengough.

Michael Weger: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have a confession to make. A few days ago I didn’t know as much about Bill 137 as I should have. Today I stand here possibly knowing more than I will ever need to know.

I have reviewed the bill and the Hansard from October of 2023, and there was a good and lengthy debate on the bill. Last night I also read Repeal Bill 137: Saskatchewan Speaks Up For Trans Youth. This paper was a partnership between the Social Innovation Lab on Gender and Sexuality at the University of Saskatchewan and the MLA for Saskatoon Meewasin. I will always respect a person that works hard, and I ask for the same respect in return. I want the MLA for Saskatoon Meewasin to know that I respect him for the work that he has put into this issue and for his representation of the 2SLGBTQIA+ [two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning, intersex, asexual, plus] community.

“The government has taken away all of our children’s rights. The government doesn’t care about our youth.” This is the message being sent by the opposition to young people in Saskatchewan. And the real unfortunate part of this is that some of these young people are vulnerable and dealing with complex adolescent issues. The last thing they need at this difficult time in their life is something else to fear. They don’t need to be told that their government is out to get them.

These children need to know that their government actually wants to ensure their parents will be informed and involved in their education, in their life decisions. And when that happens, our children will do better. Mr. Deputy Speaker, our students are our future.

So let’s be clear on what Bill 137 actually is. Bill 137, commonly referred to as the Parents’ Bill of Rights. It is a piece of legislation that clearly lays out the rights that are offered to the parent or guardian of a pupil by amending The Education Act, 1995. Bill 137 set out to codify parents’ rights relating to their child’s education, and it did just that. The rights of parents or guardians of a pupil are now set out in section 197.2(a) to (o) of The Education Act, 1995.

Let me summarize these rights that the opposition would like to have cancelled. Parents have the final say on their child’s education. Schools give guidance, but parents make the key decisions. Parents will get regular updates on how often their child attends school, how they behave, and how they are performing academically. Parents can meet with teachers and school staff to talk about what classes their child is taking and how they’re doing in them. Parents can look at their child’s official school records, including grades, assessments, and behaviour notes. Parents can find out what courses are available and choose which classes their child will take, including online options.

Parents will be told what rules and policies the school follows, including how student behaviour is managed. If the school is disciplining a child or investigating something they did, parents will be notified according to the law. If a child is expelled, parents can ask the school board to review the expulsion after one year. If a child is having attendance issues, parents will be involved and informed in addressing them.

Parents will be included if the school is assessing the child’s learning ability, and can request a review of such assessments. Parents can ask for their child to be excused from daily opening exercises, like pledges, national anthem, or other routines. Parents will be consulted before any medical or dental exam or treatment is given at school. Parents will get at least two weeks’ notice about sexual health lessons and can choose to have their child opt out by giving written notice to the principal. If a student is under 16, the school must get the parent’s permission before using a new preferred name or gender identity for the child at school.

Now section 197.4(1) addresses the use of a new preferred name or pronoun in more depth, and it reads as follows:

If a pupil who is under 16 years of age requests that the pupil’s new gender-related preferred name or gender identity be used at school, the pupil’s teachers and other employees of the school shall not use the new gender-related preferred name or gender identity unless consent is first obtained from the pupil’s parent or guardian.

Now the issue often raised with subsection (1) is that there could be a situation where the child is concerned or staff at the school are concerned that the conversation with the parent may not go smoothly. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the school will not just blindly out a child in this situation to their parents. You need to read section 197.4(2), which states:

If it is reasonably expected that obtaining parental consent as mentioned in subsection (1) is likely to result in physical, mental or emotional harm to the pupil, the principal shall direct the pupil to the appropriate professionals, who are employed or retained by the school, to support and assist the pupil in developing a plan to address the pupil’s request with the pupil’s parent or guardian.

You see, Mr. Deputy Speaker, there is a safeguard in place for very rare situations where a parent may not be in the right place to accept and support their child’s gender decision. We need to trust the professionals in this situation to provide the necessary supports.

So why is section 197.4 so . . .

[Interjections]

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I’d ask that members opposite would stifle the comments at this point in time. Questions will come later. And let’s let the member from Weyburn-Bengough continue his speech.

I recognize the member from Weyburn-Bengough.

Michael Weger: — So why is section 197.4 so important? I have two children in university, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and two children still in grade school, with my son in grade 10 and my daughter in grade 7. Neither of my children in grade school are old enough to vote, to drive a car alone, to consume or purchase alcohol or cigarettes — thank goodness — or to legally change their name.

You know, a couple of weeks ago I had to sign the consent form for my daughter to come on a class trip to visit me in the most beautiful and most secure office building in the province. Why would either of my children that are under the age of 16 be allowed to choose a new gender-related preferred name or gender identity without my involvement?

Let’s consider my two younger children for this discussion, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I know how tricky that age was when I was a kid, and it has undoubtedly become more complicated for our youth these days. At their ages, their bodies are going through changes. They’re trying to fit in with different friend groups at school. They’re watching Snapchat or TikTok videos or TV shows where they are told that they should do this or do that, dress a particular way, act a certain way.

And I’m a busy dad. I’m not around as much as I probably should be. What if I don’t pick up on the signs that my child is questioning their gender identity? And what happens if there’s no Bill 137? I’ll tell you what happens, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My child misses out on the opportunity to have their dad involved in the decision. My child misses out on me telling them that I love them and I will support them no matter what.

Bill 137 allows me the right to be involved in my child’s education and life decisions. But more important than that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it gives my child the opportunity to have me involved in their education and life decisions. No child should miss out on that opportunity.

When my predecessor, the member from Weyburn-Big Muddy and also the minister of Crown Investments Corporation at the time, spoke to the third reading of Bill 137, he ended his comments by explaining that he could not support something for a fellow MLA’s family that he could not abide by for his own family. Well I think quite highly of that member, so it should come as no surprise when I echo his concern.

Repealing Bill 137 would take away the parental rights that I have summarized, which are codified in section 197.2 of The Education Act. These are the rights to be involved in your child’s education, the right to be involved in your child’s life, and if it came to it, the right to show your child how much you love them and will support them no matter what.

I cannot support the repeal of Bill 137. I cannot take away these parental rights. I cannot do that to you. I cannot do that to you. And I cannot do that to you, as I do not want it done to myself.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Regina Walsh Acres.

Jared Clarke: — Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I wish I could say it was a pleasure to join into this debate, but it is not. There is nothing honourable in this bill. There is nothing honourable in what this bill has done to the LGBTQ+ [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning, plus] community in this province, to trans kids in this province.

I used to be a teacher, grade 6‑7 teacher, in the formidable years of kids figuring out what their identity is. And I’ve heard a lot today about family and values. And absolutely 100 per cent, families should be involved with their kids and the decisions that are being made. No question.

[12:00]

As a teacher, children thrive in school when their parents and their family are supportive and are there reading with them at a young age, supporting them, talking about important issues — all of those pieces.

But that’s not what Bill 137 is about. You have all of the kids in school. You have of that some who are 2SLGBTQ+ [two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning, plus], and within that you have some who are trans. And within that you have families who are supportive and in that, in the trans community, you have families — a small, small, tiny number — who are not supportive. And that’s, that is who this bill hurts, and that is who, when we were debating this bill, who we talked about all the time, for the 40 hours. It was those kids who were at risk because of this bill.

They want to talk about the fact, oh, the principal will help the kids navigate the conversation so it goes smoothly, or the counsellors will be there to . . . Oh, my God. Go into a school. What is the ratio of counsellors to students in Saskatchewan classrooms right now? It is dismal. We’re talking one counsellor to thousands of students.

This was my lived reality as a teacher in this province, Mr. Speaker. So when your student was struggling . . . I had students — not around their gender identity, but in crisis — who needed to talk to a professional, and I asked, “Can my student see the counsellor today?” “No, they’re not here until next week.” That’s the reality in schools. So this notion that, oh, the professionals are there to help navigate this, is . . . I can’t, Mr. Speaker.

I recently attended a rally in Regina protesting Bill 137. There were some heartbreaking stories there, Mr. Speaker, about the impacts that this bill is having on children in this province. This isn’t fearmongering. This is coming from those kids. Eleven-year-old kids, 12‑year-old kids got up on stage and talked about how bullies have been emboldened by this bill, how they are experiencing more hate as a trans kid, as a nonbinary kid, as a gay kid now than before. That’s not hyperbole. This is coming out of the mouths of the kids who are most impacted by this bill. And for this government to just be like, oh, nothing’s going wrong, it’s fine, is just . . .

Again, and I give credit to the member from Kelvington-Wadena for recognizing that not all homes in this province are safe, but that’s the issue. Every member in this House and most of the people in Saskatchewan know now that I have two transgender kids. We had conversations and we talked about, you know, what that meant and helped them navigate through that. And I’ve talked about the love and the support that we provided to our kids through this challenging time. Lots of families do that. And in those cases, those trans kids, hopefully — not always — but hopefully will be okay.

But what about the houses that aren’t safe? If all houses are safe in this province, then why do we have child protective services? If all houses and homes in this province are safe, why do we have foster parents in this province? Why do we have the Kids Help Phone in this province? Why do we have Lulu’s Lodge in this city?

We talked about this at length. When we were having the emergency sitting, members from Lulu’s Lodge came and sat up here in this gallery. Lulu’s Lodge is a home, a homeless shelter for queer youth who have been kicked out of their house because of their gender identity or sexuality. Kicked out of their house.

I remember hearing a story from a queer youth who told me that when their dad found out about their gender identity, they had 15 minutes to get out of the house before they thought they were going to be hurt physically. That young person never went home again. I wonder if the principal of the school could have helped smooth that conversation over. What about those youth? That’s who Bill 137 targets. Those are the kids that we’re concerned about who are . . .

I’ve got two minutes. So many things to say, Mr. Speaker. When I spoke on this bill in the emergency sitting, I spoke for three and a half hours. But I’m going to just wrap ’er up here.

Suicide rates are the leading cause of death among young people aged 15 to 24. Transgender and gender-diverse youth are over seven times more likely to attempt suicide. That’s not because of the fact that they are trans. It is because of the stigma. It is because of the bullying, the bullying that has increased dramatically because of Bill 137.

Go talk to kids. During the emergency sitting I remember a mom sitting in the gallery who had lost their nonbinary, 14‑year-old child, Bee. That child had a supportive parent, and yet they still died by suicide. Today is the Trans Day of Remembrance. This isn’t just going to be okay. This bill has real implications for use in this province, and members on that side of the House know that. This bill is hurting kids in this province. It needs to be repealed. They have the power to do that.

If this is about protecting, increasing parental involvement in a child’s life at school, we put forward an amendment to the bill to strike a parental advisory committee that would work with the minister. They voted that amendment down. When we brought forward an amendment to protect kids in these vulnerable situations where we knew that they were at risk, members on that side voted it down.

Now when I talk about all of this around trans kids, as I’ve alluded to before, we often use the phrase, you know, what if this was your child?

All I’ve got is five seconds. This needs to be repealed, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Batoche.

Darlene Rowden: — Thank you to the member opposite for the suggestions. Mr. Speaker, Bill 137 supports something that everyone in education already acknowledges: that parental involvement is essential. School boards say it. Teachers say it. Counsellors say it. And parents certainly say it. We all know that when families are engaged, students do better academically, emotionally, and socially.

Parents are the primary decision makers for minors, Mr. Deputy Speaker. That’s not a controversial statement. It’s the foundation of how we raise kids in this country. Parents carry the legal responsibility and the developmental responsibility for the big decisions in their children’s lives. And strong family involvement, as research consistently shows, is linked with better mental health and outcomes in school. Bill 137 recognizes that reality and puts it into practice in our education system.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, our government believes that parents should be aware of significant changes in their child’s life, and that schools should not be in the position of making unilateral decisions that contradict family expectations or values. Sensitive issues — and there are many in education — should be handled collaboratively. And to be fair, many in education agree with this. Some of the best examples of collaboration with families are driven by teachers, administrators, and support staff who work hard to build those relationships.

Trust in our school system depends on open communication between educators and families, Mr. Speaker. Even when intentions are good, any policy that keeps parents in the dark risks eroding that trust. Bill 137 creates transparent processes so families are treated equally, expectations are clear, and confusion is minimized.

And, Mr. Speaker, there was confusion before Bill 137. Parents didn’t always know what information they were entitled to, and staff didn’t always know how to respond. These amendments brought clarity.

When students are working through questions about identity, which can be emotionally complicated, mental health professionals emphasize the need for a stable support system. And for minors, that support system includes parents. It has to. Our government agrees that parents should be included in these conversations and supported as part of the team around the child.

At the same time, Bill 137 recognizes that not every situation is simple. That is why the bill includes safeguards for the rare cases where a student may face harm at home. In those situations, Mr. Speaker, this legislation ensures that school professionals step in, that proper reporting takes place, and the student does not navigate those circumstances alone. The bill creates a safety net, not a blanket rule. It requires schools to involve counsellors, psychologists, or other in-school professionals to develop individualized support plans and ensure student welfare remains the top priority and that no single staff member is left to make high-stakes decisions alone.

Saskatchewan has now aligned with other jurisdictions that use opt-in systems for sensitive areas of curriculum, such as sexual health and healthy relationships education. We know every family is different. Values differ. Comfort levels differ. Expectations differ. To respect that diversity, these amendments require schools to inform parents of content being delivered, obtain consent before participation, and allow families to opt out without stigma or penalty. This enhances accountability, reduces misunderstandings, and respects the simple fact that parents are partners in education.

To support educators, Bill 137 also establishes consistency in who is permitted to present to students. This prevents unvetted or ideological material from being delivered to minors, and staff have a clear framework so they can focus on teaching.

[12:15]

Now, Mr. Speaker, we’ve heard the criticisms. Some argue that Bill 137 undermines student autonomy or disproportionately affects gender-diverse youth, but the facts simply do not support that narrative. First, social transitioning is not prohibited under Bill 137. What the bill requires is parental involvement for minors, the same principle that applies to many other important decisions in a child’s life. Second, the bill contains explicit safeguards for students who may be unsafe at home. It ensures they receive professional support quickly and ensure the proper authorities are involved where necessary.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — Just one moment. Member from Batoche, when you started your speech there was only nine minutes on the clock. I just want you to know that there will be an additional minute as the debate runs down.

Darlene Rowden: — Third, evidence shows that youth fare best when they have stable, supportive adults in their lives, not secrecy, not isolation, not fragmented communication. Bill 137 strengthens those supports by ensuring families and professionals are working together.

Fourth, this bill adds transparency. It does not tell families what to believe or how to raise their children. It does not dictate values. It does not prevent exploration or identity development. What it prevents is confusion, inconsistency, and decisions being made without the people responsible for a minor’s well-being.

Mr. Speaker, there is another part of these amendments that speaks to civic literacy and shared identity, requiring schools to display the provincial flag alongside the Canadian flag as equipment becomes available. It is about grounding students in who we are as a province and as a country. Many other jurisdictions already do this, and it’s an important reminder that public education is not only about academics; it’s also about preparing young citizens with a sense of community and belonging. That is not something that should be repealed, Mr. Speaker. It is something we should all support.

Education is often where new challenges first show up, Mr. Speaker. Schools are on the front lines of social change, mental health needs, shifting family dynamics, and evolving community expectations. Bill 137 gives them clarity. It strengthens communication, it ensures consistent governance across the province, and it supports the people at the heart of the system — students, families, and educators.

At its core, Mr. Speaker, Bill 137 centres collaboration and developmental appropriateness. And I want to repeat that because it’s important — developmental appropriateness. We owe it to our students to make decisions that match their stage of growth and to involve the parents who love them and care for them. Bill 137 builds a healthier, more transparent, more effective educational environment for every student in Saskatchewan.

For those reasons, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will not support repealing amendments to The Education Act brought on by Bill 137. Thank you.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — The 65‑minute period has expired. The 10‑minute question-and-answer period will begin. I recognize the member from Humboldt-Watrous.

Racquel Hilbert: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On this side of the House we believe in parental involvement in the education of their children and the importance of parent choice in how their children are educated. Policies that exclude parents from important information about their kids erodes trust between schools and families.

Does the member from Saskatoon Eastview believe it’s appropriate for teachers to withhold important information from parents regarding their children in classrooms?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Eastview.

Matt Love: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I’m incredibly happy to stand up and answer this question from the member opposite. And because she wasn’t here the time that this bill was debated, I encourage her to go back and read the record.

But during the time of Bill 137 — actually between when this policy was introduced and when we sat in the emergency session — I learned extensively about what real parental engagement should look like in schools. I contacted school boards, experts, academics, and most importantly parents. And I learned about what a real parental engagement strategy should look like.

I then proposed that to this Assembly and every member opposite voted it down. So we talk about engaging with parents in a real, authentic way. Yes, we had a plan to bring forward. They voted it down. They should be ashamed of that voting record in this Assembly, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Nicole Sarauer: — Mr. Speaker, at the time of the King’s Bench court decision that Justice Megaw ordered, the Premier responded on Twitter calling it “judicial overreach.” Will the member for Weyburn-Bengough explain to the House how a judge granting an injunction is “judicial overreach”?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Weyburn-Bengough.

Michael Weger: — Thank you for the question, Mr. Speaker. And lots of opponents of the use of the notwithstanding clause like to talk about it being undemocratic. I’ll tell you what’s undemocratic, Mr. Speaker. It’s having unelected judges invalidate laws enacted by democratically elected legislatures.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Dakota-Arm River.

Barret Kropf: — Mr. Deputy Speaker, our government believes parents deserve partnership in their children’s learning, not exclusion. Children with parents who are involved in their education have significantly better outcomes. To the member from Saskatoon Eastview: do you believe teachers should be able to keep information about a child from that child’s parents?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Eastview.

Matt Love: — These are easy questions, Mr. Speaker. You know what? We debated in here for hours about what real parental engagement should look like and what our kids deserve.

I’m going to point to one piece of evidence. The Saskatchewan School Boards Association, a couple years prior to this legislation, came forward. They did consult parents and they asked parents what they were concerned about in schools. They received 35,000 pieces of feedback from parents. Zero of those were about pronouns. They were about things like mental health supports, which are non-existent in our schools. They were about things like crowded classrooms, supports that aren’t there for our kids that need them.

If we want to engage parents, we need to do that in an authentic way so the real voices of parents can be heard, trusted, and valued. That’s exactly what we will always do on this side to make sure parental voices are heard in this province.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Regina Walsh Acres.

Jared Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I alluded to in my speech earlier, trans youth are experiencing an increased amount of bullying after Bill 137 was passed. To the member from Weyburn-Bengough: what do you say to trans kids who are seeing an increase and experiencing an increase in bullying because of Bill 137?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Weyburn-Bengough.

Michael Weger: — Thank you again for the question. And, Mr. Deputy Speaker, our government will always protect parents’ rights to be involved in their children’s education. And we hope that that situation is available to those children. They can have the meeting and discussion with their parents. If that’s not an option, we have supports in the schools to support the children faced with that situation.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Kindersley-Biggar.

Kim Gartner: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Parents’ voices matter. Their involvement and their choices shape the future of their children’s education. Strong family involvement is associated with good mental health, reduced risky behaviour, and improved learning outcomes.

To the member from Saskatoon Eastview: do you believe parental involvement is undermined when teachers are able to conceal information about their child from parents?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Eastview.

Matt Love: — Another easy one, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You know, when we were in this Chamber for 40 hours of debate, the government members couldn’t bring forward a single case where what they accused to be happening was actually happening. Not a single case where parents were left in the dark. Because we trust and we know that Saskatchewan teachers are professionally good at involving parents to ensure that the safety of children is being protected. We know that schools are looking out for the role of parents and the safety of children. This is what Saskatchewan teachers are professionally good at.

Now we did bring forward an amendment to ensure that parents would have a voice in this province, just like they do in other provinces that have an office for parental engagement. Members opposite don’t want that. They voted against it.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Stonebridge.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I taught a half-dozen nonbinary and transgender students in my career. In each case, the student was fortunate to feel comfortable talking about this with teachers, administration, and family openly in collaboration.

To the member from Kelvington-Wadena: why is this government comfortable with infringing on the rights of children? And how will this government handle the physical and emotional harm brought onto kids by this discriminatory bill, if school staff are not permitted to do their job as they always have?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Kelvington-Wadena.

Chris Beaudry: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And thank you for the question. Mr. Deputy Speaker, the bill does not harm students; it strengthens the support around them. When parents, teachers, and schools work together, children do better. The research is clear. Connected families create healthier kids. Thank you.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Canora-Pelly.

Sean Wilson: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This government believes parents should be involved in their child’s education. The NDP want to keep parents on the sidelines. This law is necessary to ensure parents can be full partners in education. Does the member from Regina Douglas Park agree that having teachers be able to withhold information from parents undermines trust between families and schools?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Nicole Sarauer: — Mr. Speaker, you want to talk about fearmongering. We have the member from Canora-Pelly spreading fearmongering about teachers and what they might or might not be doing in schools, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Now we’ve been very clear. It’s another 75‑minute debate where we hear the same questions asked again and again about what we put forward that would have been real parental involvement in the schools, that every single member on the other side voted down.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Regina Walsh Acres.

Jared Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to go back to the member from Weyburn-Bengough. He didn’t answer my question in the last answer. What do you say to students, to trans and nonbinary students, who are experiencing increased bullying because of Bill 137?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Weyburn-Bengough.

Michael Weger: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you for the question. And again I would just hope that the students would be able to speak to their parents about the situation and then use the resources that are available — their teachers in the school, resource workers in the school — to address these types of situations with them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Cypress Hills.

Doug Steele: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Our government trusts that parents know what’s best for their children, and we stand with them in having a role in their child’s education. We want to enhance the transparency at the schools without telling families that . . . to believe that discouraging students from being themselves.

Does the member from Regina Douglas Park believe teachers should be able to hide information about their children’s identity or well-being from their parents?

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Regina Douglas Park.

Nicole Sarauer: — I am glad we had enough time for another member opposite to put some more fearmongering about teachers on the record, by asking the exact same question that the other member already asked, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

We’ve been very clear, and the member from Saskatoon Eastview’s been very clear about what we put forward — measures, real measures, to allow parental involvement in schools that those members voted down.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — The 75‑minute debate period has expired.

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BILLS AND ORDERS

ADJOURNED DEBATES

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ MOTIONS

Motion No. 1 — Support for Development of Pipeline to West Coast

[The Assembly resumed the adjourned debate on the proposed motion by Barret Kropf.]

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — I recognize the member from Prince Albert Carlton.

Kevin Kasun: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to start off by quoting my colleague from Dakota-Arm River:

Every family deserves certainty of a paycheque. However in 2024 the oil and gas industry lost $1.6 billion in revenue because of a lack of a pipeline to the West Coast, a direct threat to the 26,250 families in that industry in Saskatchewan.

[12:30]

What a privilege to speak to this motion, a motion that gives the time to speak on the importance of supporting the development of a new Canadian pipeline to carry the great province of Saskatchewan’s oil to the West Coast of Canada.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to talk about a pipeline that brings to the forefront the potential to become the energy superpower in Canada’s oil and gas sector. Today, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will continue to outline the benefits of a West Coast pipeline that will connect our resources to the world that needs them.

These benefits bring forth an environment of job creation, economic diversification, Indigenous involvement, and the safety that is involved in a pipeline. These aren’t just abstract ideas or philosophies but tangible benefits that will strengthen our province to provide us with the strength, safety, and security that is ours.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, this government will always advocate for creating affordable, reliable energy security for the great people of Saskatchewan.

Our government believes that pipelines continue to be the safest and most efficient way to transport oil. Not idle words. Let’s take notes from the Fraser Research Bulletin, and I quote:

When safety of transporting oil and gas by pipelines and rail is compared, taking into consideration the amount of product moved, pipelines are found to be the much safer transport method. Specifically rail is found to be over 4.5 times more likely to experience an occurrence when compared to pipelines.

Over 70 per cent of pipeline occurrences result in spills of 1 cubic metre or less and only 17 per cent of pipeline occurrences take place in the actual line of pipe, meaning that the mass majority of spills occur in facilities which have secondary containment mechanisms and procedures in place.

But here are some fun facts: in 2024 combined value of oil and gas production was 13.5 billion. In 2024 the upstream oil and gas industry accounted for over 26,250 direct and indirect full-time equivalent jobs. Saskatchewan is the second-largest oil producer and the third-largest gas producer in Canada.

So far in 2025, oil production in Saskatchewan has been approximately 444,000 barrels per day. Our government is still on track to reach our 2030 growth plan of reaching 600,000 barrels per day of production. There are over 160 companies operating oil and gas wells in Saskatchewan. The current 2025‑2026 estimate for oil- and gas-related revenue is 1.21 billion, up approximately 14 per cent from 2023 and 2024.

If other oil-producing countries in the world adopted environmental regulations similar to Saskatchewan, it is estimated that the greenhouse gas emissions from oil and gas would be cut by 25 per cent.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, our government will continue to stand up and defend the more than 26,000 families and workers who depend on jobs created by the upstream oil and gas industry. Our government will always advocate for creating affordable, reliable energy security, not only for Saskatchewan but for all the people of Canada. The ongoing tariffs by the United States have made other provinces realize what we have known all along: that we desperately need an East-to-West Coast pipeline.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is disappointing to see governments outside of Saskatchewan making decisions and policies which limit the ability to move oil through pipelines. But unfortunately, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it isn’t just outside governments trying to put limits on east-west pipeline. Even our own provincial opposition party has proven in the past against this growth.

On March 12th, 2014 the NDP stood in this House and voted against supporting, and I quote, “construction for the Northern Gateway pipeline as approved by the National Energy Board.” On May 3rd, 2012 the NDP, including the member for Regina Rosemont, stood in this House and voted against calling on all parties in the federal Parliament of Canada to unite in support of the Keystone XL pipeline.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I know the opposition doesn’t like it when we bring up things in the past that they’ve said in this House, but people have to know what they said. The people of Saskatchewan must know the truth about this tired, old, and out-of-touch, almost two decades in opposition party have stood on on these issues and others, or how they have now accepted our position on many of these issues — and we thank them for that. Whereas this government, for 18 years, will stand firm on the policies that we have developed to keep our economy growing. Because you know why, Mr. Deputy Speaker? Policies matter.

But one more. The member from Walsh Acres posted on X on July 16th, 2015, “You can’t address climate change by extracting more oil. The status quo won’t save us.” Mr. Deputy Speaker, our government will continue to promote and advocate for pipeline access, unlike the opposition who continually stand against certain — certain — new pipelines.

Without pipelines, demand for crude-by-rail transportation increases. When this happens, our rail-dependent industries pay the price — industries such as mining, manufacturing, forestry, and agriculture. In 2024 the lack of Western Canadian pipeline access to tidewater cost Saskatchewan oil producers 1.6 billion in lost revenue. This also cost the Government of Saskatchewan approximately 130 million in lost taxes, royalties, and other revenue. Mr. Deputy Speaker, these royalties help to build hospitals, schools, and the roads that serve the people of this great province.

Building an East-to-West-Coast economic corridor would be a nation-building project that would support a more competitive and resilient Canadian economy and would bring us closer to our goal of becoming an energy superpower. This would ensure that Canadians would have a reliable and uninterrupted supply of oil and gas for their homes and would protect workers in the face of tariffs from the United States.

Our government is supportive of an economic corridor that runs from Alberta to southern Ontario, an economic corridor that would never have been completed under the NDP. Our government has signed an MOU [memorandum of understanding] agreement with the governments of Alberta and Ontario to start a feasibility study for the advancement of an east-west Canadian energy corridor.

Once again, another Facebook quote from the member of Regina Elphinstone, and I quote: “If our society relies on the destructive finite resources boom-bust economy to fix income equality, well this is a problem, but it’s not a reason to keep pumping oil.”

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will admit I’m a bit confused on a statement such as that. Let me repeat just a part of that: a finite resource boom. That sounds to me like finite funding for education. A finite funding for hospitals and roads. I think that it means if they can’t nationalize it, leave it in the ground.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, our government believes in giving Saskatchewan people the environment to promote growth, to promote strength, and to promote security. How do we do this? Mr. Deputy Speaker, we do this by reducing red tape. We do this by advocating to our federal government to allow these projects to go forward. We do this by continuing to bring policies forward that help, not hinder, economic growth.

That is why today, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I second the motion brought forward by the member of Dakota-Arm River:

That this Assembly call upon the Government of Saskatchewan to support the development of a new Canadian pipeline to carry Saskatchewan and Alberta oil to the West Coast of Canada.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, Saskatchewan families need this pipeline. I move to adjourn debate.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — It has been moved that bill no. 1 be now read a second time. Is the Assembly ready for the question . . . Motion, I apologize. I’ll start again. It has been moved that the motion no. 1 is adjourned. Is the Assembly ready for the question?

Pardon me. The member has moved to adjourn debate. Is it the pleasure of the Assembly to adopt the motion?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — Carried. I recognize the Government House Leader.

Hon. Tim McLeod: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — It has been moved that the Assembly do now adjourn. The Assembly stands adjourned until Monday. Do you agree? Agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Deputy Speaker B. McLeod: — Agreed. Carried. The Assembly now stands adjourned until Monday at 1:30. Thank you. I’ll get better.

[The Assembly adjourned at 12:40.]

Published under the authority of the Hon. Todd Goudy, Speaker

Disclaimer: The electronic versions of the Legislative Assembly’s documents are provided on this site for informational purposes only. The Clerk is responsible for the records of each legislature.