CONTENTS
Standing
Committee on Human Services
THIRTIETH
LEGISLATURE
of
the
Legislative Assembly of
Saskatchewan
STANDING
COMMITTEE ON
Hansard
Verbatim Report
No.
6 — Wednesday, April 9, 2025
Chair Weger:
— Welcome to the Standing Committee on Human Services. My name is Mike Weger.
I’ll be the Chair. To my left I have Mr. Tajinder Grewal chitting in for April
ChiefCalf, and Mr. Brent Blakley. On my right I have Mr. Barret Kropf, Mr. Kim
Gartner, and Mr. Kevin Kasun chitting in for Minister Colleen Young.
Today the committee will be
considering the estimates and supplementary estimates no. 2 for the
Ministry of Advanced Education and the Ministry of Education. We will take a
half-hour recess at 7 p.m. Advanced Education has two votes: vote 37, budgetary
appropriation; and vote 169, lending and investing activities.
General Revenue Fund
Advanced Education
Vote 37
Subvote (AE01)
Chair Weger:
— We will begin our consideration with vote 37, Advanced Education, central
management and services, subvote (AE01). Minister Cheveldayoff is here with
officials from the ministry. I would ask that officials please state their name
before speaking and please don’t touch the microphones. The Hansard operator
will turn your microphone on when you are speaking to the committee. Minister,
please introduce your officials and make your opening remarks.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon to everyone here. It is
indeed a pleasure to be here to speak about the Ministry of Advanced
Education’s 2025‑26 budget. I’m joined by Deputy Minister Louise Michaud;
Assistant Deputy Minister Mark Wyatt, directly behind me; and Assistant Deputy
Minister Lindell Veitch; and chief of staff Josh Hack. We also have support of
ministry senior officials, who will introduce themselves if they come forward
to answer a question.
Post-secondary education is
vital to the growth of our province. Ministry of Advanced Education is
responsible for a post-secondary education sector that supports a growing
Saskatchewan and leads to a higher quality of life. The people of Saskatchewan
rely on our post-secondary institutions to provide the training and knowledge
they need to succeed in their careers. We are dedicated to ensuring that
Saskatchewan provides high-quality education in institutions that are
student-centred, accessible, responsive, sustainable, and accountable.
In the 2025‑26 budget,
the Ministry of Advanced Education’s budget delivers more opportunities for
students and focuses on high-quality training programs that meet the needs of
Saskatchewan’s labour force and growing economy. In ’25‑26 we are
investing $788 million in the post-secondary sector. This investment will
support our institutions and students. We are extending our multi-year funding
agreement with this sector, increasing operating funding for institutions,
creating and expanding targeted training programs, and continuing financial
support for students. Our investment recognizes that post-secondary education
supports all sectors of our economy. It will help us reach goals in
Saskatchewan’s Growth Plan, the labour market strategy, and the health human
resources action plan.
I’d like to highlight our key
investments in the budget, starting with the multi-year funding. The multi-year
funding approach has, by all accounts, been very successful. It aligns with
government’s priorities: education and training that is responsive to the
labour market, affordability for students, institutional accountability, and
innovation that supports financial sustainability. It provides funding
certainty to our institutions, which enables effective longer term strategic
planning.
Our province is facing
significant national and international economic uncertainty. As a result we are
extending our multi-year funding agreement with post-secondary institutions for
an additional year. This approach allows the province and institutions time to
work through potential impacts of external factors that are beyond our control.
I am pleased to say that
through this extension we were able to increase institutions’ operating
funding. The institutions will receive a permanent increase of $12 million
to base operating funding, which reflects the one-time 2.2 per cent increase
provided last year. We are also providing a one-time $6 million increase
in operating funding. These numbers reflect a total of 3 per cent increase to
operating funding in 2025‑26. Extending the multi-year funding agreement
also maintains the 4 per cent cap on tuition increases.
This balances the need for
institutions to raise revenue with predictability and affordability for
students. This extension of the agreement supports financial sustainability and
accountability.
In operating and capital,
I’ll now dive further into the details. In 2025‑26 Saskatchewan’s
post-secondary institutions will receive more than 718 million in
operating and capital funding. This investment supports over 55,000 students in
achieving their educational goals and preparing to join our growing, dynamic
workforce.
Funding of $40.9 million
will support key capital investments like the new Saskatchewan Polytech Joseph
A. Remai Saskatoon campus, Carlton Trail College’s trades building in Humboldt,
and planning for a new North West College campus in North Battleford.
In addition, $24.6 million
will be provided to institutions through preventative maintenance and renewal
to ensure safe, functional, and efficient campuses for students, faculty, and
staff across the province.
In the area of health human
resources training expansions, training plays a pivotal role in shaping a
dynamic health care workforce and is integral to realizing the goals of the
health human resources action plan. Our ministry’s strong commitment to health
care training is evident in the 2025‑26 budget. We continue to make key
investments in both new and existing health training programs. Health care
training remains a key priority, allowing students to prepare for and pursue
rewarding health care careers right here in Saskatchewan.
This budget delivers nearly
$62 million to support health care training initiatives, including the
continued expansion of over 900 seats in 33 health care training programs in
areas of critical need to the province. Approximately $35.3 million, a 15
per cent increase over last year, will continue previous expansions and add 60
new seats in areas of critical needs throughout the province. Ten of those
seats are in medical radiologic technology programs, 24 are in registered
nursing, 10 are for nurse practitioners, and 16 are registered psychiatric
nursing programs.
Notably the Registered
Psychiatric Nurses Association has been advocating for over 120 RPN [registered
psychiatric nurse] training seats in the province. Our government accomplished
that goal with 16 additional seats. And in 2025‑26 budget also includes
$600,000 to enhance virtual reality capacity in registered nursing programs,
improving overall student experiences and access to clinical learning. Those
are just a few highlights. I’m sure we’ll get into more as the evening progresses.
Health human resources and
the new domestic programs. Overall HHR [health human resources] investment
includes $17.2 million to continue developing four new domestic programs
at the University of Saskatchewan and Saskatchewan Polytech. Students will
start being accepted into the physician assistant program in fall of 2025. The
other three programs — speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, and
respiratory therapy — will begin accepting students in the fall of 2026. These
are significant positive steps that will help address the high demand for these
professionals while keeping our students and graduates right here in
Saskatchewan.
Physicians are an essential
part of our health care system and their services are in high demand. In ’25‑26
the Ministry of Advanced Education is delivering $51.9 million to the
University of Saskatchewan’s College of Medicine.
43.2 million will
continue to support 108 undergraduate medical seats, 150 postgraduate resident
seats, and a 15‑seat expansion in the physical therapy program. $8.7 million
supports continued development of physician assistant, occupational therapy,
and speech-language pathology programs, three of the new domestic training
programs that I referred to earlier.
Between the ministries of
Advanced Education and the Ministry of Health, the College of Medicine will
receive approximately $200 million in funding this year. These investments
are indeed critical to meet the needs of Saskatchewan people, and we couldn’t
do it without the active support of our post-secondary institutions.
Of course training is only
one pillar of the plan. We continue to collaborate with the ministries of
Health and Immigration and Career Training on further strategies to recruit,
train, incentivize, and retain health care providers for Saskatchewan.
In the area of Indigenous
supports in ’25‑26, the Ministry of Advanced Education is providing $19.9 million
to Indigenous institutions and programs that support Indigenous student
learning. $16.2 million in operating funding will be delivered to our
Indigenous institutions — the Saskatchewan Indian Institute of Technologies,
Gabriel Dumont Institute, First Nations University of Canada for example.
Indigenous teacher education
programs will receive $204,000 to support revitalization of Indigenous
languages. And we continue to provide annual funding of $50,000 to the First
Nations University of Canada for Indigenous language scholarships.
Speaking of scholarships, our
government continues to invest in student financial supports, empowering
students to complete post-secondary education and gain the knowledge and skills
they need to become our future leaders. In ’25‑26 the budget delivers
more than $46 million in direct financial support to post-secondary
students. 34.4 million will provide loans and grants to more than 22,000
students. Another 12.2 million will fund scholarships and bursaries such
as the Saskatchewan Innovation and Opportunity Scholarship, the Saskatchewan
Advantage Scholarship, and the Scholarship of Honour.
Students will also benefit
from supports after graduation like loan forgiveness and repayment assistance,
incentive programs, and return-in-service payments for certain professions.
International education.
International education and students play an important role in enriching
Saskatchewan’s communities, maintaining a skilled and talented workforce that
supports our labour force needs, and supporting the goals of the Saskatchewan Growth
Plan. This is the second year of the federal government’s cap on study permits.
This change has impacted student enrolment, economic growth, and institutional
revenue.
Through Saskatchewan’s
international education strategy, we are building strong connections with
post-secondary institutions, partners, and stakeholders around the world. This
creates opportunities for research collaboration, innovation, and the exchange
of knowledge and skills. We will continue focusing on program integrity,
student supports, and overall student experience to ensure Saskatchewan remains
a destination of choice for international students.
There are a few more areas
I’d like to quickly highlight. The Western College of Veterinary Medicine at
the University of Saskatchewan will receive $13.9 million in operating
funding, which is a 6 per cent increase. The funding supports continued
implementation of five new seats for Saskatchewan students. The college is also
receiving an additional $250,000 in capital funding for the planning and design
of an expansion that would allow for increased enrolment in the future.
2025‑26 budget delivers
$1.6 million for Mitacs, an increase of $430,000. This will add more
research and innovation internships for Saskatchewan students, driving the
province’s economic growth.
The Global Institute for
Energy, Minerals and Society, or GIEMS, will receive $530,000 to support
research and innovation in the energy and mineral sector through coordinated
work between the University of Saskatchewan, the University of Regina, and Saskatchewan
Polytechnic.
In closing, I want to again
acknowledge and thank all of our partners across the post-secondary sector.
Their commitment to Saskatchewan’s Growth Plan and the labour market strategy
is clear, as well as their dedication to ensuring our students receive a
high-quality education. The Ministry of Advanced Education shares that
commitment and dedication. New and expanding training opportunities will
encourage students to build their lives and careers right here in Saskatchewan,
helping to meet the needs of our labour force and our growing economy.
We also continue to closely
work with our sector as we navigate through international changes that impact
our province. Our commitment is clear. Over the last two years we have invested
$1.6 billion in post-secondary institutions and student supports.
[17:15]
We continue to remain
committed to investing in students, education, supporting the financial
stability of institutions, aligning with labour force priorities, and shaping
the future of our province through higher education.
Committee members, Mr. Chair,
thank you for your time. I appreciate the opportunity to put some highlights
forward, and I certainly look forward to answering any questions that you may
have. Thank you.
Chair Weger:
— Thank you, Minister. I’ll now open up the floor for questions. Mr. Grewal.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and also thank you, Minister, for your opening remarks. I
would also like to thank all the officials for your hard work. I know it is
uncertain times. Putting together a budget during this time is extremely
difficult. Thank you very much for your time and efforts.
So looking forward to the
discussion this afternoon. And my first question is going to be, Minister, that
there is a significant increase in your ministry’s central services budget, and
it’s increasing by 7.3 per cent this year. Can you please explain why there is
such a large increase, and what are the major reasons for that increase?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yes, well thank you very much for the question. And I’ll just begin by saying,
I have been in your shoes. When I started my career back in 2003‑2004, my
first role was the Advanced Education critic at the time. And my first day in
the legislature, I led off question period because there was a strike going on
at what was SIAST [Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science and Technology]
back then. It was an interesting time. And I’m sure you’re finding it’s an
interesting portfolio that has so much to offer and so much to capture your
interest.
And your question: yeah, you
are correct. The change is 7.3 per cent, and that’s for central management and
services. It’s gone up from 16.526 million to 17.735 million. 671,000
increase in salary adjustments resulting from the settlement of collective
bargaining agreements with SGEU [Saskatchewan Government and General Employees’
Union] and associated out-of-scope increases. So that takes care of about half
of that increase.
And the second item is a
$940,000 increase for asset validation program. And you know, that concerns the
facility condition index and making sure that the ministry understands the
condition of the capital of the buildings that we are responsible for. So that’s
the bulk of it.
And it does have a third area
here. It says $1,000 increase in minister’s salary. So I guess I’m responsible
for 1,000 of that 1.209 million. Other than that, yeah, no, the bulk of it
is those two areas, and two important areas for sure.
Tajinder Grewal: — Thank
you, Minister. And since the 2020‑2021 budget year, your ministry’s
central services budget has increased by 19.1 per cent. Can you comment on
what’s driving that continued increase in your central services budget over the
years and whether you think that growth is excessive?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. I partially answered the question with the current year, with the
671,000 and 940,000 that I mentioned earlier. But the growth from 2020 and ’21
resulted largely from our funding for the IT [information technology] upgrader
to our student aid system. So a very large portion of that increase was due to
that upgrade.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Simply due to one factor, it went 19.1 per cent in last six years?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Pardon me?
Tajinder Grewal: — Due to
just that factor, it increased by 19.1 per cent in last six years?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. You know, the numbers appear large in a
percentage way, but really when you look at the absolute value it’s not that
large. And as I indicated, the $940,000 increase in the asset validation
program, the 671 increase in salary adjustments, and approximately $2 million
for the funding of the IT upgrader, you know, it works out to about $3.6 million
over that long time frame. Which in this particular area it seems like a large
increase but in absolute dollars it’s quite understandable.
Tajinder Grewal: — Thank
you, Minister. Over the past six years, the province has increased the funding
for universities, Sask Polytechnic, and regional colleges by only 5 per cent
and that’s roughly 0.8 per cent per year. During the same time, inflation rose
by nearly 20 per cent. So why is the province purposely underfunding the
post-secondary education system?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. I don’t have all the exact years that the
member’s asking for, but I can just concentrate on the last three years. And
when we first signed the multi-year funding agreement, the first two years that
was a $60 million lift, and then $12 million in ’24‑25, $18 million
in ’25‑26.
[17:30]
So that’s, you know, some $90 million
there. You know, we’re providing stable funding in consultation with the
institutions. Of course part of their funding comes from ICT [Immigration and
Career Training], the career training budget as well. But you know, overall the
multi-year funding has been well received and has been meeting the needs of the
institutions.
Tajinder Grewal: —
Minister, my question is about percentage increase, not the millions of
dollars. So can you comment on that? The per cent increase, why is so much less
than . . . Inflation is 20 per cent, and you’re funding only 0.8 per
cent per year. So in terms of percentage, you give me the figures in terms of
percentage. How much is that? It’s not underfunding purposely?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. And just for the committee’s information,
the province is the largest contributor to this sector’s operating budgets. We
provide 59.2 per cent of the total revenue. That’s ’22‑23 figures. Over
the last decade funding has gone up by 6 per cent. Institutions have done an
excellent job to improve their financial sustainability and enrolment. They’re
up 24 per cent.
And we’ve been challenging
the sector to find efficiencies in their area, to do much more with some more
money, and they’ve certainly enhanced those efficiencies with early retirement
and renewal of faculty. They’re raising new revenues as well, and we all know
that international education has helped with those revenues as well.
According to Stats Canada,
Sask has one of the most publicly funded post-secondary sectors in Canada. In
the country we are the fourth-highest proportion of government for both the
university and college sectors, so we rank very well across the country. Funding
has gone up.
You know, I realize it’s
never enough, but that’s part of the partnership that we have here with the
institutions, where we challenge them not only to use the increases efficiently
but to look at their own way of finding efficiencies as well. And that’s been
the way. But again when you compare us to other institutions across the
country, we’re in about fourth place, which you know, we can always do better,
but we’ve had a good record so far.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Minister. So this year the Ministry of Advanced Education is
increasing its funding by over 7 per cent, while the funding for the
stakeholders is falling by 0.82 per cent. Shouldn’t the focus of your budget be
on the universities, Sask Poly, and regional colleges?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yeah, well absolutely. Yeah, absolutely it is, and you know, 90‑some per
cent. And that’s what I tried to say. The scale of what you were saying about
central services management was a very small portion of the overall budget. And
you know, we’re well into the 90 per cent that goes into institutions. And a
lot of the budget that we referenced earlier was capital-based, and you know,
it’s projects that come and go. And if there’s an IT project it might skew that
number up, which it has in this regard, but as it falls off, that number, you
know, might fall in the future as well. Not comparing apples and oranges, or
apples to apples. They’re apples and oranges, I guess.
So you know, there is indeed
a big difference. And you know, on that first budget, I indicated it’s moved in
the last year $1.2 million, and over the whole time period it was $3.6 million,
so a very small portion of the overall budget. And again the large vast
majority of funding goes directly to those institutions, well over 90 per cent.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Last year the number was 727,943, and this year the number is 721,939. And
basically one of the immediate impacts of this freeze on the funding for the
post-secondary sector has been rapid increase in student tuition for
Saskatchewan students. And according to Stats Canada, Saskatchewan’s
undergraduate fees are the second highest in Canada, a full 31 per cent higher
than the average undergraduate tuition in Canada. So what was the increase in
tuition fees in post-secondary institutions last year in 2024‑25?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks again for the question. So it’s important for the member to understand
that operational funding is indeed up and has increased. And you know, the
capital flow goes up and goes down from time to time, but operation funding is
up. And a part of the negotiations for the multi-year funding was an agreement
that tuition would be capped at 4 per cent. And we feel that’s a fair way of
doing things.
We want to ensure that our
universities are, you know, top of the class as far as providing the services
that they do. And we feel that the 4 per cent is a fair agreement, and the
institutions agreed with us. But that is part of the multi-level funding, and
it again continues on as we extend the multi-year funding for another year.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Do you have the numbers for the tuition increase last year? Tuition fees?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. Once again thanks for the question. So yes, the tuition for the
domestic undergraduate program is second highest in the country, but we are
third lowest for domestic graduate tuition, sixth lowest for international
undergraduate tuition, and third lowest for international graduate tuition.
So of course there’s
variables in there. The average tuition for domestic undergraduate is $9,609 in
Saskatchewan. And percentage increase last year at the University of
Saskatchewan, USask, tuition increased by an average of 3.83 per cent, and the
University of Regina increased by 4 per cent. And you know, most are in that
near-4 per cent range.
[17:45]
Tajinder
Grewal: —
So don’t you think that these high tuition fees are not good for our children
remaining in Saskatchewan and receiving their education here?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well I think, you know, we offset that with some programs that are very, very
successful — the graduate retention program, for an example. You know, it’s an
investment and costs do go up. And we feel that, you know, the 4 per cent limit
that was negotiated with the multi-year funding agreements is fair.
You know, we always want to
do better. We’re always shooting to be middle of the pack. But you know, right
now we’re second highest in undergraduate but third lowest for domestic
graduate and sixth lowest for international and third lowest for international
graduate. So you know, when you average all of those out, we are near the
middle of the pack.
But you know, more
importantly, we want to make sure that there’s fair funding, that there’s fair
increases, and an outstanding education that is offered. And I’m comfortable
saying that.
Tajinder Grewal: — Thank
you, Minister. So over the term of the Scott Moe government — this is according
to Stats Canada — your government has increased tuition fees by over 35 per
cent. Is this not simply increasing the affordability issues that face
Saskatchewan households? And why would the government believe that to be an
appropriate result of your policies?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. And yeah, I’ve got some pleasant news here
for sure. Like in the undergraduate area, second highest in the country, but
when you include student fees, all of a sudden we move down to fifth place. So
we have very modest student fees compared to other jurisdictions, which is
very, very positive. And you know, as far as the percentage increase over terms
— I’m talking about year by year — under 4 per cent.
And certainly what we’re
hearing from parents and students is they want stability. They don’t want to
see the big fluctuations. Like we’ve seen Alberta go up 10 per cent in one
year. And you know, I again think that it’s something that our government really
focuses on, is long-term stability as far as costs go. And that’s why we worked
it into the multi-year funding agreement to make sure that it goes under 4 per
cent.
And I think it’s fair to say
as well, in the whole cost of a university education the housing component is
very important as well. And in Saskatchewan we have, relative to other parts of
the country, not all parts of the country, but for the most part our housing
costs are certainly more moderate than in some of the larger provinces and the
larger cities and all of that. So it all comes together, and I think again
we’re in a fair position where we want to be in this sector.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Minister. So are you comfortable with 35 per cent increase during
the last seven years?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well I’m comfortable that if increases are necessary, which they are, and
they’re negotiated and if they’re 4 per cent or less . . . I just
said the University of Regina was 3.83 per cent last year and 4 per cent. And
you know, of course the costs do go up. But we look at ourselves compared to
other jurisdictions, and when student fees are included we’re in fifth place.
So we’re, you know, reaching our goal of being at the middle of the pack.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
But your numbers you’re not showing this. Four per cent is showing way more.
So my next question is, how
much will our post-secondary institutions in Saskatchewan have to increase
tuition fees this year?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well there’s a cap because of the extension of the program. It’s a cap of 4 per
cent, so it can’t go over 4 per cent.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Okay, thank you. One of the ways to reduce the impact of tuition fees increase
is to better fund student support; however looking at your budget, student
support are only increasing by 0.62 per cent. So, Minister, can you advise
whether this level of increase will reduce the average level of debt that
Saskatchewan students are having to incur to go to the university?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right, thank you for the question. In ’25‑26 the government will
provide 113.5 million in direct support to students through tax credits,
grants, and scholarships. And funding of course is targeted to those most in
need. A provincial grant combined with the Saskatchewan Advantage Scholarship
provides up to $1,750 over an eight-month school year. Typically, low-income
students receive up to $5,920 in combined provincial-federal grants.
So you know, when you look at
the average tuition and you look at the monies that a student most in need is
able to get, and you know, with the expectation of those students doing some
work over the summer, I think that we’re in a pretty good place when we look at
that.
And of course I could get
more into the graduate retention program, and if indeed there is some debt that
is incurred, it can very, very quickly be addressed or eliminated through the
graduate retention program over the number of years if that student stays in
Saskatchewan and is able to find a necessary job.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
I have a follow-up question that you have increased 0.62 per cent increase in
funding for student support. Is this the recommended increase that your
ministry submitted to the Ministry of Finance this year?
Hon. Ken
Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. And certainly this is a very important area
and one that our government takes very seriously. The Student Aid Fund is fully
funded, and we do projections on what indeed the needs will be for ’25‑26.
Of course I’m not going to get into the exact numbers that you go to treasury
board with and what you come back with, but in this area we’re very confident
that we’re meeting the needs of all the students.
And a very important factor
is that we don’t say no to anybody either. If there is indeed an
under-projection and an increased need, we will fund that as well. What we have
found is that our projections have been accurate. The Student Aid Fund is fully
funded with the monies that have been provided.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Minister. During the last three months I had a chance to visit many
post-secondary institutions and meeting the management. One of their concerns
is that lack of international student enrolment. If you compare from the last
year, this year is 40 to 50 per cent less, and it will further decrease next
year and there will be good revenue lost to many institutions.
Does the ministry have a plan
to cover that revenue or the institution has to cut some services due to that
lack of revenue by loss of international students?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well of course the member is correct. You know, it is a real concern for us.
And it was a federal government decision that was done without any consultation
or certainly very much a lack of consultation. You know, we feel that we would
be better served if the federal government came to each province and assessed
what was happening. I know that there have been abuses in the system, and I’m
very pleased to say that those abuses aren’t as prevalent in Saskatchewan as
they have been in other provinces.
So we understand why the
federal government made their decisions. We are absolutely concerned about its
effect. You know, it’s affecting the first-year students but it hasn’t affected
second, third, and fourth year so we’re not feeling the entire effect on it.
But you know, it is going to be a top concern for us going forward. It is a top
concern for the institutions. I’ve talked to the institutions many times about
it. You know, U of R [University of Regina] has more international
students than the U of S [University of Saskatchewan] as a per cent,
and Sask Poly as well.
So the concern is there,
definitely. But the institutions and the ministry is working really hard to see
how we can offset that by setting up agreements with different countries and
searching out who we think can best be an area where we can increase international
students.
[18:00]
You know, part of the problem
is when the federal government sends out the signal around the world that
numbers are going to be reduced in Canada, you actually get less applications
as well. So you know, we’re very concerned about it. And I know the member
knows that, you know, it was a major topic of the Ontario election when that
took place, with all three parties, their major parties agreeing too that they
could have been better served by the federal government.
But the U of S and
the U of R and Sask Poly certainly, and the other institutions have
very good international relations. And it just hasn’t started over the last
year or two; they’ve been working at this a long time. And there are some
reassurances there that we’re going to try to get those international student
numbers to be as high as possible and as high as will be allowed by the federal
government.
You know, I mentioned the
three main institutions, the largest institutions, but you know, I was out at
Suncrest community college, and they have a fair number of international
students there. And the smaller regional colleges are concerned about, you know,
the future and the decrease in numbers as well. And you know, continuing care
aides, for example, programs like that that are thriving right now. It is a
concern for the future for sure.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Minister. My question is about the loss of revenue. This is real
that they are feeling the loss of revenue now, and going to worse next year. So
is the ministry going to have a plan to cover that loss, or those institutions
have to cut some services to make up?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well we’ll be monitoring that very closely. We’ll be looking at, you know, a
future multi-level funding agreement that we would like to put forward. You
know, a number of years ago when the request was made it was well received, and
the multi-year funding has served us very well. So you know, we’ll be looking
at all aspects of funding going forward.
Tajinder Grewal: — Thank
you, Minister. My next question is, what is the approved 2025‑26 capital
budget for each of the two universities, Sask Poly, and the regional colleges?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. Well I have a series of numbers for you here. The total capital
budget is $40.9 million. Approximately 29.4 is for the two universities,
8.2 for Sask Polytech, 2.8 for the regional colleges, and $520,000 for the
federated and affiliated colleges.
The University of
Saskatchewan received $22.094 million in capital. University of Regina,
7.274 million; Sask Poly, 8.261 million; regional colleges, 2.837;
and 520 for the federated and affiliated colleges — Luther, St. Thomas, St.
Peter’s, and Campion.
Not to pre-empt the future
questions from the member, but what do each of these include? Preventative
maintenance and renewal at the University of Saskatchewan is 14.844 million.
Health human resources is 7 million. Western College of Veterinary
Medicine is 250,000. University of Regina, preventative maintenance and
renewal, 6.574 million; HHR, 700,000. And Sask Poly, HHR is 4.892 million.
And the Joseph A. Remai
Saskatoon campus renewal is $2 million. I’m sure we’ll get into
discussions about that at some point, but it’s a real jewel in our system and
certainly am very pleased with how things are progressing at the Remai campus.
And preventative maintenance
and renewal for Sask Polytech is $1.369 million. And I have the numbers
for the regional colleges as well if the member wants them.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Minister. Can you please also list me all the capital projects over
$1 million that get funding for the universities and regional colleges?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. We have four main projects that are over the $1 million
threshold: the Saskatchewan Polytech HHR medical laboratory technology, medical
radiologic technician, and respiratory therapy in Regina, $3.5 million;
Sask Polytech Saskatoon campus, as I mentioned earlier, $2 million;
University of Saskatchewan, new and expanded health and human resources
programs, $7 million; and the Carlton Trail College trades building
expansion, $1.034 million.
So that’s the ones over the
million-dollar threshold. Of course there’s several that are under the million-dollar
threshold, but that should answer your question.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
So just $2 million for Sask Poly for 2025‑2026, right?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Correct, yeah.
Tajinder Grewal: — What is
this funding specifically for?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Again thank you for the question. The budget invests $2 million in the
project for ’25‑26 to complete site preparation work. That was tendered
in August of 2024, in advance procurement to construct the new technology and
trades centre. Site preparation completion is estimated at a value of about
$700,000, and the remaining funds will be used for advance construction
procurement.
I just want to expand upon it
as well. You know, this is a major project for the city of Saskatoon and for
the province of Saskatchewan, in the neighbourhood of $300 million. The
government is going to be putting forward in the neighbourhood of $200 million.
But $100 million is
going to be raised by Sask Poly and their capital campaigns. And they’re doing
very, very well. They’re meeting their targets and I think the number is in the
low 60 millions right now, and they’re working towards $100 million
in contributions through their capital campaign, which is just incredible.
So they’re well on their way.
We’re meeting the needs that they’re asking for at this particular time, but I
can tell you, I always look forward to an update on how things are coming
along, as far as that goes.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
So do you think, Minister, that $300 million will be the total cost for
the whole project?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yeah, that’s what’s projected right now. Of course we hope that things remain
on time and on budget. But of course, with the geopolitical world that we live
in today, it’s hard to project from one day to the next, you know, as we talked
about in question period the last couple of days. Look what’s happened in the
price of oil in the last number of days, you know, and it all affects what goes
in.
But you know, we issue very
competitive RFPs [request for proposal]. They are well received. We have
competitive bids going forward. We’re undertaking an RFP right now, and as
minister I’m pleased to see the competition that is there and the interest that
is there. It’s on the radar screen of every company in the province, I think.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
And how many years it will take to construct it, the whole project?
[18:15]
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. Of course, you know, we have a very, very
aggressive timeline. The whole project is staged into three main stages, and
the first stage is the trade and technology building, which they could start on
as early as 2026. And you know, that’s part of the RFP that’s gone out now, and
the target date for the completion of that first phase is 2029.
There’ll be future phases as
well with the health sciences and the student services and all of that, but
those are our target dates to begin with now, and so far everything’s on time.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
It’s good to know they’re starting in 2026. What will be the first building or
facility that will be built?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
It’ll be the trade and technologies building. That’s the first building that . . .
Tajinder
Grewal: —
That will be completed by 2029?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
2029 is the target completion date here.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Okay. My next question is more to multi-year funding agreements with
post-secondary institutions. The previous Advanced Education minister said
several times that the past two years they’re having negotiations with the
post-secondary education. So my question is, are you still in negotiation, and
what is the status of the negotiations?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yeah, we’re hearing very clearly from the institutions that they would like to
continue with the multi-year funding, and negotiations have been taking place.
But in light of again the geopolitical situation that we’re in, in North
America right now, we just thought it would be prudent to extend the existing
agreement for one year. And I must say the institutions agreed with that as
well.
So we wanted to make sure
that it’s steady as she goes, but I think it’s fair to say as we look back on
the previous agreement over the number of years, it’s served its purpose. It’s
provided that stability. It’s allowed institutions to look, on a multi-year
basis, look forward. And you know, when I became minister, that’s one of the
first things I’ve heard from all of the different institutions, that they very
much appreciated it. They thought it was a good exercise and they thought we
should look at those.
You know, once we’re finished
the whole budgetary process and the legislative process here in the spring, I’m
going to search out and start those negotiations with the various institutions
as well.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
So it just continues.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yeah.
Tajinder Grewal: — Okay.
And my next question is about your business plan reference to promoting
collaboration among post-secondary institutions to implement sector-wide
initiatives. What are you referring to here?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. Lots of answers for this one, you bet. You know, collaboration is
certainly a major theme with the advanced education in Saskatchewan. And you
know, I have to say, the first tour that I did after becoming minister, I went
to the Dr. Sylvia Fedoruk Centre at the U of S. And in my first briefing with
them, they talked about the collaboration that they do with the University of
Regina at that centre, and then at Sask Poly and all of that. And you know,
oftentimes when you become a minister and you’re responsible for certain areas,
you have people working in silos, and you know, this organization doing this,
and this organization doing this. And it’s your job as a minister to try to get
them to talk to each other and to collaborate.
But I found with this
ministry, it’s already happening in spades, where certainly the three major
institutions work very well together. And you know, there’s a brokerage model
with the regional colleges as well, where that collaboration takes place there,
where regional colleges are able to deliver. You know, the ministry meets with
the institutions as part of its oversight and accountability role, and it helps
with those efforts to coordinate. And in fact, we’re hosting a sector
conference this fall to bring all the parts together and to be able to
collaborate in a formal manner.
I can give you other examples
as well. You know, collaboration in the nursing area, the virtual reality area
— where we just made an investment this year — is something that happens. And
even just the location that it’s going to happen between Sask Poly and the
University of Saskatchewan, you know, that took a lot of collaboration to bring
that together. You know, that idea had been around for a while, and not
everybody was sold on it, but it took extreme leadership from the top levels of
both institutions to bring it together.
Another one that we should
talk about tonight is the Global Institute for Energy, Minerals and Society,
GIEMS. And it’s a collaborative research, training, and innovation partnership
between the University of Saskatchewan, the University of Regina, and Sask
Poly, which was developed to promote and align research and innovation in the
province’s energy and mineral sectors. And I know the member, being formerly
employed at the university, would be well aware of the innovation and the work
that is done in collaboration in this area.
So you know, it’s something
that is happening. There doesn’t have to be a lot of push from the minister or
the ministry. It seems to be taking a life on its own. But I think we see it in
other sectors as well in the province and certainly in, you know, the
agriculture sector and the food security sector here in the province as well.
But I just see a continuation of that happening here, and the collaboration is,
you know, very well received. And I think when our constituents, our taxpayers
hear about this collaboration, they think it’s the right thing to do and that
everybody is leveraging off of each other in that regard.
Tajinder Grewal: — Thank you, Minister. So my next
question is about Sask Polytech. There are significant waiting lists for some
programs. So can . . .
Hon. Ken Cheveldayoff: — Sorry, there’s significant . . .
Tajinder
Grewal:
— Waiting list. Waiting list for some programs. So can the minister advise on
the specific programs that have significant waiting lists, and also which ones
will be addressed by the funding in this budget?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. And you know, it is indeed an important one
because, you know, we do have wait-lists. When you have a thriving, growing
economy, a burgeoning private sector, you certainly create demands and you
create wait-lists.
And that’s something that our
government, not only do we, you know, just want that to happen, we set targets,
we set goals. And I’m sure the member is aware of the government’s growth plan
for 2030, and it’s something that the institutions follow very closely. They
try to anticipate where the growth is going to take place and what areas are
needed.
You know, I can get further
into the question. The BHP academy for example at Carlton Trail, where it’s a
partnership with the private sector, people are, you know, encouraged to enter
that academy. And the course work is designed to ensure upon completion their
very high likelihood of becoming an employee of that private sector
institution, in the case of BHP.
[18:30]
You know, as far as our
government goes in the areas that we’re trying to meet the needs, the health human
resources for sure in that area, some $117 million. You know, we’ve
invested $170 million to support over 900 new health care training seats
in 33 programs. So that’s a very direct answer to the member’s question about
what this budget will do and continue to do, and has been happening since 2020.
And you know, it’s a
burgeoning industry. Every province in the country wants to have more doctors
and more nurses. And we know the likelihood of training more of them here in
the province increases the likelihood of them staying in the province. And that’s
why we’re increasing the seats at the medical college and as well as the
residency and all of that and expanding into the physician assistant program,
for example, and nurse practitioners and things like that. And so that’s
certainly what we are addressing.
You know, we work very
closely with the regional colleges, and you know, career training with the
Ministry of Career Training as well, ICT. They’re close partners with us in
that area as well.
A waiting list is not
necessarily a bad thing — because they keep a waiting list — and sometimes it
takes a little bit longer to get in the program. But you know, I believe it
shows that you have a thriving economy and that you want to increase that. Like
in medical school, for example, I believe we have over 800 applications. And
we’re very proud of, since we became government we had 60 seats, and now we’re
moving from 104 to 108 seats. But it’s still not enough, and we’re looking at
creative ways to enhance the number of physicians, certainly, and other health
care practitioners that come to the province.
I hope that answers the
member’s question, and we can continue to talk about this area if you like.
Tajinder Grewal: — My
question is about Sask Poly programs. So I mean if there is a demand in the
industry, they’re looking for people, trained people, and people want training,
then what’s the hurdle there? So the demand is good for the economy to train
people, industry needs those people, but why it’s not happening?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. And I can get to the specifics of it and
then take a step back and talk a little bit wider about it as well. But you
know, a wait-list exists in the medical radiological technician program, the
nursing programs. You know, we never get enough nurses, but we certainly are
expanding and doing all we can to train them. Heavy equipment truck and
transport, power engineering, industrial mechanics — those are all the examples
of areas that are in high, high demand because we have such a thriving economy
in Saskatchewan.
In Sask’s post-secondary
sector, a record number of students. The number now, I keep using 55,000, but
the updated number for ’23‑24: 59,080 students. That’s up 9 per cent from
last year, so we’re in a really good situation where we’re meeting that demand
because the numbers are increasing. You know, 6,000 more students than in 2019‑2020,
and you know, the growing capacity is meeting the student demand.
And again we work very
closely with ICT and the minister in that regard, you know. They do some of the
gauging of the vacancies, and they look at, you know, what’s needed where. And
we work very, very closely with them.
The institutions themselves
like Sask Poly, they have advisory councils and they talk to the private
sector. But you know, just anecdotally, I met with the Saskatchewan Mining
Association, for example, and hearing directly from them about what they would
like, and the request is usually more, more, more. And you know, we try to
gauge what the most relevant areas are and ensure that we’re able to meet that
capacity. But it is encouraging to see a thriving sector that is very much in
demand in these areas.
Tajinder Grewal: — So my
next question is about The Regional Colleges Act. It requires a regular
review and, according to my information, no review happened since 2010‑11.
Is the ministry planning to review it this year?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. Yeah, the regional colleges, a real
important part of the ministry and of the operations in Saskatchewan. You know,
they’re very nimble and responsive. And I’m sure the member will share that
opinion if he’s had a chance to visit some of them, like you said you have. And
yeah, I wish I had the opportunity to visit more early in my tenure, and I’m
looking forward to doing that after we break from session.
But I have had a chance to
take in some of their community days. I was up in Melfort and took in the one
at Suncrest, and I was just very impressed. They brought in the mayors and
community leaders. And they just all talked about how important the regional
colleges are to the network, and how they stream together well with Sask Poly
and the universities and just allow people to get a chance to have their
education very close to home.
And so I’m convinced that
there’s a real role and a continued role for them, but I realize that there,
you know, from time to time, you have to take a look at the whole scope of
things. And you know, in 2018 there was a regional college review undertaken.
And that took place, and now we’re looking at the scoping and the assessment
for a review of The Regional Colleges Act. But in light of what’s
happened this year, it’s not our top priority.
Very recently we had two
colleges that wanted to come together and felt that they could be better served
by a merger, and that was the Cumberland and Parkland colleges that came
together to create Suncrest College. And there’s ongoing work. They’re sharing
new technology systems and they’re finding that that partnership is working
very well. So I guess that’ll be part of it to see, you know, have we
right-sized the area, the catchment areas for the regional colleges? Do we have
the right number?
So we will be looking at the
Act and the scope and looking at the review that took place in 2018 in due
course.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Yeah. I agree with you on several factors on the colleges. Like I was there
last Friday at Suncrest College. My question was on the Act, but it looks like
it’s not a priority for the government to review the Act.
So my next question is about
this very good program you used to have named Saskatchewan advantage grant for
education savings, called SAGES. That program was suspended in 2017‑18
and then cancelled in 2022‑2023. It was an excellent program giving
incentive to the parents to invest in RESPs [registered education savings
plan], then eventually our students, our children were using that program.
Is there any plan to bring
back that program which a was very popular, very excellent program?
[18:45]
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much for the question. And certainly yes, you know, the SAGES
program was in place and it was a popular program. But you know, a review was
done and it was cancelled. And you know, decisions were made to look at the
graduate retention program and to enhance that program and to see.
And it wasn’t because one was
a bad program and one was a good program, but we just thought that, you know,
the graduate retention program might address a larger need. And you know, with
SAGES and what happened there . . . And you know, there’s many more
products now for RESPs that parents and individuals can contribute to and help
to fund education. And those programs are growing in popularity. So a decision
was made to enhance the graduate retention program and to suspend SAGES.
And with the overall
popularity of the graduate retention program, we feel that we’ll just continue
down this road. But not to say that the SAGES wasn’t a good program. But in
light of limited budgets and the focus on success, we decided to go and give the
graduate retention a priority. And that’s why you saw a 20 per cent increase in
the program as well.
We heard from people that
have gone through the program and accessed it and said that the graduate
retention program was so important to the launch of their career. It helped
them save some money to buy a house, to stay in the province. And that’s, you know
. . . Again, two good programs. A decision was made to focus more on
one and, again, I shared the numbers with you earlier: 85,000 people that have
taken advantage of it.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Minister. I agree with you that the graduate retention program is a
very good program, and the funding increase from 20,000 to 24,000 this year, I
applaud that. And my question on that program is that, say for the last five
years, I’m looking for the data — the numbers in terms of dollars — for the
male graduates versus the female graduates. I’m talking the tax credit accessed
in the last five years. Can you provide it? You may not have a number right
now.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
I’ve never seen a number like that, but we’ll see if we can find that.
Tajinder Grewal: — Thank
you.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much. As I suspected, yeah, no we don’t have a gender breakdown.
You know, the graduate retention program is a partnership with the Canada
Revenue Agency, and I don’t think they’ve seen a need to break it down by
gender.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Is there any possibility to find those numbers?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Not from what I can hear here. It’s a partnership that we share. I guess, you
know, we could ask the question at some point if necessary. Does the member
feel that this is a necessary area that we should be looking at?
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Just that I heard some concern from some female graduate students. They are not
accessing that program fully because of some conditions. They’re raising
families, going to mat leave, so I mean, the male graduates having a better
access to the tax grant as compared to the female graduates.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Oh okay, well that’s interesting. Yeah, mm-hmm.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
So there’s a couple of examples I heard, like people approaching me. They’re
saying that there are certain limits there that are not good for the female
graduates.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Hmm.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Because they go to the mat leave, then they come back, and they’re not fully
accessing the program.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much. Yeah, I must admit I haven’t heard that mentioned to me once
in various discussions with people. But yeah, as the member knows, it’s a
non-refundable tax credit. And there’s seven years in which to use it, which
can be carried forward for an additional three years, so 10 years to do it.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Good for nine years, and if people are going on a family program, have one kid
and the second kid or third kid . . .
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yeah.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
I heard some issues from the people there. They were unable to access as
compared to the male graduates.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Okay, fair comment. We don’t have any stats to back that up. But you know,
thank you for the member’s research and concern, and it’s something that we’ll
try to look at.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Okay, thank you. My next question is, how many students are enrolled in the
University of Saskatchewan’s medical school, including residents?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. Very good question. And you know, across the four-year undergraduate
medical education program, the College of Medicine has currently 108 entry
positions. And then across, it’s 424 students. And in the College of Medicine
postgraduate medical education residency program, there are currently 480
residents across 27 active training programs in eight provincial training
locations. So very important numbers.
I know in following the Nova
Scotia election for example, this was a topic that was very much part of that
election campaign where they wanted to . . . the Premier and
opposition parties were competing for, you know, how many residencies in
different universities across Nova Scotia, for example. And this is something
that we take very serious. And when we became government there were 60 medical
college seats, and we’ve gradually increased it. You know, it went up to 90. It
went up to 104 and 108.
And of course, you know, as I
said earlier, we believe that the more you can educate these people, the higher
the likelihood they’re going to stay in Saskatchewan. We’ve provided incentives
for them to locate in areas under 100,000 people. And you know, it’s going
very, very well, but it’s so, so competitive. But there’s areas that I can’t
get into now, but we’re trying to think outside the box and do areas.
You know, with 800
applications and 108 spots, it’s something that we have to look at. Okay, where
do those other applicants . . . where are they going? Are they going
to other universities? Are they going to other countries? Do they want to come
back to Saskatchewan? Do they want to come back to Canada? Can we make it
easier for them to do that? You know, these are all questions that we’re
working on. Not to drift too far from the question, but I’ve given you the
numbers, and I think they’re very good numbers.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
A follow-up question. How many of these student doctors are from outside of
Saskatchewan but within Canada?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Thanks very much. And as the member may know and the committee may know, we
have no undergraduate international students in Saskatchewan. So we ensure that
those are for our Canadian students. In our resident programs, we have
currently 58 international students out of 135 residents at the current time.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
What’s the annual tuition for a Saskatchewan resident attending the medical
school at the U of S?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. Thank you for the question. The annual tuition amount for College of
Medicine is $21,056. Amongst the 12 schools of medicine across Canada, the
College of Medicine at the University of Saskatchewan has the fifth-lowest
tuition fee, and student fees total $1,121 in addition to that.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Minister, you said there is no international student attending medical school
at the U of S, right?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
That’s correct, yes.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
And how many students are enrolled at the U of S pharmacy school?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
I’m trying to be quick here because I know we’re getting close to the end of
our time. College of pharmacy, University of Saskatchewan: first year, 77
full-time, 9 part-time; year two, 74 full-time; year three, 84 full-time; year
four, 87 full-time. So what’s the math on that? 160, 171, 140, 151 . . .
322?
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Okay. And how many of these students are Saskatchewan residents charged the
regular tuition fees, and how many of these pharmacy students are foreign
students and charged international student rates?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
In the college of pharmacy, how many are international students?
Tajinder
Grewal: —
And Saskatchewan versus international.
[19:00]
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
All right. We don’t have the breakdown of the number of international students,
but in the college of pharmacy the tuition is actually the same as domestic and
international. It’s $23,892 per year.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yeah. But I’d kind of like to know that number too, so I’ll try to research
that down and if I’m successful I’ll share that with the member.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
It is very interesting to me that international students have the same fee.
Normally it’s four and a half times.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Yes. Yeah, that’s the exception here for sure.
Chair Weger: — Thank you, Minister. Having reached our
agreed-upon time for consideration of these estimates, we will now adjourn
consideration of the estimates and supplementary estimates no. 2 for the
Ministry of Advanced Education. Minister, do you have any closing comments?
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Well thank you very much. I’d like to congratulate the member on his first
estimates in this area. Very well-thought-out questions, very pertinent
questions. And we stayed away from the politics here, and I think it was well
served. But thank you.
As
I said, I was in your shoes at one time. I know it’s not easy doing the
research. And I commend you on the research that you have done. It’s made us
think about some things, and with the goal of serving even better. So thank you
to you.
Thank
you to committee members who participated, and thank you to Mr. Chair. And of
course a big thank you to my deputy, the assistant deputy ministers, and the
hard-working people at the Ministry of Advanced Education who take their job
very seriously and do an excellent job supporting me in my role and supporting
all of us and to ensure that we have a world-class advanced education system
here in Saskatchewan. So thanks to all involved and thank you to those who are
watching in this evening as well.
Chair Weger: — Thank you. Mr. Grewal, any closing comments?
Tajinder
Grewal: —
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to thank the minister for very respectful
dialogue. I hope we’re still friends after today.
Hon.
Ken Cheveldayoff: —
Oh, absolutely.
Tajinder
Grewal: —
And thank you to all officials, your hard work and your staying here long and
putting together the budget. And also thanks to the committee members, Mr.
Chair, Legislative Assembly officials, and Hansard operator. Thank you very
much.
Chair Weger: — Okay. I will echo all of those same thank yous,
and this committee will now recess until 7:33.
[The
committee recessed from 19:03 until 19:33.]
Chair Weger:
— Okay. Welcome back, committee members. Just on my left, we have Mr. Matt Love
chitting in for Noor Burki and Ms. April ChiefCalf with us now. And then on the
right, just to update, we’ve got Mr. Brad Crassweller chitting in for Barret
Kropf. We will now consider the estimates and supplementary estimates
no. 2 for the Ministry of Education.
General Revenue Fund
Education
Vote 5
Subvote
(ED01)
Chair Weger:
— We will begin with vote 5, Education, central management and services,
subvote (ED01). Minister Hindley is here with officials from the ministry. I
would ask that the officials please state their names before speaking and
please do not touch the microphones. The Hansard operator will turn on your
microphone when you’re speaking to the committee. Minister, please introduce
your officials and make your opening remarks.
Hon. Everett Hindley: — Sure.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’ll be brief on the opening remarks. We won’t do the 30
minutes that we did the first night for the members here this evening.
I’ll
maybe just introduce the two that are at the table with me right now. We have
obviously some other officials joining us from the Ministry of Education. But
Deputy Minister Clint Repski to my right and Assistant Deputy Minister Jason
Pirlot to my left. And a great team of other assistant deputy ministers and
executive directors and senior officials behind me to help answer any of the
questions that the committee members may have here tonight. And with that,
we’ll turn it back over to you four for questions.
Chair
Weger: — Thank you, Minister. I
will now open the floor for questions. Mr. Love.
Matt Love: — Thank
you, Mr. Chair. And thanks, Minister, for your opening comments that were
delivered at the last meeting of this committee.
You
know, despite our attempts at forming an agreement to move that meeting time to
when I could be present, I understand that that wasn’t possible. But I do want
to express thanks to my colleagues, who very competently filled in and asked a
number of important questions surrounding K to 12 [kindergarten to grade 12]
education and early childhood learning and all the, I think, five hours of
questions that you answered last time that this committee met.
So,
Minister, I’d like to start by following up on some of the answers that you
were not able to provide last time, or commitments that you made at that
meeting to table documents. Hoping to see those documents tonight. So those
tabled documents that you committed to last time were supplying numbers, as has
been customary in this committee over the last number of years, for students
receiving intensive supports, broken down by division; EAL [English as an
additional language] students broken down by level and division; as well as
your commitment to provide operating grants for divisions following the signing
of the teachers’ collective bargaining agreement.
Are
you in a position to provide those at this time?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Thanks to the member for the question. We have most of the information here
which we can provide here tonight.
So what we do have is the CÉF
[Conseil des écoles fransaskoises] enrolment but we only have it for two years,
I think it is, for ’24‑25, ’25‑26. So that’s what we have. We have
as well an update on capital, calculation of the Canada-Wide Early Learning and
Child Care annual budget, the intensive support data by school division, and
the English as an additional language data by school division.
We don’t have the CBA
[collective bargaining agreement] calculations, so the operating grants for the
individual school divisions. That is, to my understanding, still being worked
on and calculated with the school divisions, so that work is happening right
now. And I think as I committed to at the previous meeting, as soon as that is
done, that that information will be publicly available. It’s my understanding
we’d be able to share that with the committee as well. But we can table what we
have here tonight.
Matt Love: — Okay.
Thanks, Minister. Additionally one of the questions brought forward one week
ago was if there were any changes made to the funding formula. At that time you
indicated that that was contingent on the collective bargaining agreement being
signed. That was signed the day after our committee meeting and I learned of
that last Thursday, that that was signed. So can you update if any changes have
been made to the funding formula?
Angela Chobanik:
— Hi there. Angela Chobanik. I’m the executive director of the education
funding branch. So we are working on some new components within the funding
model to reflect the changes in the CBA. So specifically, within the funding
model we have some pieces under the category of instruction. And so we’re
building new formulas within that instruction piece to reflect the complexity
pieces within the new CBA.
Matt
Love: —
Okay. Is that being impacted by the number of teachers that are required to be
hired to be in compliance with the new CBA? Like the classroom complexity
teachers, is that impacting the formula?
Angela Chobanik:
— So the formula pieces that we are working on are to reflect the new clauses
in the CBA. So specifically where schools are between 75 and 149 students, and
above 150 students, and then a pool of funds available to reflect the other
students.
Matt
Love: —
Okay, I’ll have more questions about those teacher hires later, but I
appreciate the answer on the formula at this time.
Minister, one week ago we
asked you to detail the $54.4 million that was communicated by your
government on budget day and in your opening comments last week. That was broken
down to things like inflation, non-teacher salaries, and transportation, but
you said that you were not able to do that due to the CBA not being signed. Are
you able to do that today — to break that down into the categories that you
communicated to the public on budget day?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Yeah, thanks for the question. I guess just essentially we do have the CBA
signed. The calculations are still being worked on in terms of what that impact
is as part of that 54 million. Again we don’t have those. It takes more
than a week to be able to do those calculations based on the ratification of
the CBA, and that’s what’s still happening. So yeah, we don’t have the answer
to that yet until we have the final calculations, and that sort of impacts that
bucket of 54 million.
Matt
Love: —
So, Minister, you’ve had much longer than a week. Last week you indicated and
your officials indicated that it was premature to release that until it was
signed but that high-level work was being done to understand the impacts.
So I do want to acknowledge
that, you know, I didn’t create these categories. These were the categories
that you communicated to the public on budget day. And these categories have
very little to do with the CBA, with the exception of those teachers in the
specialized support classrooms. So this should be something that, you know,
again pointing to your own comments last week that you just had to wait until
the agreement was signed.
So when can we expect to know
— you know, again what you communicated and your government communicated on
budget day to the public — when can we expect to get details on how those
dollars are broken down?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
So what I just communicated about 60 seconds ago is it takes more than a week
to complete these calculations. So to the best of my knowledge the teams are
working on trying to complete those calculations and figure out what the actual
dollar amounts are, and that should take place fairly quickly I think.
This is my first experience
going through a CBA-type of a process. I don’t know if there’s anything
additional you want to mention, Clint, about how long this has taken
previously, but again until we . . . Having the CBA signed and
ratified is one thing. Converting that language into calculations and dollars
and cents, that’s another component as well. Again I don’t think it’s going to
take a long period of time, but Clint, anything further you want to mention
just about the process?
Clint
Repski: —
Sure. Clint Repski, deputy minister. In terms of the timing, we do want to have
all the packages finalized for the school divisions and as soon as we possibly
can. At this point in time, it’ll be within two weeks.
We’ve been talking to the
divisions. We’ve been talking to the board Chairs. They’re anxious to get their
budgets up and running. We fully understand that. But from start to finish,
once we have all of the information it does take about three weeks. Unfortunately
it’s still a very manual process to go through all of the calculations in the
funding grant, so to go line by line and be specific. It’ll be within a
two-week period so that divisions can start and finalize their staffing
decisions and their hiring. They’ll have their budgets in that time.
Matt
Love: —
Thank you for that insight. Minister, we also talked last week about the
$130 million that again your government communicated to the public on
budget day and in a number of press releases and in your opening comments last
week.
[19:45]
And at that time you did have
some good information, which I appreciated, on the cost of the contract as far
as some of the salary increases and the retroactive pay. And that was good to
learn. But can you provide some insight onto the number of teachers that will
be required to be hired as a result of the CBA?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Okay. As the member and public knows, it was broken down into three different
categories based on school size. So I’ll maybe just start with the number of
schools in each of those categories. And we do have some calculations around
the additional teacher requirements and FTEs [full-time equivalent] that would
translate into based on the arbitrator’s decision.
So 150‑plus student
population schools, there’s 443 of those. In the category of 75 to 149 students
there would be 129 schools. And 74 and less student population, there are 147
schools. We’re looking at a total of 719 schools.
Additional teacher
requirements: so for the 150‑plus the arbitrator ruled a 1.0 FTE. The
additional teacher requirements in that category would be 443. In the middle
tier of 75 to 149 students, that’s the 0.5 FTE ruling by the arbitrator. So
that translates to 64.5 FTEs. And then of course for the under 75, those are
the schools that will be using the $20 million fund. So that we don’t have
a number for because that still has to be sort of sorted out as to what that’s
going to look like for individual schools of that size. So total additional
teacher requirements would be 507.5 FTEs.
Now in terms of the cost
. . . In classification by the way, just on classification, we used a
broad average. But it’s estimated the number of incremental teachers at
approximately $100,000 per, so that gives you a number of about 50 million
— 50.75. And then plus you add on the small-schools complexity fund. That’s
20 million there. So ballpark, 70.75 million is what we’re looking
at.
Jason Pirlot:
— Jason Pirlot, ADM [assistant deputy minister], Education. Just one real quick
note on the 20 million: actually that money will be allocated based on
enrolment, so school division enrolment on a relative basis, right. So across
the province it’ll be allocated out based on each school division’s relative
percentage of enrolment.
Matt
Love: —
So that’s not just the schools under 74. Okay, that makes . . .
Thanks for clarifying that. That’s appreciated.
So, Minister, that’s, I mean
that’s a lot of teachers. And I think that they’re needed. You know, we’ve
certainly seen over the last number of years very challenging situations of
thousands more students. I think in the last four years, 15,000 more students
and 86 fewer classroom teachers, so we certainly need more teachers.
Do
you have any concerns about the ability for school divisions to staff at this
time of year? I mean they don’t have their budgets yet, and they need to find
507.5 new teachers. Can you just comment on any concerns that you have on the
ability for divisions to meet these contractual obligations, and any concerns
you might have on a potential teacher shortage, including what this might do to
substitute teacher pools? Because that’s obviously where a number of these
teachers will be pulled from.
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Yeah, thanks for the question. It is certainly . . . it’s a big
number. It’s a significant number of teachers and, you know, we’ll be working
closely with school divisions and also with our, obviously our post-secondary
institutions as well in terms of the number of teachers that are trained every
year and come out of our post-secondary institutions and hopefully hired here
in Saskatchewan.
So I think it certainly does,
you know, lead to further conversations with our partners at Advanced Education
to talk about the numbers of teachers that are being trained, how many that we
are hiring and keeping here in Saskatchewan, working with our partners in the
North as well. You know, I’ve had a chance to meet with groups. Earlier this
week I met with Northern Lights School Division. Had a couple of
representatives come down to Regina to meet with me about some of the
challenges that are unique to northern Saskatchewan.
So the new CBA and the
arbitrator’s report impacts everybody. But the 507.5 FTEs, you’re right. It’s a
significant number. But I think, you know, we’re confident that we’ll be
working with our partners in the system to be able to try to make sure that we’re
doing everything we can to have enough teachers to fill those positions as
quickly as possible.
Just in terms of, you know,
the follow-up questions around teacher shortage and whether that’s anticipated
and what the impact is on the substitute teacher pool, I think there’s some
language in the agreement. And Clint, I don’t know if either you or Jason wants
to maybe speak to that portion of the agreement and how that is stipulated in
there.
Clint
Repski: —
Yes, thanks for the question. It is a lot of teachers. When we got the
arbitrator’s report looking at how do you fulfill that obligation, it’s a tall
order. On average Saskatchewan hires around 500 new teachers a year. This is
effectively doubling that over a period of time.
So when we look at article
17, which is what you’re referring to, there is a clause in here that talks
about in the event where you can’t hire. So the expectation for the agreement
and the conversations we’ve had with the school divisions is you need to
attempt to hire these positions as you normally do. If you’re able to staff,
great. If you are unable to staff, those dollars are able to be reallocated to
other provisions. So the money doesn’t sit. It does get reallocated. And that
process, once they’ve given it trying to hire those teachers, you can meet with
your principals, your local, to have that conversation of, okay, if we can’t
hire a teacher what can those resources be used for.
And in the meantime, as we
get our teacher numbers up across the province, that is going to have to be the
provision that’s going to be in place. We are not going to be able to hire that
many teachers this upcoming year, so based on clause 17.6.1, in collaboration,
“the principal and members of the school staff will identify other professional
services to support class complexity in the school.”
So the resources will be
there based on the calculation that the minister had previously spoken to. And
yeah, anyway, we’ll see what we get for teacher hiring. It is a tall order.
Matt
Love: —
Yeah, no doubt it’s something that we’ll continue to pay close attention to
and, you know, anticipate what can be done to address those needs. And in
particular, you know, my colleagues here are reminding me of the impact that
that could have on northern and rural and remote school divisions where
staffing resources, as jobs open up potentially in some of our major centres
and bigger school divisions that . . .
I remember, you know, when I
left the College of Education and had very few classmates at that time who were
saying that they had planned to go and teach in the North. Several of them did
go to do that.
[20:00]
But as teacher positions open
up, certainly I just want to express my concern that this could leave students
in the North without qualified, certified teachers in the classroom, which we
already know is a challenge for Northern Lights and Creighton and, you know,
other northern divisions. So we’ll be watching that closely Minister.
I want to move on to another
question from last week, if I can, that was brought forward by my colleague,
Ms. Senger, who’s sitting next to me. And the question — I just want to revisit
the context of the question — was really a question about classroom complexity
and about the challenges in Saskatchewan to provide an education for all
students. And you know, we have become aware on our side that there are an
increasing number of students who are being denied access to an education in
Saskatchewan through a various number of designations. And school divisions I
think have different terms for these — and my colleague communicated this well
last week — sometimes called deferred enrolment, sometimes called assigned to
home.
And certainly we’ve heard
from divisions that this is a concern. They want to afford every child the
right to education, and yet we’ve been hearing increasing concerns that not
every child is afforded that. And we asked you last week, Minister, if you’ve
heard any of these concerns and you said no, that none of them had come to you.
I’m wondering if you want to revisit that in light that I was at the SSBA
[Saskatchewan School Boards Association] gathering and talked to trustees from
several school divisions last Thursday evening and I asked if any of them had
communicated this to you or to the ministry and all of them said that they had.
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Thanks. I’ll double-check for the member. I don’t believe I said that
specifically. I think, you know . . . I’ll go back and look. I just
took some notes from the questions last week. I think there was a question
around whether I was aware if any specific human rights violations had been
brought to the government’s attention or to my attention. I don’t believe so. I
think my answer at that time was no, I don’t think I had.
But has it been raised with
me as minister about the increased complexity of students, some of the
challenges that divisions and schools face? Certainly. I think last week I
commented, just as an example, having met with Saskatoon Public school division
and Catholic school division, but you know, in particular talking to Saskatoon
Public about some of the increasing numbers that they’ve been seeing in terms
of students that have additional needs. And so we had a discussion about that
around the table with the board members from Saskatoon Public, and then
subsequently toured John Dolan School afterwards as well.
But I would say that, again,
certainly it has been brought up in conversations with the school divisions
that I have met with, and they’ve all kind of spoken to their specific
circumstances within their divisions. Obviously each division’s a bit different,
and each school a little bit different as well in terms of the areas, you know,
and the neighbourhoods that they serve. And some find it more particularly
challenging than others. So I think certainly we’re aware of it and it has been
brought to my attention.
Matt
Love: —
Yeah. And just to be clear, Minister, the concern that we’re raising here with
this question is not just the broad concept of classroom complexity or those
medically complex students that are so wonderful at John Dolan School. And I’ll
mention, probably the best day of work that I have as an MLA [Member of the
Legislative Assembly] is attending their annual track meet at John Dolan
School. It’s the best. It’s a lot of fun.
But the question is about
students who . . . You know, due to a decade of really challenging
budgets the school divisions have worked with, they’re turning students away.
They’re saying, we can’t safely take you in and care for your needs at school;
it’s not safe for you or for others. And that trend is increasing. And what I’m
hearing from divisions, that they’re reporting this. They’re sending this in to
the minister and to the ministry. They’re sending in hard numbers of how many
students they’re having to turn away.
I heard of a division at the
start of September turning away 140 students that they could not accept as
full-time students because they did not have the resources. That’s a big
concern. That is a really big concern. And then that division got to work. They
did everything that they can over time to accept as many of those as they can,
but at the end of the day they could not accept them all, not even part-time.
And so that’s a big concern.
And, Minister, I encourage you to keep your eye on this concern and to listen
to school divisions. Because they want to do what we would all expect they
would want to do, which is provide an education for every child. So I do
encourage you to pay attention to that trend. And I had the same conversation
with the minister last year and encouraged him to pay attention to that trend
as well.
I’m
going to move on to some questions about Jordan’s principle, Minister. My
question is, how many educational assistants are employed in Saskatchewan,
throughout the province, employed through Jordan’s principle funding?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Thanks. We can’t specifically identify which EAs [educational assistant] are
funded through Jordan’s principle. So the way that the process works is that
school divisions will apply directly for the funding from ISC [Indigenous
Services Canada] from the federal government. And then when they receive that
funding, they make those staffing and hiring decisions based on the dollars
that they receive.
It’s my understanding they
don’t report that to us and they don’t indicate, you know, in terms of how many
EAs they have at a particular school division. They don’t break it down by
which EAs are funded by which bucket of funding, I guess, within the overall
total amount of funding they receive.
So yeah, short answer is, we
don’t have a breakdown of how many EAs they’re hiring because, again, it’s an
application by the school division to ISC, and then from there they make their
hiring decisions based on the dollars that are allocated to them.
Matt
Love: —
Would you have any kind of ballpark sense of how many that might be?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Like total number of EAs, or just to speculate on how many might be Jordan’s
principle-funded EAs?
Matt Love: — Yeah,
like is there 500? Is it 1,000? Jordan’s principle EAs. Do we have any kind of
ballpark sense of what there might be?
And
I’ll ask you a second question here while you conference on this. Does your
government take credit for hiring these EAs and having these supports in place
in our school divisions?
[20:15]
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
In terms of number of EAs, I’ll just maybe give a few numbers here for context.
So these are a provincial total number. So again, we don’t have a breakdown of
how many would have been hired by the school divisions through Jordan’s
principle funding. But ’24‑25 year, 4,901 educational assistants; ’23‑24,
it was 4,497; ’22‑23, 4,116; ’21‑22, 3,801; and 2020‑2021,
3,777. So it’s been increasing. The total number of EAs hired by school
divisions in Saskatchewan has been steadily increasing over the past. This goes
back five years including ’24‑25.
The vast majority of the EAs,
and I just chatted with the officials here — and you know, I don’t think we’re
able to give a ballpark — but the vast majority would be hired through
provincial funding. But in terms of again how many would be funded by, and even
just a ballpark, how many would be funded through Jordan’s principle, we don’t
have that information available. Again it’s a direct relationship between the
school divisions and ISC. But again I would say that the vast majority of the
EAs that are hired and funded are funded through provincial dollars.
Matt
Love: —
So, Minister, I’m wondering if you can comment on this phenomenon. You point
out the exact numbers that I have had access to. And what we’ve seen is in our
school system and that education sector staffing profile that you just
referenced, many designations have either flatlined or gone down as student
numbers have increased, including drastic reductions in things like
teacher-librarians, reductions in psychologists, reductions even in classroom
teachers. With 15,000 more students yet a reduction in teachers. But EAs have
increased over the time period as you rightly pointed out.
My concerns is that that
increase in EAs is due to school divisions accessing Jordan’s principle and, as
we’ve seen this past winter, the loss of eight EAs in Saskatoon.
So
I guess my question to you, Minister, is if you and your government are taking
credit for the increased number of EAs working in the system, do you take
responsibility when they lose their jobs?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Thanks for the question. So just for way of context here to the member’s
question, and I think I referenced it a little bit before, but just around
. . . And I think the member too mentioned it in his question around
. . . And I think that, you know, the example given was psychologists
in addition to EAs and other types of professional supports that might be hired
in a particular school division, in a school.
So the ministry provides the
funding to the school divisions with the operating funding. But boards of
education, they have the responsibility to make the decisions on a hiring basis
and based on what they feel works best to accommodate the students they have in
a particular school in their division.
So the divisions then decide
whether they, you know . . . Based on what they’re facing, their
particular school or school division, is it better that they use that funding
to hire a psychologist, or would it be better utilized for EAs? What do they
have for availability perhaps in that community when it comes to those sorts of
professional designations?
So that does speak to the
flexibility that school divisions have to make those locally based decisions
dependent on what they see would be the best use of dollars to provide the
supports needed for students within their schools. So that again kind of speaks
to the school division responsibility.
I would say, you know, that
there has been some work done though, and some of the things that school
divisions have asked for around additional funding for . . . And some
of this is through the multi-year funding agreement. Some of it of course is
through supports for learning, but you know, as an example I think it was the
’23‑24 budget where there was an additional $7 million added into
the funding to go to school divisions specifically for EAs.
And this was asked for. It
was some of the feedback that the ministry and the then minister at the time
was hearing in consultation with school divisions. I think that translates to
about 200 additional EAs if I’m not mistaken, from that specific $7 million
fund. So it speaks to, you know, what we’ve heard in the past and continue to
hear, you know, when we’re meeting with school boards, with trustees, with
divisions, with teachers on the ground in terms of what’s working and where do
they need additional supports.
And that’s why you’re seeing,
you know, the funding increased in record amounts over the past couple of
budget years from this government.
Matt
Love: —
Thanks, Minister. The question was about Jordan’s principle funding, and if you
take credit for EAs will you take responsibility for those folks. So you’re
likely to hear from me in a letter on this matter just so I can get some more
clarity on that. But I do have lots of questions I’d like to get to in our
remaining time here tonight.
You’re a new minister. Will you be
revoking that directive? And when can school divisions expect to resume those
crucial partnerships with third-party educators?
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Thanks to the member. Just for, you know, just way of clarification. There’s no
budget line item for this particular issue or initiative, so it, you know,
doesn’t really specifically relate to the budget. But regardless, the directive
was issued to school divisions in August of ’23 specifying, as the members
would know, that teachers are presenting the sexual health education materials
in the classroom. That directive still remains in effect.
Have
I been meeting with groups who have reached out? Yes, I have. I’ve had the
opportunity to speak to some groups who have wanted to discuss the directive
and whether or not the government plans to change that. So I’ve listened to
those groups and taken their opinions and information that they’ve presented.
I’ve taken that under consideration and thanked them for the time that they’ve
done to do so and will continue to meet with those groups. But for the time
being the directive remains in effect.
Matt
Love: —
Minister, I hope to see that change soon. I’m hoping to get through two final
questions if time permits, so I’m going to move on to a question about the SDLC
[Saskatchewan Distance Learning Centre]. Has the SDLC published its annual
report for last school year as all school divisions are expected to do? If so,
where can it be found? And what is the SDLC per-student funding projected for
’25‑26?
[20:30]
Hon.
Everett Hindley: —
Thanks for the question. Just conferring with the officials from Sask DLC
[Distance Learning Centre]. The annual report hasn’t been completed yet. Expect
it should be done here shortly, so this spring, and it will be published online
and made publicly available. But we expect that to be done here in the
not-too-distant future.
Just
around the per-student funding for ’25‑26, I’ll maybe get the CEO [chief
executive officer] of the Sask DLC, Darren Gasper, to speak to that. At a high
level, I’d just say that my experience with the DLC thus far and some of the
briefings that we have had, and even just in a couple of media events we’ve
done around a couple of the courses, there’s been increasing demand and
enrolment.
We’ve
seen that in the recently announced, in the past year or so, the oil and gas 20
and 30 program, where it has become fully subscribed in a matter of days, if
not much longer than that. And then even today we had an opportunity to spend
some time at Sask Poly, where they had a one-day kind of a learning camp for
high school students to learn about the auto body tech program. And again, it’s
been around for a couple of years, I think, and the numbers there jumping
dramatically.
So
some very good signs when it comes to the enrolment and the interest and the
online availability of courses that can be offered through DLC. But maybe I’ll
just ask Darren if he can shed any more light around the funding arrangement
and how that works for DLC and how it impacts the students.
Darren Gasper: — Yeah. Thank you for
the question, Mr. Love. We don’t have a specific amount per student because our
budget is based on a course tuition collection per course. So for example, it’s
$500 a course at the high school level. So if we have a student that takes
three courses, $1,500 would be invoiced back to that particular school
division.
Matt Love: — So how does that relate to the $18 million in the budget line?
Darren Gasper: — So the
18 million is the base funding through the GRF [General Revenue Fund] for
us, and the remainder of the budget is built through the tuition collection
back from the school divisions.
Chair Weger: — Okay. Having reached our agreed-upon time for consideration of these
estimates, we will now adjourn consideration of the estimates and supplementary
estimates no. 2 for the Ministry of Education. Minister, do you have any
closing comments?
Hon. Everett Hindley: — Thanks, Mr. Chair. Just briefly, thanks to the Ministry of Education
team who are here with us in the room, the committee room here tonight, and
those that are not here but doing the work behind the scenes. We had quite a
team here last week for estimates. So thanks to everyone from the Ministry of
Education for their support day in and day out for the Ministry of Education
and what we’re doing for schools.
Thanks to the committee members and Mr. Love for your time here this
evening, and Ms. Senger and ChiefCalf for your work and questions here tonight.
And we’ve got some follow-up that we’ll try to get to you as quickly as we can
here, particularly around the CBA again. As Deputy Minister Repski indicated,
we’re anticipating in a couple of weeks here, max, that we should have those
numbers communicated to the school divisions and then have that publicly
available for your committee members here as well. So thank you.
Chair Weger: — And Mr. Love, any closing comments?
Matt Love: — Yeah. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I want to thank Minister Hindley and all
the officials who are here tonight and who work in the best interests of our
incredible children and youth in this province each day when you come to work.
You know, we are big fans of publicly funded, delivered education and the work
that our teachers do in the classroom, and work that our trustees and board
Chairs do, and directors and administration. None of that happens without the
work that you do.
So I want to thank you for your service to our province and for joining
us here in the committee tonight. Thank you to Hansard, my fellow committee
members, for all of the time put in to the questions that were brought forward
here and to the work that we’ve accomplished here in this committee. Thanks,
Mr. Chair.
Chair Weger: — Okay. And I will echo all of those same thank yous, and state that
this concludes our business for today. I would ask a member to move a motion of
adjournment.
Kim
Gartner: —
I so move.
Chair
Weger: —
Mr. Gartner has moved. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Weger: —
Okay, carried. This committee stands adjourned to the call of the Chair.
[The
committee adjourned at 20:36.]
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.