CONTENTS

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS

PRESENTING PETITIONS

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

International Women’s Day

Paddockwood Library Serves Its Community

Government’s Job Creation Record

Warman Resident Gives of Herself to Help Others

Saskatchewan Royal Purple Association Helps Those in Need

Status of Women Office and SK Arts Support Women

Government Funding for Education

QUESTION PERIOD

Fuel Tax and Affordability

Contract Negotiations with Teachers

Nuclear Energy and Expenses for International Travel

Government’s Energy Policies

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PRIVATE BILLS

SECOND READINGS

Bill No. 906 — The Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute Amendment Act

SEVENTY-FIVE MINUTE DEBATE

Contract Negotiations with Teachers

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ MOTIONS

Motion No. 3 — Government Policies to Attract Capital Investment

 

 

FOURTH SESSION — TWENTY-NINTH LEGISLATURE

of the

Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan

 

DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS

(HANSARD)

 

N.S. Vol. 65    No. 29A Thursday, March 7, 2024, 10:00

 

[The Assembly met at 10:00.]

 

[Prayers]

 

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

 

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To you and through you, Mr. Speaker, I’d like to introduce Ms. Samantha Becotte and some of her team from the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation joining us here for proceedings today.

 

Now, Mr. Speaker, it’s known that Ms. Becotte and I, we have a couple disagreements on a few different things. But, Mr. Speaker, Ms. Becotte and I probably agree on a few different things: the northwest part of the province is a beautiful part of the province, Mr. Speaker; Saskatchewan is a great place to raise a family; and we agree on the importance of ensuring that our pre-K to 12 [pre-kindergarten to grade 12] education system can be as good as it can be, Mr. Speaker.

 

So I’d like to ask all members to join me in welcoming Ms. Becotte and her team to the legislature today. Thank you.

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — Request leave for an extended introduction.

 

The Speaker: — Leave has been requested for an extended introduction. Is leave granted?

 

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

 

The Speaker: — Carried.

 

Mr. Love: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I’d like to join with the minister in welcoming Samantha Becotte, president of the Teachers’ Federation here to her Assembly. And I want to thank Samantha in particular for her leadership during very challenging times as being a steadfast, strong, passionate voice for our kids, our classrooms, and our teachers.

 

Samantha and I, to my knowledge, didn’t cross paths during my time as a classroom teacher. And when there were elections at the STF [Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation] I reached out to some of my teacher colleagues after she got elected. I said, tell me about her. You know, I’m curious, like when she stepped forward. And they had the most glowing, wonderful words to say about Samantha as a leader of the teachers that were behind her, who elected her into this role, believed in her leadership because she’s got a track record in this province of being that kind of leader that our teachers and our students need to fix things in our classrooms. So I want to thank Samantha for being here with us today in her Assembly. But she’s not alone. She’s joined by other members of the executive and local presidents.

 

So I’d like to introduce a few other members who are up today here, Mr. Speaker, in your gallery. I’d like to introduce Patty Mergel. Patty is the president of the Prairie South Teachers’ Association. She’s a kindergarten teacher. And we had a wonderful chat this morning about the incredible work that kindergarten teachers do. I told a couple stories about my youngest and his experience in kindergarten just last year. So thank you, Patty, for your leadership and for being here today.

 

Christopher Kampman wasn’t able to make it. So I’ve got a list of who was coming, wasn’t able to make it. But Christopher is the president of the Regina Catholic teachers’ association. Melissa Gerlach — oh, behind the clock, who I can’t see from where I’m standing — but thank you, Melissa, for being here as the president of the Regina Public teachers’ association.

 

Bobbi Taillefer is here, the executive director of the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation. Thank you so much for your leadership in this province and the work that you do every day for the teachers of Saskatchewan.

 

And finally Angela Banda, the federation associate executive director in charge of labour relations. Angela is an educator, a former administrator, a principal, who was in Saskatoon Eastview at one point in a school in my constituency. And I want to thank Angela for her leadership, her career in education, the work that she does with the federation.

 

And I understand also Glenna Coleman is with us. There she is. Sorry, I’m still learning faces. But I want to thank Glenna and the entire team of leaders, educators, folks who are in it for the right reasons, to make sure that every child in Saskatchewan has the supports that they need when they arrive at school to succeed in school and beyond for the benefit of our province. Thank you for what you do.

 

I’m going to ask all members to join me in welcoming this delegation to their Assembly.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Nutana.

 

Ms. Ritchie: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to join with the member from Saskatoon Eastview in welcoming the members from the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation here to their Assembly. And in particular I want to give a warm welcome to Angela Banda, who is one of my constituents in Saskatoon Nutana.

 

Certainly I’ve heard from many constituents in my riding who want to see a fair deal for teachers. They want to see classroom size and complexity being part of the bargaining process, and they want to see that their teachers and students are properly supported. And so it’s my great pleasure to welcome Angela to her Assembly.

 

And while I’m on my feet, I also want to take this opportunity to welcome once again my constituency assistant Kerry Schaefer, who is seated in the east gallery this morning. Kerry and I have just returned from a consultation meeting in Swift Current yesterday where we were engaging with a constituent on my private member’s Bill 615, which is a bill to establish a comprehensive wetland policy for Saskatchewan. We’re the only province — in Saskatchewan — without a comprehensive wetland policy.

 

And the work that Kerry is doing to ensure that these consultations are going forward and we can meet and listen and hear from people right across the province about this very important issue, I wouldn’t be able to do it without her able assistance. And I’m very grateful for her support in that work, and I invite all members to join me in welcoming Kerry Schaefer once again to her Legislative Assembly.

 

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

 

Ms. Sarauer: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To you and through you, it’s my honour to rise today to introduce a number of students seated in the east gallery from Arcola School. We have 69 grade 8 students joining us this morning. It’s great to see all of you. You’re accompanied by teachers today: Michael Schienbein, Nicole Roeher, and John Ross.

 

I’m very much looking forward to the opportunity to have a conversation with all of you after question period. Please ask me all the tough questions that you’re thinking of. I hope you have an enjoyable experience in the legislature today, and I ask all members to join me in welcoming them to their Legislative Assembly.

 

PRESENTING PETITIONS

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Fairview.

 

Ms. Mowat: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to present a petition calling on the Government of Saskatchewan to recognize the Timber Bay residential school as a provincially run residential school.

 

These citizens wish to bring to our attention that survivors of the Timber Bay residential school have been denied the Indian residential school settlements that other sites received, on the basis that the school was run by the province of Saskatchewan rather than operated by the federal government; the province of Saskatchewan oversaw 2,000 children attend the school in Timber Bay, which operated between 1952 and 1994; and that Timber Bay residential school is the only residential school in Canada with an open RCMP [Royal Canadian Mounted Police] investigation surrounding historical crimes.

 

I’ll read the prayer:

 

We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan call on the Government of Saskatchewan to recognize the Timber Bay school as a provincially run residential school, release the school records to the survivors, offer the students of the school a formal apology, and compensate the survivors.

 

This is signed by individuals from La Ronge today, Mr. Speaker. I do so present.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Westview.

 

Mr. Buckingham: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We, the undersigned residents of the province of Saskatchewan wish to bring to your attention the following: whereas the Trudeau Liberal-NDP [New Democrat Party] coalition carbon tax is one of the main causes of affordability issues and inflation in the nation of Canada; that the federal Liberal-NDP government was politically motivated in issuing a carve-out for home heating oil; and that the Government of Saskatchewan’s decision to not collect or remit the carbon tax on home heating in Saskatchewan has led to a drop in inflation; further, that despite the decision to not charge the carbon tax on home heating, Saskatchewan families continue to pay that tax out of pocket at the pumps, grocery stores, and more.

 

We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan take the following action: to call upon the Government of Canada to immediately suspend the carbon tax across the nation of Canada and acknowledge its significant impact on affordability and inflation in Canada.

 

The below undersigned are residents of Regina. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon University.

 

International Women’s Day

 

Ms. Bowes: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to recognize March 8th as International Women’s Day, which takes place tomorrow. International Women’s Day is a global holiday that celebrates the social, economic, cultural, and political achievements of women. On International Women’s Day it is imperative to recognize women’s achievements, educate and raise awareness about women’s equality, advocate for positive change advancing women, and lobby for the acceleration of gender parity.

 

Each year International Women’s Day has a different theme. This year’s is Inspire Inclusion. This theme emphasizes strength and diversity, challenging stereotypes, and supporting all women, especially those from marginalized groups and communities. One of the key pillars of this year’s theme is the promotion and advancement of diversity in leadership, because the more diverse perspectives we have, the more successful and equitable our decisions are made.

 

When speaking about International Women’s Day, renowned activist Gloria Steinem once explained, “The story of women’s struggle for equality belongs to no single feminist nor to any one organization, but to the collective efforts of all who care about human rights.”

 

I encourage all members to join me in recognizing March 8th as International Women’s Day and to commit to fighting for gender parity and the advancement of the rights of women and girls in our province, our country, and around the world. Thank you.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatchewan Rivers.

 

Paddockwood Library Serves Its Community

 

Ms. Wilson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In February, the Paddockwood library hosted a tiny art show and gala auction. I attended with about 145 other guests and was fortunate to bring home a beautiful art piece. Local artists contributed 225 pieces of art and community businesses also supported the event, which raised almost $5,000. This was shared evenly before Christopher Lake library, CPL Recreation, and the Paddockwood library. This fundraiser is only one of the many events that are held throughout the year and is a testament to the vision of Paddockwood branch librarian Kyla Fremont.

 

Kyla has made the library the hub of activity for the community. She has bright book displays that guide patrons to their topics of interest, while families can be sure to find fun activity days for their children.

 

Please join me in thanking Kyla Fremont and the many volunteers for keeping the spirit of small-town Saskatchewan alive through their passion for community service. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Regina University.

 

Government’s Job Creation Record

 

Ms. A. Young: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Once again some very odd statements continue to be made in this legislature when it comes to Saskatchewan’s economy. In a statement yesterday, and I’ll quote directly from Hansard, “The province added almost 13,000 jobs in January of ’24 compared to January of ’23.”

 

And now I really hate to be the one to break it to you, Mr. Speaker, but almost 13,000 jobs were not added in January. That was the number of jobs added over the last year. What the labour force survey from StatsCan actually shows is that 6,200 jobs were lost in the month of January.

 

And unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, what is even more concerning is that when you examine the percentage growth in jobs by province between 2018 and 2024, this government has the worst job creation record in Canada. Saskatchewan’s job growth over the last six years averages just over 1 per cent per year — less than a third of PEI [Prince Edward Island]; less than half of Nova Scotia; less than Alberta, Ontario, BC [British Columbia], Newfoundland, New Brunswick, and Quebec.

 

[10:15]

 

Mr. Speaker, this government’s job creation record is that they are the last in Canada between January 2018 and 2024. Now why any government would be proud of the worst job creation record in Canada is hard to understand. But Sask Party math just doesn’t add up.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Martensville-Warman.

 

Warman Resident Gives of Herself to Help Others

 

Mr. Jenson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Saskatchewan residents are known for their kindness and generosity, and one of my constituents is no exception. Ruby Dyck of Warman recently made a significant donation to a couple of causes she believes in.

 

Mr. Speaker, Ruby recently donated $100,000 to the Saskatoon Food Bank & Learning Centre’s Plant Possibility campaign. She also dug a bit deeper and gave the St. Paul’s Hospital Foundation a donation of $200,000.

 

Ruby learned the value of hard work at an early age growing up on the family farm, but eventually moved into town to be closer to school. Mr. Speaker, Ruby met her soulmate and late husband, Richard, in third grade and they became high school sweethearts. Ruby and Richard went on to purchase their own dairy and grain farm, and she gave up her work as a teacher to work alongside Richard full-time on the farm.

 

There is so much more to Ruby and Richard’s story, Mr. Speaker, but it’s important to recognize Saskatchewan residents like Ruby who give of themselves to help others. When asked what she would tell others about the importance of philanthropy and getting involved in fundraising campaigns, she states, and I quote, “Open your heart and give what you’re able to those less fortunate. If you have enough, please share.”

 

Mr. Speaker, these are very wise words, and Ruby Dyck will continue to be an inspiration to us all. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Prince Albert Carlton.

 

Saskatchewan Royal Purple Association Helps Those in Need

 

Hon. Mr. Hargrave: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, 10 years ago after a tragic family snowmobile accident, members from the Saskatchewan Royal Purple Association, Elaine Perkins and Sandi Lougheed, got together to discuss what they could do to help those affected by brain injuries.

 

Ten years later the Royal Purple and the Saskatchewan Brain Injury Association are celebrating their 10‑year anniversary of the BrainLove campaign. The partnership between the Royal Purple and SBIA [Saskatchewan Brain Injury Association] has had a massive impact in Saskatchewan and Canada as a whole, so much so that March is now recognized as BrainLove month.

 

Since the BrainLove campaign began, different Royal Purple clubs in Saskatchewan have raised over $200,000. BrainLove is an initiative to raise funds for the SBIA to allow them to offer their services across the province.

 

BrainLove is not the only campaign the Royal Purple Association undertakes. They also mark the third Thursday of October as Purple Thursday to raise awareness on domestic violence and interpersonal violence. One of the leading causes of brain injuries in women is due to interpersonal violence.

 

Mr. Speaker, the number of Canadians that die from brain injuries every year is absolutely shocking. In fact a Canadian suffers a brain injury every three and a half minutes. I ask all members to join me in congratulating Elaine Perkins, Sandi Lougheed, and the Royal Purple Association and all those who have contributed to their incredible efforts to help those in need. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Lloydminster.

 

Status of Women Office and SK Arts Support Women

 

Ms. C. Young: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Tomorrow is International Women’s Day. It is celebrated each year to recognize the social, economic, cultural, and political achievements of women. This year’s theme is Invest in Women — Accelerate Progress, a reminder that investing in women is the cornerstone of prosperous and inclusive communities.

 

Tomorrow our government will open an art exhibit with SK Arts in the Qu’Appelle Gallery — 40+ Years in the Making: Women and Clay. The work honours women who have significantly contributed to ceramic arts in Saskatchewan and celebrates the remarkable talent of our artists. It will be open until May 6th in the Cumberland Gallery. I encourage everyone to view the work and think about the contributions women have in our province, in our communities, and in this House.

 

Over the last two years the Status of Women office has been working hard for women, negotiating an agreement with the federal government on the national action plan to end gender-based violence, and our partnership with Shoppers Drug Mart to provide more than 12 million free menstrual products to schools and transition houses over the next four years.

 

Our government understands that supporting women is key to improving life for everyone. We look forward to continuing the work that supports women to live safe, healthy, and prosperous lives in our province. Thank you.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatoon Willowgrove.

 

Government Funding for Education

 

Mr. Cheveldayoff: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Fifteen additional teacher-led projects have been approved for funding through the Teacher Innovation and Support Fund. This brings an additional $452,000 in funding to support the new ideas that teachers around the province are developing. Mr. Speaker, we’ve allocated $860,000 directly to this fund since its inception in January, and that’s all included in the additional $53.1 million that we provided this year to support our classrooms.

 

Here’s some examples of what teacher-led projects we’re funding: Saskatchewan Rivers School Division is piloting a hands-on visual math program to help students increase their numeracy skills. Holy Trinity is using their funding to develop a professional development project for teachers to improve their math-teaching skills. Saskatoon Public is working with their staff to provide students with experience in industry-level carpentry training and certification. Regina Public is developing a project that provides English as an additional language learning resources for students. These are just a few of the many great ideas that we’re funding.

 

Our Premier also made an exciting announcement yesterday. The 2024‑2025 budget will include $2.2 billion in school operating funding, the largest increase in Saskatchewan history, and over $356 million will be dedicated to classroom supports, a 15 per cent increase.

 

Mr. Speaker, we’re always ready to work with our partners in education, and these announcements show just that.

 

QUESTION PERIOD

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Leader of the Opposition.

 

Fuel Tax and Affordability

 

Ms. Beck: — Mr. Speaker, this tired and out-of-touch government clearly isn’t focused on the things that matter most to Saskatchewan people. Instead we see them focused on picking fights and taking flights. Let’s look at offering some relief for Saskatchewan people who are struggling with the cost of living.

 

Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, we saw the Premier and we saw that whole caucus give a standing ovation for the SaskPower minister’s $3,500 private Mercedes chauffeur in Paris. But, Mr. Speaker, when Saskatchewan families asked for some relief on their fuel bills, to that the Sask Party says, let them eat cake.

 

But I’ll try again, Mr. Speaker. Will the Premier finally give Saskatchewan people a break on their fuel tax?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Deputy Premier.

 

Hon. Ms. Harpauer: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I found it interesting, yesterday the Leader of the Opposition said, and I quote, “leaders lead.” But when it comes to affordability, the Leader of the Opposition’s only policy is a temporary pause on collecting the gas tax that pays for the roads in this province, Mr. Speaker, a policy that was first proposed over two years ago under Ryan Meili. That leader has failed to come up with a single policy of her own. No leadership. Just the same old NDP that would crash our economy.

 

On this side of the House, under our Premier’s leadership, we are leading Canada in affordability for a family of four. Regina is leading the nation in terms of housing affordability. We are among the lowest in Canada for personal income tax. We removed 112,000 people off of the income tax roll entirely. We’re leading Canada in capital investment, and we led Canada in GDP [gross domestic product] growth. While Saskatchewan leads Canada, the opposition member continues to follow the policies of the failed NDP leaders Jagmeet Singh and Ryan Meili.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Leader of the Opposition.

 

Contract Negotiations with Teachers

 

Ms. Beck: — Mr. Speaker, speaking of the spokesperson for “let them eat cake.” This tired and out-of-touch government needs to focus on what matters to Saskatchewan people, things that matter like our kids’ classrooms. Teachers, like those who are here today, Mr. Speaker, are fighting for a better deal that includes class size and includes complexity.

 

Now the Premier yesterday announced on Twitter that he’s willing to make an investment. Will he bargain in good faith and put that into a contract so that he can be held to account for his newest promises?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There was a significant announcement yesterday, a significant announcement that this next year’s provincial budget is going to see the largest ever increase to school operating funding in Saskatchewan history — $180 million. But that $180 million is going to be going to our 27 school divisions, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, that Leader of the Opposition, a former trustee herself — other former trustees on that side of the House and as well on this side of the House — with that position, with negotiating into the contract, did she consult with the SSBA [Saskatchewan School Boards Association]? Did she consult with 27 school boards? Because that’s not what school boards are telling me, Mr. Speaker, and I’m out there listening to school boards.

 

Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation to return to the bargaining table so that we can get a fair agreement so that our teachers and students can be back in the classrooms.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Leader of the Opposition.

 

Ms. Beck: — Mr. Speaker, I know the minister is new here, but he’s got a few things to learn. Now teachers say that they don’t believe that a promise made by this government will actually be kept. And, Mr. Speaker, I don’t blame them.

 

Let’s look at what happened to NORTEP [northern teacher education program]. The Premier signed a multi-year funding deal to keep NORTEP running. The then Justice minister swooped in, ripped up the deal, and closed the program. That’s just one example, Mr. Speaker.

 

Teachers know that a deal with the Premier’s signature on it isn’t worth the paper that it’s written on, and they know that the only way to secure those classroom supports that are so needed in this province is to get them in a contract. I’d get the deal done, Mr. Speaker. Why can’t the Premier say the same?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — Mr. Speaker, one of the most significant commitments that our provincial government makes to the people of this province every single year is the budget. We’re going to be announcing the budget on March the 20th.

 

But the Premier made the unprecedented step of announcing the largest ever increase to school operating funding yesterday, Mr. Speaker. That is in addition to other additions that we’ve made over the last year. Just since the beginning of January, we’ve added dollars for pilot projects that we just highlighted in a member statement. We’ve added money for additional classroom space in some of the fastest growing communities in our province, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to bargaining and getting an agreement done for our kids, this government has moved. This government has provided a renewed mandate that includes provisions around workplace safety, annualization of classroom supports funding, the provision for the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation to manage their own dental plan, and a salary offer that accounts for cost of living, Mr. Speaker.

 

It is time for the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation to return to the table, so we can get a fair agreement done for students and teachers.

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — Mr. Speaker, this completely tired and out-of-touch government would rather bargain through the media, bargain on Twitter and Facebook, bargain on the radio and on billboards than to meet with the teachers who are here today. This is a government that is more interested in stoking division and scoring political points than actually doing the work of governing.

 

Saskatchewan people deserve better. Our teachers and our kids certainly deserve better. They deserve a deal that includes classroom size and complexity. Will the minister finally stop the division, get back to the bargaining table, and negotiate on classroom size and complexity?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — Mr. Speaker, let’s just chat about a couple things here. Number one, as I’ve visited the school divisions all across the province, the sentiment has been clear from our locally elected school board members that they do not want class size and complexity in a provincially bargained agreement, Mr. Speaker. Government agrees with that. That is the local voice in education, Mr. Speaker.

 

Now when it comes to classroom supports, Mr. Speaker, we’ve added dollars in-year, as I specified in my last answer, and we have committed to a 15 per cent increase in classroom supports funding in the next provincial budget.

 

The job of the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation, Mr. Speaker, is to represent their members at the bargaining table and get a deal done on salary and benefits so that their members can be in the classroom.

 

Bargaining for 30 minutes over five months is not going to get the job done, Mr. Speaker. Teachers and students deserve better. We, as a government, and people of Saskatchewan expect better, Mr. Speaker. It’s time for the federation to return to the table and get an agreement done.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon Eastview.

 

Mr. Love: — Mr. Speaker, I’ll remind the minister that last year after the budget, those 27 school divisions told this government that they were, and I quote — I can’t say this but they can — that this government was “misleading the public.”

 

Mr. Speaker, spending public dollars on a luxury chauffeur service while Saskatchewan people are struggling to pay their bills doesn’t fly with Saskatchewan people. But this should come as no surprise to this tired and out-of-touch government that geared up for a fight against teachers by vilifying them through a public billboard campaign, billboards set up across the province paid for by public dollars.

 

[10:30]

 

Mr. Speaker, did the minister really think that a public billboard campaign would weaken public support for teachers?

 

The Speaker: — I would like the member to apologize and withdraw that comment that you made.

 

Mr. Love: — I apologize and withdraw.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, in response to that question, what this government has put out there, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that we have a fair deal on the table for teachers.

 

At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, this is a province that according to Statistics Canada — remember it’s been said in this House that StatsCan doesn’t lie — Statistics Canada says that Saskatchewan invests more per capita in K to 12 [kindergarten to grade 12] education than any other province in Canada.

 

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to our teachers that do important and good work every single day in classrooms all across the province, our Saskatchewan teachers are paid above their Western Canadian counterparts. What we’ve put on the table is a fair offer. We want to get an agreement done. We’ve moved on several items, closer to the union’s mandate, Mr. Speaker.

 

Again teachers and students belong in the classrooms; they belong in the gym, Mr. Speaker. We owe it to our kids. We’ve seen what disruptions in the classroom do, over the last several years. That is not what we want to repeat, Mr. Speaker. It is time for union leadership to come back to the bargaining table.

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — Mr. Speaker, vilifying teachers, one of the most well-respected professions in this province, is a new low for this tired and out-of-touch Sask Party government. And it turns out that that was their plan all along.

 

They were in contact with an advertising firm to discuss their anti-teacher billboard campaign back in June. This was before proposals were even presented at the table. Now between July and November they spent more than $145,000 of public money on those anti-teacher billboards.

 

Mr. Speaker, how can this minister justify spending $145,000 of public funds on anti-teacher billboards?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — Mr. Speaker, as I stated in my last answer to the same member, what we have put forward is a fair offer for teachers to respect the good and important work that they do in classrooms all across this province every single day.

 

Mr. Speaker, teachers in this province are paid above the Western Canadian average. Our province invests more per capita than any other province in education across the country. We’re adding to that in this next provincial budget, with a $180 million increase in school operating funding, the largest ever in the province, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, if this is really about kids and not about politics, it’s time for the union leadership to come back to the bargaining table so we can make sure students and teachers are back in the classroom.

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — Mr. Speaker, it’s a shocking display from this minister who is so completely out of touch with the realities our kids and teachers face. He proves it every time he stands up, Mr. Speaker.

 

Now this Minister of Education likes to talk about respecting board autonomy, but under this tired and out-of-touch government, the only autonomy that local boards have had is the autonomy to choose every year what gets cut due to insufficient and underfunding from this Sask Party government.

 

Teachers deserve a deal that will address class size and complexity. Why doesn’t he have the guts to put it in the contract where he can be held to account?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.

 

Hon. Mr. Cockrill: — You know, again, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to speak with board chairs across the province yesterday and talk about the largest ever operating increase that’s coming in this next year’s provincial budget, Mr. Speaker, to the 27 school divisions across the province.

 

I’ve spent the last several months touring the province, Mr. Speaker, meeting with school divisions in their hometowns, meeting with our locally elected school board members. As I said previously, that Leader of the Opposition, a former trustee herself, is going against what boards are saying all across the province. Is she now disagreeing with school boards all across the province? Is she disagreeing with school boards in her own community, Mr. Speaker?

 

Again, Mr. Speaker, if this is about kids and not politics, the union leadership needs to come back to the bargaining table.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Regina University.

 

Nuclear Energy and Expenses for International Travel

 

Ms. A. Young: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Day after day we see how very far this government has fallen. Ten years ago when Brad Wall was premier, a private chauffeur touring you around a European capital, it resulted in contrition, repayment, and demotion. But those days are long gone and so is Premier Wall. And this Premier, Mr. Speaker, is no Brad Wall.

 

Instead of a humble apology, what did we see yesterday, Mr. Speaker? We saw every member of this government stand up and give a standing ovation to using public money to tour around Paris. Mr. Speaker, people hate this. Why can’t the Sask Party admit that this was a mistake? Do they really think the average person is applauding their entitlement?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Crown Investments Corporation.

 

Hon. Mr. Duncan: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The van service that was used by our delegation — used by government while we are overseas and used by the former NDP government, including when they were in Paris, which is not unusual — it was used by our delegation to take us to the convention centre, to take us to the embassy, to take us to our hotel, and to take us to the airport, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, while we were there we were able to engage with over 15 meetings and engagements, Mr. Speaker, with organizations, both government and non-government to ensure that Saskatchewan has a role and a place at the table when it comes to ensuring that nuclear power is going to be a part of the energy mix for the world.

 

And we saw that just days later at COP [Conference of the Parties] when over 20 countries indicated that they would be signing on to tripling nuclear energy, Mr. Speaker. I can say Ontario, New Brunswick, and Alberta want to be at those tables. We have a choice. We can be at those tables, Mr. Speaker, or we can fall behind like the NDP would want us . . .

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Regina University.

 

Ms. A. Young: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Part of why former premier Wall was so popular with Saskatchewan people was that he was sometimes able to admit when he made a mistake. He knew that the people of Saskatchewan had no tolerance for wasting public money. That’s why June Draude paid the money back. That’s why Rick Mantey was demoted.

 

But, Mr. Speaker, the Sask Party has changed. The entitlement, the arrogance, Mr. Speaker, you can warm your hands on it. So how, how did the Sask Party become so tired and out-of-touch with Saskatchewan people?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Crown Investments Corporation.

 

Hon. Mr. Duncan: — Yes, Mr. Speaker, I recall the fondness and devotion that the NDP had for Brad Wall. Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the van service that was used by our delegation, which has been used when we are overseas . . . I know the member opposite suggested that perhaps we walk, perhaps we rent a car in a city, a metro area of 11 million people. I don’t think the people of Saskatchewan think that that is reasonable, Mr. Speaker.

 

The van service, Mr. Speaker, was used to take us to the convention, to take us to the embassy, to take us to our hotel, and to take us to the airport. Anything that we did on personal time was paid for out of our own pockets.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Regina University.

 

Ms. A. Young: — Mr. Speaker, this is a government that loves to talk about things that happened in the past — 2006, choices that were made by an older government. So yeah, let’s go. Because you know what, Mr. Speaker, I am interested in what happened in 2007 when hope beat fear, when a scrappy opposition with an energetic and charismatic leader, you know, changed things up a little bit. And I’m excited for what’s happening next fall.

 

So, Mr. Speaker, to the members opposite, let’s live in the now. People are struggling. Mortgages are in arrears. People can’t pay their bills. Do they realize how tired and out of touch they’ve gotten, Mr. Speaker, under this Premier’s watch?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Crown Investments Corporation.

 

Hon. Mr. Duncan: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I can tell you what the people of Saskatchewan are excited about. They’re excited about the fact that this province is embarking upon a path to ensure that Saskatchewan is going to be further in the nuclear value-added chain, something that we had the opportunity as a province but was squandered by the NDP. And those jobs, those jobs went to Ontario. They went to other jurisdictions, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, there’s an opportunity for us now. We’re looking at deploying the BRWX 300 technology in the coming years to be a part of nuclear power generation not only for Saskatchewan, but also for countries like Poland, Mr. Speaker, also like countries like the Czech Republic.

 

There’s an opportunity that we can grow that economy here in Saskatchewan to not only provide those jobs and that supply chain for our projects here in Saskatchewan should we choose to build that, Mr. Speaker, but also for other Canadian jurisdictions as well as, projects that are going to be built around that world. We want to be involved in that. We want to see the benefit here for people to be able to work and stay in Saskatchewan, Mr. Speaker. Why would they . . .

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Regina University.

 

Ms. A. Young: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. To his credit the Minister for SaskPower used to have pretty good political judgment, and he was an MLA [Member of the Legislative Assembly] when June Draude had to repay the cost of her car service.

 

He knows that a $3,500 chauffeur doesn’t sit right, so why hasn’t he apologized? Is it the leadership of this tired and out-of-touch government or is it the fact that the Premier’s inner circle isn’t going to let him? This new version of the Sask Party — Mr. Speaker, so tired, so out of touch — they never say sorry. They never back down. They never admit when they’ve made a mistake.

 

So, Mr. Speaker, to the SaskPower minister: why won’t he do what he knows to be right and apologize for sticking the taxpayers with the bill for his private tour of Paris?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Crown Investments Corporation.

 

Hon. Mr. Duncan: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As I said before, the use of the van service is not unusual when we’re travelling in foreign capitals, Mr. Speaker, in European capitals or other jurisdictions.

 

It is the same type of service that was provided, frankly at a higher cost, when Mr. Calvert and Mr. Cline travelled in 2006, when you adjust those dollars to today’s dollars, Mr. Speaker. In that case, the members opposite would know that they arranged for a four-hour sightseeing tour of Paris using that service.

 

We did not do that, Mr. Speaker. The van service was used to provide our travel to the convention centre, to the hotel, to the airport, as well as to the embassy. The member opposite has suggested that we walk. Mr. Speaker, the hotel to the embassy is 35 kilometres. I don’t think people would think that that is reasonable. She suggested that we rent a car for the group of four of us. Mr. Speaker, I think that that would also be seen as unreasonable in a city of 11 million people.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatchewan Rivers.

 

Government’s Energy Policies

 

Ms. Wilson: — Mr. Speaker, the Sask Party’s new mantra is build and protect, after they realized there wasn’t any growth and it wasn’t working for anyone. Their net zero by 2050 agenda definitely isn’t build and protect; it’s more like wreck and neglect.

 

The Saskatchewan people are blessed with a province rich in God-given natural resources, sitting on a gold mine of affordable and reliable energy, not just for Saskatchewan but for all our neighbours as well. Yet this Saskatchewan Party government wants to shut down coal, shut down natural gas, and is dumping billions into failed green projects.

 

Can this government find their feet, stand before this Assembly and the Saskatchewan people, and reject this destructive policy of net zero by 2050?

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Crown Investments Corporation.

 

Hon. Mr. Duncan: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I just want to perhaps correct the member opposite. It’s really the Government of Canada, the Liberal government, supported by the NDP, who want to shut down coal, who want to shut down natural gas, Mr. Speaker, and want to put this province in a position where . . . We saw just a couple of months ago in Alberta, where we frankly had to have an all-of-the-above solution to help out our neighbours to the west, who had an emergency situation where people nearly didn’t have heat to heat their homes in the middle of the wintertime, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is correct in one thing: we are abundantly blessed with resources in this province. And that’s why we’re working so hard to be a part of the nuclear fuel cycle. That’s why when you look at companies like Cameco and Orano, Mr. Speaker . . . We sit on the second-largest reserve of uranium in the world. That’s why when we go to conferences like COP and we go to conferences like the global nuclear expo, Mr. Speaker, the eyes of the world are on Saskatchewan.

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Saskatchewan Rivers.

 

Ms. Wilson: — Mr. Speaker, I am tired of the misdirection and the doublespeak from the Sask Party government. The member from Cypress Hills stood up and led us to believe that the Sask Party government is pro-coal and pro-natural gas.

 

[10:45]

 

Mr. Speaker, this government’s stated objective in their published documents is to kill — to kill — our coal and natural gas with net zero by 2050 and replace it with wind and solar, which they know won’t work. Are they just plain ignorant, or are they straight-up gaslighting and lying to the public about their agenda?

 

The Speaker: — I ask the member from Saskatchewan Rivers to withdraw and apologize for inflammatory and unparliamentary language.

 

Ms. Wilson: — I will not apologize for this government’s lying.

 

The Speaker: — I ask the member one more time to withdraw and apologize.

 

Ms. Wilson: — I will not apologize for their lying.

 

The Speaker: — One last time, will the member withdraw and apologize?

 

Ms. Nadine Wilson, I hereby name you for disregarding the authority of the Chair. Pursuant to rule 57(2), the member is suspended from the service of the Assembly for the remainder of the sitting day. I ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove the member.

 

Why is the member on his feet?

 

Mr. Buckingham: — Requesting leave for an introduction.

 

The Speaker: — The member from Westview has asked for leave to do an introduction. Is leave granted?

 

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

 

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS

 

Mr. Buckingham: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it’s my pleasure to introduce, sitting in the west gallery, Mathew Fox. Give us a wave, Mathew. Mathew joined the caucus office in December as one of our researchers, and he is doing a fantastic job. He also worked in the office of the Minister of SaskBuilds and Procurement. He’s been a great addition to our office, to say the least.

 

Mathew is here along with his political science class. Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members to join me in welcoming these post-secondary students and Matt to his Legislative Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

ORDERS OF THE DAY

 

PRIVATE BILLS

 

SECOND READINGS

 

Bill No. 906 — The Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute Amendment Act

 

The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Yorkton.

 

Mr. Ottenbreit: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m very happy to rise today to move second reading of Bill 906, The Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute Amendment Act.

 

The governance committee of Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute has been reviewing their governance documents for many years and, as a result, recommendations were made to the board of regents to propose some amendments to the Act. The board unanimously supported the amendments that were presented to the members at a corporation meeting on July 15th, 2022. The proposed amendments were overwhelmingly supported by 94 per cent.

 

Founded in 1911, the original charter aimed to create a Christian school that was broadly based and rooted in Lutheran heritage. The founders stressed their intent to provide an ecumenical environment which would welcome, educate, and inspire its students.

 

These governance reforms will enable a more flexible and responsive framework; allow the school to fulfill its founders’ educational, ecumenical, and ministry aspirations more effectively; nourish newer growth within the school community while remaining loyal to the vibrant vision of the founders and the church; strengthen the relationship between the corporation and the school; retain ties to the ELCIC [Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada] through a common statement of faith and involvement of the ELCIC, or the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada congregations while also allowing for more ecumenical support; improve connections with the alumni and the memberships; and increase the ability to recruit new members.

 

Mr. Speaker, it was also crucial for the LCBI [Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute] annual general meeting to be held more frequently. Part of the amendments will allow the corporation to meet annually rather than every three years at an Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada convention. This will encourage a larger turnout among members and ensure that the LCBI reflects its independence from the Lutheran Church of Canada.

 

Mr. Speaker, the college and the others have done some excellent work on this front to modernize the institution and ensure it’s responsive to its membership.

 

So at this time I move that Bill 906, The Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute Amendment Act now be read a second time.

 

The Speaker: — It has been moved that Bill No. 906, The Lutheran Collegiate Bible Institute Amendment Act be now read a second time. Is the Assembly ready for the question?

 

Some Hon. Members: — Question.

 

The Speaker: — Is it the pleasure of the Assembly to adopt the motion?

 

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

 

The Speaker: — Carried.

 

Deputy Clerk: — Second reading of this bill.

 

The Speaker: — Pursuant to rule 104, this bill stands committed to the Standing Committee on Private Bills.

 

SEVENTY-FIVE MINUTE DEBATE

 

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

 

Contract Negotiations with Teachers

 

Mr. Love: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my honour to be on my feet and to bring forward this motion. At the end of my time, I’ll be bringing forward this motion about the need for this government to negotiate a fair deal with the teachers of Saskatchewan to ensure, to ensure that there’s a way forward for our students to get what they need when they arrive at school, that teachers are supported, that our schools have the resources available for every child to succeed at school and beyond.

 

I believe that there’s a way forward in this manner, and I believe that this tired and out-of-touch government has refused to listen to the options that are before them by engaging in productive good-faith bargaining with the teachers of Saskatchewan that will, in the end, benefit our young people, our children, and our youth — Saskatchewan students.

 

Now I want to start by talking a little bit, Mr. Deputy Speaker, about why I got into politics. And I’ve talked about this in this Assembly quite a bit. I think everyone here knows that I’ve spent a lot of time, 17 years, in our education system, either working or training as a teacher. Seventeen years, ten of that was spent as a public school teacher.

 

During that time, I coached junior and senior football, I did a little bit of track and field coaching, a little bit of basketball, worked at times with our GSA [gay-straight alliance] at my school, worked with a number of different clubs, and of course taught a program for grade 9s that I poured — like many teachers do — my heart and soul into.

 

I love teaching. I didn’t get into politics because I wanted to get out of the classroom. I went into politics because I love the classroom and I love the profession. I love the life of a school and everything that makes our schools a rich place and a great place for young people to be in Saskatchewan, to grow up. Really that, you know, raised-by-a-village mentality; working with parents and caregivers, I always valued that as a teacher. Working with my colleagues in the profession, working with students, building up young leaders that our province and our world needs.

 

I love teaching. I didn’t want a way out, but I saw a system of young people who grew up only knowing cuts, students who didn’t know any different, of diminishing resources every year there to support them.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, in the year that I decided to pursue a nomination and to be elected as an MLA, there was a moment when I decided. It was a Friday afternoon staff meeting — and any teacher knows if they call a staff meeting Friday at 3:45 it’s usually not for good things — and it was in that meeting that my school leadership detailed what the cuts would be due to an insufficient provincial budget and how that would impact our school.

 

At that meeting school leaders detailed that we would be losing our teacher-librarian, somebody who I’d worked with extensively over the years; that we would be losing, despite having more students new to English, more EAL [English as an additional language] students in my school, our teacher would be reduced from full-time to half-time. And when that teacher was reduced, those supports that she could provide before school, at lunch, and after school were lost because she had to change between two different schools throughout the day and her classroom wasn’t open for students to come there for help.

 

I saw a reduction in front-office staff and the incredible, valuable role that those school staff play in the life of a school. It was heartbreaking to see these reductions. And of course we saw classes get bigger and bigger. More complex needs and fewer supports.

 

I checked in with some of those colleagues in preparation for this debate, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I had a colleague that year who was teaching grade 12 level math, math 30, to 45 students at a time. And I would ask the members opposite if 45 students in one classroom is acceptable in any way. Of course it isn’t. I checked in with that teacher and she described teaching only 30 students right now in one of her classes, which seems like a whole lot different than when she had 45. But I would submit that 30 students is still too much.

 

This is an excellent teacher. She is phenomenal. But the workload that she has before her is too much for one teacher to handle. She recognized the diminishing supports that are there for those students who are struggling and need a little bit of extra support that she just simply cannot give.

 

I’ve also been clear that during my time as a teacher I also lost a student to suicide. And we know that the incredible mental health crisis that is on our hands with young people has gone largely unsupported by this government, even throughout the pandemic as we emerged. And we saw other provinces provide supports for our students who are coming back to in-person learning. We actually saw this government diminish supports through their insufficient budgets for education.

 

Now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the reality is that in our classrooms the numbers don’t lie. I’d like to go through some of the history that these members like to forget, but is their record when it comes to education. This is their record, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

Since the 2016‑17 budget we have grown in this province by 15,254 new students. More students in our classrooms . . . I hear “Hear, hear!” Thanks for celebrating that, to the members opposite. New students is good, but that member should know that those 15,254 new students are being served by one additional full-time teacher.

 

No one in this Assembly or in this province should agree that that is acceptable by any means. So to that member opposite who is celebrating, I ask him to keep an open mind and to think honestly, think honestly. Is this acceptable in any way for him to celebrate his government’s record of 15,000 new students and one additional teacher?

 

He should also know that during that same span, with more than 15,000 new students, we have seven fewer social workers working in our schools. We have three and a half fewer occupational therapists, 27 fewer counsellors, while the mental health needs of our students are recognized by all. This government has provided fewer supports for those students. So when I lose a student to suicide, and this government pats themselves on the back as if they’re doing the job that they’ve been elected to do, they should be ashamed of that record.

 

Twenty-seven fewer counsellors, with 15,254 more students. That’s 11 fewer psychologists working in our schools during that same time.

 

The numbers continue. These numbers come from the Teachers’ Federation. Since that same year until this year, in our schools we have a near‑10‑per-cent reduction in EAL students. While we see wonderful newcomers come to our province seeking a better life, wanting to contribute here, they want their young people to have the supports they need when they get to school. More EAL students, nearly 10 per cent fewer EAL teachers — that is their record.

 

We have nearly 80 per cent reduction in teacher-librarians during that same time period. The list goes on and on. We have a 23.5 per cent reduction in speech language pathologists. I mean, I could keep going and reciting these numbers. This is their record.

 

And so this is the reason that teachers are standing up, saying enough is enough. Our kids need supports when they get to school, and they’re not getting it from this tired and out-of-touch Sask Party government.

 

Unfortunately the response to these statistics and these numbers from this government, well they tell their own story. Instead of addressing the problems in a way that improves outcomes for our students, they celebrate their achievements, pat themselves on the back. And it’s an act that has grown old, and I think people simply aren’t buying it any longer.

 

Let’s look at a little bit of history, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In February of 2015 a new contract was signed with teachers. It made promises and commitments that this government negotiated at the table.

 

[11:00]

 

And then in April of 2016 there was an election, and yes, they formed government again after that election. And immediately after forming government, they announced a budget on June 1st of that year, a budget that only funded half of what they agreed to in contract just one year earlier.

 

Now while we have three former Education ministers on that side who are jumping ship and don’t want to remain doing this work, three of them, we have their words that we can rely on. And, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I’d like to rely on some of those words, as long as I can find the right page to quote from. The then Education minister . . . I’d like to read from an article published on June 14th of 2016. I’ll quote it directly:

 

Education minister Don Morgan told reporters that tough economic conditions forced the government to reduce its contribution. “We’re paying for approximately half the increase. To fund it all the way across the province would cost 18 million, and we’re paying nine of that. We’re saying to divisions, look inward and look to other divisions to find savings, look for economies.”

 

So there you have it, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They agreed to something and then they failed to fund it. And their solution was to make our classrooms bigger and more complex. Instead of funding the contract that they agreed to, their solution is to make our teachers and our students pay the price. That is wrong. That is wrong, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

And why is it any wonder that today we have teachers in Saskatchewan looking at that history and casting doubt on this government’s willingness, willingness to put things in contract that should have been there in 2016? Because the first chance they had, they walked back on that agreement. Anything that wasn’t in contract they failed to fund, and our kids and our teachers are the ones who paid the price.

 

Well later that year into October, our current leader, who was then Education critic, she detailed what impact these cuts were having. This government’s failure to fully fund the contract and to wilfully make our classrooms more complex was detailed right here in this Assembly. And I’ll read from an article published on October 24th of 2016. What I’m getting at here, Mr. Deputy Speaker, what was this government’s response to seeing the evidence of their failure to invest in education? Well again I’ll quote directly:

 

In a debate Thursday, Young said children’s lack of support “can only be laid back on school boards not making appropriate decisions which are in the best interest of students.”

 

Can you believe it? This government that failed to invest in education turn around, and the member from Lloydminster blamed it on school divisions, not her government who failed to abide by the contract that they signed. She blamed it on school divisions. Well in that debate our leader said, and I’ll quote again:

 

We’re at a tipping point. School boards and educators work really hard to keep those impacts out of the classroom, but what I’m hearing is they’re not able to do it anymore. The provincial government negotiated a contract with teachers three years ago; in its June budget, it opted to fund half of the increases.

 

Later in that debate in the Assembly, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite heckled. When our leader detailed one school division that was cutting 74 positions, she was interrupted by heckles by members opposite who said, “their choice.” They blamed school boards for the problem that they created. This was in 2016. Since that time the situation has only grown worse, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

We get insight into their perspective: underfund education; send funds to private schools, who by the way have a history of abuse, a legacy of abuse; underfund our public, separate, and fransaskois school divisions to the point where teachers are on the picket line to stand up for their working conditions because their working conditions are our students’ learning conditions. They go hand in hand.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, this government’s own history in government gives teachers every reason to believe that if it isn’t in contract, it isn’t worth a thing. It’s their history, and their former leader, Premier Brad Wall, used to say that the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. And that’s why they need to be held to account.

 

Mr. Speaker, I’ll read the motion that I submit now:

 

That the Assembly calls upon the government to negotiate a fair deal with the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation that provides adequate and predictable resources to address the challenges of class size and complexity while respecting the autonomy of locally elected school boards.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, there’s a way forward if this government is willing to do the work to meet with teachers, to keep that autonomy and decision making with the local boards. Thank you.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — The member from Saskatoon Eastview has moved:

 

That this Assembly calls upon the government to negotiate a fair deal with the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation that provides adequate and predictable resources to address the challenges of class size and complexity while respecting the autonomy of locally elected school boards.

 

Is the Assembly ready for the question? I recognize the member from Melfort.

 

Mr. Goudy: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I appreciate being able to enter into the debate today. And I just want to make note too, I appreciate the fact that there was no condemning the government for not doing this or doing that this time. I appreciate that. But I did have to re-read it a few times to wonder what we were getting at here.

 

And so I love this predictable resources piece, especially today when we’re hearing that there’s, you know, $53 million being put towards the classroom growth and complexity. The member from Saskatoon Eastview had mentioned, and I appreciate the fact that he spent time in the classroom and, you know, his perspective from those years in serving our children.

 

But I would like today to speak a little bit about the fact that both sides of the House have connections to teachers and friends. My daughter, funny enough, last night she was up doing an online class and marking papers. She’s in her last year of education. I’ve got three nephews and nieces who are teachers, and multiple friends. And you know, there’s members on that side of the House who are voted for by trustees in your constituency. And there’s members on this House who had trustees vote for us as well. So I think it’s important for us to realize that it’s not about who has more care and concern for teachers. We all need to pull in the same direction, I think, in this case.

 

And you know, when you look at what the teachers do socially, I look back at my own life and I would say that, outside of my parents and our close friends, some of my teachers were the most important people in my life. And you know, when I look at my children’s lives, it’s the same thing.

 

So I don’t think that anyone in this Chamber would ever disrespect the role and the responsibilities, and to be able to say how much we appreciate teachers in this province. It’s not just that. But as a growing economy, we also need an education system that can be K [kindergarten] to career and help us build that workforce for the future of Saskatchewan. And we see our teachers playing such a vital, important role in that.

 

Mr. Speaker, I want to say, as I was preparing . . . And I had made a comment earlier on. I was a little stirred up this week from some of the comments made in the Chamber. I sit back here quiet. But you know, sometimes I do get stirred up. And I mentioned something, and somebody said to me, you know, don’t throw stones when you live in a glass house. And so I would say about all of us in this Chamber, we live in a glass house here. All of us. And that’s the way it should be. Like, people get to see what goes on. We’re the ones they trust and they elected to come down here.

 

And you know, so I did on your behalf, I printed off something from when the tables were turned. So I was looking . . . And Rod Gantefoer is probably the best MLA from Melfort we’ve . . . Well you know, that guy, he’s done a great job. I talked with him on the phone yesterday. And I was up last night reading some Hansard stuff. The guy was eloquent. My goodness, he was eloquent. And funny enough, on that day, April 18th, 2005, there were some people in the gallery, and he spoke to them as some of the teachers:

 

. . . I think we as a society understand very well that teachers are the custodians of the hopes and dreams of our children for the future not only insofar as participants in a democracy but as citizens of the province, of Canada, and of the world.

 

The guy was eloquent.

 

But he did take your government to task a little bit when you were trying to negotiate with the teachers of your day. And like you know, it’s funny how things change so that now . . . I think at that point, from what I see in the document, is that you were offering zero, one, and one, as far as, you know, increases in salaries. And yet it landed I think, you know, to give you the right words, you landed at two, two, and two.

 

And so you know, I think this side of the House was fighting with your side of the House. And you know, I wouldn’t say that things had descended into casting dispersions, but there was certainly an opposition trying to show that maybe at that point the NDP government wasn’t doing a good job in negotiating with the STF and listening to the teachers and understanding what’s going on in the classroom. So there’s always some of that.

 

But, Mr. Speaker, today I heard again that we were vilifying teachers. The Deputy Premier actually had said too that, concerning a document that our Premier’s signature would be on, isn’t worth the paper that it’s written on.

 

Those kinds of things are being said, and you know, Mr. Speaker, I think it’s a time where we need to pull together rather than pull apart. We’re all agreeing that classroom complexity has become a very big deal in Saskatchewan. I don’t think you’ve ever heard anyone on this side of the Chamber say that classroom complexity isn’t a concern that we need to address as a government and as a society. We need to be working with the parents. We need to be working with the teachers. We need to be working with the school boards.

 

And certainly as we move forward . . . So I saw that in the call to our government to negotiate a fair deal, but I did notice that they left the school boards till the end. They said that the government should be negotiating with the STF rather than the government and the school boards negotiating with the STF. And I was wondering why you’d left that out. I wasn’t sure if that was intentional or not. But it would seem like that is your intent, that the government would negotiate with the STF and the school boards would be separated from that conversation.

 

So I have a paper from the SSBA, and that would be Jaimie Smith-Windsor as the president currently, who some of us had served alongside — on both sides of the Chamber — as school trustees in the past. And I think she went through here and said that they certainly appreciate the recent funding commitment of 53.1 million, and that dedicated funding for the local boards will be establishing the ability to address those classroom complexities that we are facing on those local levels.

 

So I sure hope at this point that you wouldn’t not believe that this side of the House, that the government side of the House does understand that we have classroom complexity, and that we do understand that our teachers are the front-line supports for families, for parents, and especially for our children.

 

So as we move forward, I just want to say a little story. Because you know, on both sides of the House we can go back and forth and yet these last few days . . . And I know somebody had looked at me earlier, and she and I had served on the school board together. There were some comments made about somebody’s character, whether he might have been lying or not, and let’s hear the story again and again.

 

And I just want to tell the story of something that I had heard that impressed my heart a lot. And so when I was a younger man, I had gossiped a few times. And you know what, I’ve even gossiped to tear others down so that I could be built up. You know, because sometimes if you can’t get ahead, if you can pull somebody down, you know, you feel ahead.

 

And so there was a — and I’ll use a preacher story, as I might have been a preacher in the past — and so there was a preacher that somebody had slandered and said something that wasn’t true about them. And they really went around the community and said this in multiple places. And this person really felt bad afterwards and realized, you know what, that was a lie. So they went back to this person, to the preacher and said, you know, I had said this. And he said, you know, I’d heard you’d said that. And she said, I wonder how I can make it right.

 

[11:15]

 

And he had said, well please go and grab a feather pillow and bring that to me. So she went and grabbed a feather pillow and brought it to him. And he said, let’s go up onto the bell tower together. And they went up onto the bell tower. And he said, would you tear that pillow open and shake out the feathers? So she tore the pillow open and shook out the feathers. And then he said, would you go and gather up all those feathers?

 

So you know, when we say things about each other personally . . . It’s one thing to fight as parties back and forth. But I would just challenge us on both sides. You know, when we say things about each other personally . . . This member is one of the one people in this government I honour so highly. And when I hear some of the things that were said, you know, it just casts dispersion on a person’s character.

 

And I would just ask that on both sides of the House, we consider those things moving forwards. Because three things we want from publicly funded education — knowledge, character, and skill. And character, it’s so important that we uphold that. So as we move forwards, I would hope that you would influence your friends to get back to the table. We’ll influence our friends to get back to the table. But let’s get back to the table where we can have discussions.

 

We’ve committed to move on some of the issues that the STF had brought forwards. If this is truly the heart of both sides of the Chamber, let’s encourage a deal to get made. And then we can move forwards and get teachers and students back in the place where they want to be, in the classroom and in the gyms. And let’s pull together a little bit. We went after you back in 2005, and you’re going after us now. But let’s commit to . . .

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Walsh Acres.

 

Mr. Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. What parent doesn’t want the best for their child? And what parent doesn’t want to set their child up for success in life, to dream about with pride what their child will accomplish as they grow? And yet here in Saskatchewan we have a government that doesn’t think the kids of this province deserve the best. They don’t think Saskatchewan kids deserve the best education.

 

No, instead this government for the last 10 years, year after year after year, have cut per-student funding in education. They have not listened to the pleas of school boards. They have not listened to the pleas of parents or teachers or of students. They have pushed the education system in this province to the brink of collapse, to the point where you have 3,500 teachers rallying outside this building on Monday of this week desperate to be heard by this government.

 

We just had a member from the opposite side of the House talk about their connections with teachers. And I ask, did any members on that side of the House go out and talk to teachers on that day, when 3,500 of them were desperate to be heard?

 

Now Saskatchewan kids deserve better than what they’re getting, and it’s time for the Sask Party government to get to the table and get a deal done that addresses class size and complexity. Saskatchewan New Democrats are calling on the government to negotiate a fair deal with teachers that provides adequate and predictable resources to addressing the challenges of class size and complexity, respecting the autonomy of locally elected school boards.

 

Now my office has received hundreds of emails and phone calls asking me to fight for students, for teachers, and for parents. And I’m proud that Saskatchewan New Democrats, if we were government, have committed to negotiating in good faith and negotiating class size and complexity into the provincial collective agreement and restoring funding to the education system.

 

Because we believe that every child, no matter where they are born in this province or how much money their family has, that every child in this province deserves to get a good modern education that has the appropriate supports for the students that need it and an education that prepares them for a future in this province.

 

Now it’s past time for the government to do what’s right and get a deal done that supports Saskatchewan teachers, because what this comes down to, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is about kids. When teachers talk about supports for kids, we’re talking about a little tiny kindergarten kid who’s having trouble with their speech development and needs to see a speech pathologist to make sure they’re on the right track. When we talk about supports in classrooms, we’re talking about a grade 12 student in a math class who’s got 40 kids, 40 other peers in their class, who may or may not have a desk to sit on in their classroom because there isn’t enough desks to fit in the room. This is what teachers and school divisions and parents are talking about when we’re talking about supports for kids.

 

And like the member from Saskatoon Fairview, I’ve talked at length about being a teacher. It was one of the big reasons why I decided to run in the by-election, because I saw first-hand the deteriorating state of education in this province.

 

And you know, just this week I met with classes that were here watching proceedings in the gallery, and I went down and chatted with them afterwards and chatted with the teachers. And both of the teachers had started in . . . I actually went to the University of Regina with them, and we started teaching in the system at the same time. So they had both been . . . This is their ninth year. It would have been my ninth year as well.

 

And we talked about the programs and supports that were there for kids when we started nine years ago that simply aren’t there today. I’ll give you a couple of examples.

 

The first one that blows my mind is the Discovery Preschool that used to be in my school, which is just a few blocks away, where I started teaching. And this Discovery Preschool was for kids with disabilities to come into a teacher-led classroom that was mixed with mainstream kids who didn’t have a disability. They came together and they started to learn how to act at school and how to go to the bathroom and all of these things.

 

And the teachers were able to get to know the kids, get to develop an understanding of what their needs were to support them so that when they went into kindergarten the following year, the system knew exactly how to help and make sure this kid, this child with a disability, could succeed.

 

And that program was completely cut. And so now kids with disabilities just show up in kindergarten and the teachers don’t know anything about them. They have to just start. And it really isn’t fair to those kids.

 

You know, one of the experiences that I had at my other school that I was at just the last two years was the lack of EA [educational assistant] supports for students. And what we’re seeing more and more is that EA supports for kids are based on behaviour. So EAs are spending time with kids out of the classroom because they need a break or they need to be supervised in a different setting where they’re not in the classroom. EAs are not being used to support learning in the classroom as much as they used to be.

 

And one example, we had a student that was coming in to our school that had incredible needs and so they were going to require a one-on-one EA the entire time that they were at school, five days a week. We were so short of EAs at the time that the solution was to take an EA that was already being used one-on-one with another student who had incredible needs and just take the EA completely away from that child and put the EA with this new child coming into our school. So this child who was in our school already who needed a one-on-one EA all the time, five days a week, would just no longer have an EA. And it was up to the teacher now to deal with that student in the classroom along with 25, 26, 28, 30, 34 kids. This is the state of education.

 

We talk about the population growth in this province, and we’ve seen again the numbers since 2016 — 15,000 more students in our school system and one additional teacher. A lot of these students coming in don’t know English. We’ve promised them this life in our province and we ask them to come here and help in our workforce and in our communities, and yet when their kids go to school and they don’t know English, we just kind of shrug and say, well the teacher, with the rest of their kids, they’ll figure it out. In my school last year that I was at — a fantastic school — the EA support went from full five days a week to 2.5 days a week. There was no decrease in the number of EAL students.

 

Now this morning, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I listened to the Premier on The Evan Bray Show, and despite offering some increased funding into the education budget, he continued to vilify teachers on the air. He continued to pretend like the only issue in the classrooms is a result of the teacher job action.

 

Mr. Speaker, the reason we use the words “tired and out of touch” to describe this government is because that’s how they act. There were 3,500 teachers outside this building on Monday who would rather be in their classroom with their students. Over 100,000 emails have been sent to MLAs across this province — 100,000.

 

The people of this province want what’s best for our kids, yet based on their actions this government does not. Enough is enough. This is about our kids, and our kids need more supports in schools.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Lumsden-Morse.

 

Mr. B. McLeod: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It’s a pleasure for me to rise on my feet today and speak to this Assembly. I have a tough act to follow in my colleague from Melfort, and it would be painfully obvious as I have my conversation with the group today that I may not have been a preacher in the past.

 

So let me start by saying that my respect and regard for the teachers, all teachers of Saskatchewan and the work they do, is very significant. They are doing exemplary work. They have in the past. They will in the future.

 

Teachers have a significant influence on all of us in our lives. My favourite teacher was grade 5, Ms. Pukari. I remember her distinctly in the little town of Eston, Saskatchewan where I first grew up. The lessons that she taught in my life continue. The joy and desire to learn was instilled at a very early age. And then later in life in my high school years, a husband-and-wife team that gave of themselves immensely in our local community school. Ken and Judy Guenter taught their whole career in one town. Raised their family. Awesome, awesome people.

 

The complexity of the classroom has many components that have been clearly acknowledged by all. No one doubts that. And they continue to increase. Do we have massive needs that should be addressed? Absolutely, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The needs at times appear to be overwhelming.

 

I have received many letters, many letters asking for help and support. And I need the Assembly and the people of Saskatchewan to know that I’ve read every one of them. Some of the them read fairly quickly because it’s copy and paste. But the ones that aren’t just copy and paste, I’ve read several times.

 

I’ve taken the time to visit several schools in my constituency that are facing the pressures of space and limited resources. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I’ve also participated in 2 of the 26 meetings that our Education minister has had with our elected school boards. Twenty-seven school boards across the province and the minister has met with 26 of them, and by the end of next week it will be 27. Sit-down meetings with extensive back-and-forth, listening to the needs and concerns of the boards and administrators.

 

In and of itself, that is a significant exercise of listening, hearing, and consulting. It shows the dedication to the task of leading and managing the Education portfolio effectively. One of the more consistent complaints I have heard is that no one is listening to what is needed. The example that our Education minister has provided would tell a very, very different story.

 

[11:30]

 

Personally, I’ve had meaningful conversations with many dedicated teachers that at times have been challenging, but I have never, ever doubted the underlying motivation to only want better for the children and youth of Saskatchewan.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I share that desire as a grandparent of 10 — 6 who are already in school here in Saskatchewan. I want what is best for them. I want a fair agreement for teachers that is also a fair deal for Saskatchewan taxpayers. And that is where open and transparent negotiation needs to enter the picture.

 

A quick definition of the word “negotiation,” Mr. Deputy Speaker, is discussion aimed at reaching an agreement. That is going to take time and effort and ultimately an attitude of compromise that will get us to an agreement.

 

Now the motion reads, Mr. Speaker, “. . . negotiate a fair deal with the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation that provides adequate and predictable resources to address the challenges of class size and complexity . . .” So let’s talk about what is being presented and offered.

 

Our government’s commitments are substantial — 180 million of increased operational funding. That’s up 9 per cent year over year to 2.2 billion, with 356 million specifically allocated to classroom supports — 356 million. That’s an increase of $45 million, up 15 per cent from last year. And that’s in the coming budget, Mr. Deputy Speaker. That sounds to me like a reasonable, affordable offer to get to a fair deal. On top of that, our government has moved on the issue of workplace safety. Offered. The STF wanted to administer their own dental benefits. That’s been offered. And our government has offered the same salary formula as MLAs receive, not the 23 per cent increase the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation wants, but a fair and a reasonable approach.

 

Now I want to take a few moments to speak regarding the capital building projects that our government has undertaken in the education space — renewal and planning for growth. What a great problem growth is, but it must be planned for. The lack of planning under the previous government continues to haunt us today. According to a June 2001 enrolment project paper produced by the NDP, it states, come 2010 there would only be 140,000 students in the province. Mr. Speaker, how could they have been so wrong? There were 160,000 in 2010. That’s 20,000 more than was anticipated. Today there are over 195,000. The NDP didn’t plan for growth; quite the opposite. They planned for decline. And what did they do? They closed 176 schools.

 

After 16 years under the NDP government, there were 30,000 fewer students in schools. Schools, the bricks and mortar, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are vitally important in addressing the issue of class size. Equally important is the dedicated staff to teach and care for students. But if you don’t have the space, what are you going to do? There’s the importance. Portable classrooms have helped ease some of that space issue but real, long-term solutions require the planning and building of new schools. Our government is committed to that task and the upcoming provincial budget will continue to demonstrate that.

 

The last part of this motion says, “while respecting the autonomy of local boards.” I would ask the question, Mr. Deputy Speaker, how can the autonomy of local boards be respected if local decision making is removed and dealt with in a collective bargaining agreement? It leads me to wonder what the Saskatchewan School Boards Association has to say. And on February 16th, Jaimie Smith-Windsor, president of the SSB, had this to say:

 

Boards believe in local decision making, as communities in Saskatchewan are very diverse. We have urban, rural, and northern divisions all with unique characteristics and needs. Boards believe class complexity should be dealt with at the local level and not in a provincial collective bargaining agreement. Local communities, their committees representing local teachers’ associations, trustees, and senior administration will be established to identify and address priorities.

 

That sounds like a great, workable plan. Continuing:

 

A framework for reporting will be developed by the boards of education, the Ministry of Education, and the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation with the mandate to report at the local level and to aggregate at the provincial level as part of the provincial education plan.

 

More of a fleshed-out plan. The press release concludes, “We look forward to continued collaboration with our partners, and further, to returning to the bargaining table to reach a fair and a reasonable agreement.”

 

That’s the desire of members on this side of the House, and I know it’s the desire of members opposite as well. The upcoming budget will deliver a record budget increase in school operational funding and a record new commitment to address classroom size and complexity. In my world, and I hope in everyone’s world, that’s a fair deal for teachers, school boards, and the taxpayers of Saskatchewan. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

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

 

Ms. Sarauer: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It’s my honour to rise today to stand in support of the motion put forward by my colleague, the member for Saskatoon Eastview, supporting our schools, supporting our teachers, and supporting our students. Something that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have done, and I think in particular my colleague, the critic for Education, has done very well throughout the course of this dispute, is ensured that at all times when we are contemplating what’s happening in education, we’re putting the thoughts of the students first, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

And when you do that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think it really highlights why the teachers are fighting for what they’re fighting for today, why they’re standing outside in minus 40 weather for hours on end, fighting on behalf of their students, Mr. Speaker.

 

I appreciate the comments that have already been put forward in the debate today. And my colleague on the other side, the member for Lumsden-Morse, spoke about the overwhelming surge of letters, emails, and phone calls that are coming into MLAs’ offices all throughout the province in support of what the STF has been putting forward, in support of our kids, in support of the students of Saskatchewan, in support of providing better supports for our classrooms, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

It makes sense why the teachers are so adamant that these promises need to be put in writing in a contract, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We may not have seen this, you know, several years ago, this request. We’re seeing it now because every single year over at least the past decade we have seen this government cut and cut and cut funding to education, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

And what does that mean, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for our schools and for our school divisions who do, yes, have the autonomy to decide what to do with that money, Mr. Deputy Speaker? They are forced to make cuts to supports for students, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Some autonomy.

 

We see this government talk about autonomous school boards only when they want to shift blame over why supports are gone in our schools, Mr. Deputy Speaker, supports that existed back when I went to school, Mr. Deputy Speaker. A long, long time ago, my colleague likes to remind me. Very rude. But still supports that existed in my day, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

Now I think it’s fair to say that we all care about education in our schools, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I think every member in this House will get up and say that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. But a government’s priorities always show with where they allocate the dollars, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and this government has done that loud and clear over the last decade. What they have shown is that for them, education of our students is not a priority, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And I’m old enough to remember the budget announcements from this government over the last 10 years.

 

Now I must speak a little bit about the Regina Catholic School Division because that’s a division that’s near and dear to my heart. It’s the school division I grew up in. It’s the one I was a school board trustee in from 2012 to 2016, and it’s the one that my kids will be going to. My daughter is going to be going into kindergarten in the fall. So it’s obviously a school division I care about a lot.

 

So I, for the purposes of this debate, went back each year over the last several years to see what sort of budget announcements happened within the Regina Catholic School Division over that period of time. Every single year, Mr. Deputy Speaker, when I looked up, I found since 2015, it was a budget cut for Regina Catholic Schools — each year a budget cut. And what did that mean for their autonomy, Mr. Deputy Speaker, so to speak? It meant that they had to cut yet another support for students.

 

2022, Regina Catholic School Division had to add fees for lunchtime students. They cut seven online teacher positions.

 

2019, the Regina Catholic School Division had to cut the speech language program, maintenance cuts. That was also the year when the Cornwall Alternative School, a school in my riding, a school that helps kids who are the most in need, almost got shut down because of budget cuts from this government. So forgive me if I get a little upset when I hear members opposite talking about school board autonomy, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

2017, the Regina Catholic School Division had to cut the Sunshine Preschool program, which provided supports for ages‑3‑to‑5 kids, many of whom had intensive needs. They had to cut two pre-kindergarten programs and cut one speech and language pathologist, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

In the 2016 budget, there were some quotes from school board trustees at that time. One is from board Chair at that time, Donna Ziegler. She said, “They changed the rules of the game. If boards know what they can expect, it makes it a lot easier to plan budgets, but it’s the surprises that make it difficult to juggle.” Board member, and still board member to this day, Rob Bresciani said, “I am concerned about the sustainability of this.” Mr. Deputy Speaker, that was almost a decade ago.

 

These are the difficult decisions that school boards have had to make as a direct result of the underfunding of this government, Mr. Deputy Speaker. So what are teachers doing right now? They’re standing up, they’re speaking out, and they’re fighting for our kids. They have seen what happens when governments systematically underfund education. So forgive us and forgive the teachers and parents when they hear governments making announcements over Twitter, on the radio, and want to see a little meat to those bones, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

I’ll give you one example of why maybe they’re a little suspect. 2016, the Sask Party government announced that they would not be committing to fully funding the teachers’ new contract. So when they were negotiating — through arbitration at that time — a new collective bargaining agreement, the minister at that time stated that they would not be committing to fully funding a new contract for that province’s teachers. What would that have meant for school boards? What sort of autonomous decision could they have made, Mr. Deputy Speaker, when the government decides that they’re not going to fully fund a contract?

 

They’re cutting, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and that doesn’t lie at the feet of those school boards, those school divisions who are doing the good work of being the local voices — yes, local voices matter — the local voices for their schools, Mr. Deputy Speaker. That lies right at the feet of this government, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and that’s what we’re seeing right now. That’s what we’re seeing, loud and clear.

 

[11:45]

 

That’s why hundreds of people are writing to the member from Lumsden-Morse’s office or calling him. Very glad to hear that he’s read all of those emails and those letters and those calls. I’ve also gotten a lot of emails and calls and letters, Mr. Deputy Speaker. What we’re hearing loud and clear are teachers and parents that are fed up, that are fed up with this government continually underfunding education and hoping that they don’t speak out about it, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

Well they’re showing today, and they’re continuing to show, why Saskatchewan’s most important asset — our kids — needs to be invested in, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Absolutely needs to be invested in. And again, it’s all about priorities. A government’s priorities are shown with their pocketbooks, Mr. Deputy Speaker, where they put the money. We have not seen this government prioritize kids, prioritize kids’ education, Mr. Deputy Speaker, yet.

 

I looked over the last decade, and what did I see? Budget cut, budget cut, budget cut, Mr. Deputy Speaker. So that’s why these teachers and these parents and these kids are speaking up, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And that’s why we’re standing with them, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And that’s why we will continue to, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

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

 

Mr. Nerlien: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I’m following some inspirational words and I appreciate my colleagues sharing their thoughts. I want to put a couple of things in context that I think are important in this conversation. First of all, I agree with all the members that have spoken today that we all have tremendous respect for teachers, for the education of our children, the support services that are in place. We truly appreciate the role that they play.

 

And I think in fairness, as my colleague from Lumsden-Morse said, we’ve all been inspired, inspired in our lives by teachers. I mean I personally, I can remember Ms. Diamond in grade . . . I think it was grade 8 or 9. Ms. Diamond walked into the room and she said, it’s . . . She walked into the room and said, sounds rich but it ain’t. I was inspired by that.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to just put, as I said, something in context here. In the last 16 years . . . Well let’s take it at this point in time. I’d ask each of you to add up the population of all of the cities in Saskatchewan except Regina and Saskatoon. Add up the population of every city in Regina . . . except Regina and Saskatoon. The total number that you will come to is the number of people that this province has grown by since we became the elected government of this province.

 

Think about that. Think about that. Think about the challenges that come with growth. Think about the infrastructure challenges. Think about the number of schools and hospitals, the highways, the infrastructure that communities have to put in place to support growth. Growth by itself creates incredible challenges, and we all recognize, certainly on this side of the House, that with growth comes challenges.

 

With growth comes opportunities for new citizens to become a part of what I think is a pretty darn good place to live and work and to . . . My colleagues are saying, the best. Well in my constituency, the town of Foam Lake calls itself the best place in the world to live. Perhaps they’re reflecting the belief of the province of Saskatchewan.

 

So all of those challenges come with growth, and I think we have to keep in mind that and be proud of that growth and recognize that we are doing everything possible to address that growth in a meaningful, responsible way, respecting the taxpayers of the province as well.

 

So in the last . . . In those 16 years we’ve already built 60, 60 new schools, and we also have 30 major renovations of existing schools. And I know in my constituency we do have a major renovation occurring today of one of our schools, and I think that’s really, really important.

 

A couple other things I just want to address. The member opposite, actually I think all of the members have used the word “vilify.” And I find that very disturbing. The definition of “vilify” is to speak in an abusively disparaging manner. I just had to look that up, because I find it really unfortunate that members are using that terminology. Because not a single member, not a single member in this House has spoken of teachers in an abusively disparaging manner. Not one. Unbelievable that they can use language like that.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, they also have talked about cuts. So this morning I thought, well, I know they’re going to use the word “cuts.” So let’s look at the 2018‑19 budget, operational funding only — this isn’t including any of the supports or any of the other resources that are available. The ’18‑19 budget was $1.651 billion, so operational only. The ’19‑20 budget was 1.769 billion. The ’20‑21 budget was 1.804 billion. The ’21‑22 budget was 1.833 billion. The ’22‑23 budget was 1.858 billion. The ’23‑24 budget was 1.906 billion. And now the Premier announced last night that the ’24‑25 budget will be 2.2 billion.

 

Cut? I don’t see a cut in there. I think there’s some rationalization of funding, but there certainly isn’t a cut in the budget. The operational funding was not cut in any of the last six and the next year.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to talk a little bit personally about some of the conversations that I’ve had. I’ve spoken with dozens of teachers in the last few weeks from all over the province. I’ve spoken with teachers from Regina, Saskatoon, Swift Current, the far North, and certainly from a number of teachers in my constituency about complexity, about class size, about the challenges that we’re all facing in the education system today. And those conversations have been extremely cordial. They’ve been very civil. They’ve been very encouraging from my perspective, because the teachers understand the challenges that we’re facing. The individual teachers understand the challenges that we’re facing. They understand. They have their . . . Their perspectives are extremely important.

 

And I can tell you, you know, just my own family, it might be interesting for you to know that we have 10 active teachers in my immediate family, we have five retired teachers in my immediate family, and we have a number of support staff in my immediate family. So I kind of think we have some conversations around education at our Christmas dinners.

 

You know, for us to . . . For members opposite to suggest that we aren’t engaged with the education system is simply false. Every one of the members on this side is speaking with teachers, speaking with the school boards, speaking with the education professionals and providing that feedback, providing that input, having the discussions with the minister.

 

But the other thing that we’re hearing from and talking to are the taxpayers of Saskatchewan. And let’s not forget that each and every year we are responsible . . . When we put forward a budget — the Minister of Finance will rise in a couple of weeks and put forward a budget — we are responsible to the taxpayers of Saskatchewan. The members opposite wouldn’t have any idea what that means. They have no clue what it means to be responsible to the taxpayers. Not a single one of them would have that responsibility in their mind when they’re talking about the level of funding that goes into education and health care, highways, policing, all of the things that are important to the people of Saskatchewan. The taxpayer is important in this conversation.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, the teachers of this province want to be respected for the role that they play, and I can assure you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that on this side of the House, we respect the teachers for the role they play. Thank you.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — Why is the member on his feet? Oh, sorry, the 65‑minute period has expired and the 10‑minute period of question-and-answer period will begin.

 

I recognize the member from Saskatoon Riversdale.

 

Mr. Friesen: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In the motion today you talk about respecting the autonomy of school boards. As spoken clearly by the SSBA, they want to retain this autonomy, and yet your leader has said publicly that the NDP opposition would negotiate classroom size and complexity in the union agreement. You can’t have it both ways.

 

To the member from Saskatoon Eastview: do you believe that the union should have this control, or do you really believe in the autonomy of our locally elected school boards?

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — I’m happy to be on my feet to answer this question because it just shows how out of touch that member and this government really is on the needs in our classrooms. There is absolutely a path forward in respecting local autonomy, which is a value that we have on this side, and their track record proves time and time again that they do not hold. This is a government that tried to eliminate local boards. If that member doesn’t remember it, it was in 2017. They tried to get rid of local boards altogether.

 

When you sit down and listen to those local boards they’ll tell you the facts: they want adequate, predictable funding for our students and teachers to get what they need at school. This government has failed and their track record proves it.

 

There is a way forward through this agreement to ensure that teachers have input and local boards have the autonomy to make decisions how these funds are rolled out. On this side we trust those teachers; we trust those local boards. Can the members opposite say the same thing?

 

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

 

Ms. Sarauer: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I’ve got a question for the member for Kelvington-Wadena. I’m wondering why he’s more interested in disparaging — now I won’t use the word “vilifying” because I hear loud and clear he’s very offended by that word — why is he more interested in disparaging teachers through billboard campaigns rather than just working with them?

 

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

 

Mr. Nerlien: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I’m glad she is using the word “disparaging” rather than “vilify,” and I don’t understand again why she would use such language. Expressing facts in public is a fairly common practice, and I think both sides on this discussion have appropriately expressed themselves in public. And I think that’s the right thing to do, but more importantly they should be at the table negotiating a deal.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from P.A. [Prince Albert] Northcote.

 

Ms. A. Ross: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition has publicly said that they would support including classroom complexity in their negotiating at the bargaining table, but she gave no real commitment to address the issues nor would she provide information on how much it would cost.

 

The NDP have no plan and no real commitment to teachers. To the member from Regina Walsh Acres: what is your plan, and what will it cost?

 

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

 

Mr. Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a government here who started with a billion-dollar surplus at the beginning of last year and is now, after special warrants, spending another $757 million for a total deficit of a billion dollars. So for this government to suggest that we’re having trouble balancing the budget is a little rich.

 

Our party, our leader has committed to working with teachers, to working with school boards, to make sure our students in this province have the funding they need to get the best education for their future.

 

[12:00]

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Now I’d welcome the member from Lumsden-Morse here, and I know he’s one of the newest members in the Assembly, but he might not be aware of his government’s track record when it comes to education.

 

With the numbers presented here today, since 2016‑17, 15,224 new students and one new teacher. Is this a record he’s proud of, and does he think that that represents adequate investment in education?

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Lumsden-Morse.

 

Mr. B. McLeod: — Thank you. Thank you. As I said earlier in my document that I read into the House, you know, math is an important subject. I learned it in school. We all took it in school and, you know, when you plan for retraction in terms of the number of people that are going to be in school, what does that get you? That gets you no investment in schools. That gets you no further in terms of planning for the future.

 

In a few short years after 2001, we were going to have that many less students, around 140,000, a drop of 20,000. That projection was absolutely wrong. And our government is looking at planning for the future, planning for the growth, and investing the dollars that are needed to make sure our schools are . . .

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Martensville-Warman.

 

Mr. Jenson: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has claimed that there’s always a “cost containment within agreements” during collective bargaining.

 

Now we know that the opposition has never really been very good at explaining anything, but they’ll now have another chance at it. And to the member from Regina Walsh Acres, who I might add, I’ve had discussions with board members and they’re telling me that the member for Walsh Acres does not speak for our board.

 

So to the member from Regina Walsh Acres: what would be your cost containment when negotiating classroom sizes and complexity, and what kind of a cap would you be placing on funding?

 

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

 

Mr. Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You know, the reality in schools is that teachers are struggling and are hanging on by a thread. In this House we had a 17‑year veteran teacher who is leaving the profession because they don’t have the supports that they need.

 

They’ve overshot the budget for this year by $2 billion and they’re worried about our cost containment, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We will work with teachers. We will work with school boards. We will work with parents to make sure that every child in this province gets the best education that they deserve.

 

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

 

Mr. Love: — Mr. Deputy Speaker, I asked a question a moment ago to the member from Lumsden-Morse, and he did everything possible to avoid talking about his government’s track record. So we’re going to try again. He’ll have another opportunity.

 

Fifteen thousand new students in this province, one additional teacher, an 80 per cent reduction in teacher-librarians, fewer mental health supports, 23 per cent reduction in speech language pathologists — this is the track record. Can he defend it? Will he take his feet and answer the people of Saskatchewan? Does he support that track record of failing to adequately invest in education so our children, the children of this province get what they need when they go to school?

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Lumsden-Morse.

 

Mr. B. McLeod: — Thank you for the opportunity to again speak to the question. We’re looking at a situation in Saskatchewan where members opposite closed schools, and members on this side built schools. Closed. And built.

 

And I also want to remind the member opposite of what is being presented and offered in the upcoming budget: 180 million of increased operational funding, 180 million. Let’s let the 27 school boards across the province do the math on what that’s going to bring for them in their operation. That’s up 9 per cent year over year. $2.2 billion. The numbers speak for themselves, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Lloydminster.

 

Ms. C. Young: — Mr. Speaker, our government is proud of the work we’ve done with local school boards. We will always support local voices in education. To the member from Regina Walsh Acres: did the Leader of the Opposition consult with school boards before announcing that the NDP would deal with classroom size and complexity?

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Walsh Acres.

 

Mr. Clarke: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have been meeting with a ton of school boards across the . . .

 

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

 

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ MOTIONS

 

The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Moosomin.

 

Motion No. 3 — Government Policies to Attract Capital Investment

 

Mr. Bonk: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I’ll move my motion at the end of my comments.

 

I address you today on a matter of utmost importance: the success of the Saskatchewan government in growing exports and attracting capital investment.

 

As we embark on this discourse, I’m reminded of the profound words of Milton Friedman. And I know my good friend, the member from Regina Douglas Park, doesn’t really like Milton Friedman; she’s more familiar with the works of Marx and Lenin. But I prefer Friedman and Sowell and Adam Smith.

 

But Milton Friedman, a Nobel laureate in economics, he was a staunch advocate for free markets, limited government intervention, and individual liberty. He believed that economic prosperity could best be achieved through the policies that promoted competition, innovation, and entrepreneurship — principles that resonate deeply with our government’s approach to attracting capital investment.

 

In his seminal work, Capitalism and Freedom, Friedman extolled the virtues of free markets as the most efficient allocators of resources and drivers of economic growth. He argued that when individuals are free to pursue their own interests in voluntary exchange, the invisible hand of market ensures the optimal allocation of goods and services, leading to increased prosperity for all.

 

In the context of Saskatchewan’s investment attraction and export success, we can observe these principles espoused by Friedman at work. The Government of Saskatchewan, recognizing the importance of free markets and limited intervention, has adopted policies that foster an environment conducive to export growth and the attraction of capital. Rather than resorting to heavy-handed regulation or protectionist measures, the government has embraced the principles of competition, innovation, and entrepreneurship, unleashing the latent potential of our province’s economy.

 

One of the key pillars of Saskatchewan’s success lies in its commitment to fostering a business-friendly environment. Recognizing that excessive regulation stifles innovation and hampers economic growth, the government has undertaken efforts to streamline bureaucratic processes, reduce red tape, and create a level playing field for businesses of all sizes. By removing barriers to entry and facilitating ease of doing business, Saskatchewan has attracted capital investment and encouraged entrepreneurship, leading to a vibrant export sector that thrives on competition and market forces.

 

Moreover the government’s prudent fiscal policies have played a crucial role in attracting capital and investment and promoting export growth. Saskatchewan has adhered to principles of fiscal responsibility, ensuring that public finances remain sound and stable. By maintaining low taxes and disciplined spending, the government has created an environment conducive to investment and economic growth, thereby laying the foundation for a thriving export sector.

 

Furthermore Saskatchewan’s commitment to infrastructure development has bolstered its export capabilities and enhanced its competitiveness on the global stage. Recognizing the importance of efficient transportation networks, our government has invested in the expansion and modernization of infrastructure, facilitating the movements of goods to domestic and international markets. By investing in infrastructure, our government has reduced transportation costs, improved connectivity, and opened new avenues for export growth, thereby maximizing the potential of our province’s resources and industries.

 

In addition to these structural reforms, our government has pursued targeted initiatives to support key export sectors and facilitate market access. Whether it be agricultural products, mineral resources, or value-added goods and services, Saskatchewan has positioned itself as a global leader, leveraging its comparative advantages to drive export growth and the provincial GDP.

 

Saskatchewan’s investment attraction and export growth is bolstered by its comparative advantages in key sectors such as agriculture, mining, and energy production. The province’s vast arable land, climate, and advanced farming techniques make it one of the world’s leading producers of grains, oilseeds, and pulses. Similarly Saskatchewan’s rich mineral reserves, including potash, uranium, and oil, position it as a global powerhouse in mining and energy production.

 

By specializing in these sectors and leveraging its comparative advantages, Saskatchewan has been able to capitalize on international demand for its products and services, driving export growth and economic prosperity.

 

Furthermore our government has pursued targeted initiatives to support key export sectors and facilitate market access through trade promotion activities, including the opening of international trade offices, investment incentives, and strategic partnerships. The government has worked to promote Saskatchewan products and services on the world stage, opening new markets and diversifying export opportunities.

 

Our government has demonstrated commendable foresight in diversifying its export markets and reducing reliance on any single trading partner. Dr. Thomas Sowell, one of the foremost intellectuals of our time, whose keen insights into politics, economics, and public policy offer invaluable perspectives, he warns us against the dangers of overreliance on a single source of demand, noting that it leaves economies vulnerable to external shocks and disruptions.

 

Saskatchewan has heeded this warning by actively seeking out new export markets and forging trade agreements with a diverse range of countries and regions. By diversifying its export destinations, Saskatchewan has mitigated risk and ensured the resilience of its export economy in the face of global uncertainties. This proactive approach to international engagement has helped position Saskatchewan as a global leader in agriculture, mining, and energy production, driving export growth and enhancing the province’s competitiveness on the world stage.

 

However it’s important to recognize that the success of Saskatchewan’s export growth is not solely attributable to the government’s actions. As Friedman once observed, the market is a complex and dynamic system driven by the collective actions of countless individuals and businesses.

 

In Saskatchewan it’s the hard work, ingenuity, and entrepreneurial spirit of our citizens that truly drives export success. From farmers to miners, from manufacturers to exporters, it is the efforts of individuals and businesses across the province that have propelled Saskatchewan to new heights of economic achievement.

 

Allow me to illuminate a fundamental economic concept that lies at the heart of investment attraction in Saskatchewan: the multiplier effect. Let’s explore how investment in Saskatchewan sets in motion a chain reaction of economic activity, amplifying the initial impact of creating a ripple effect of prosperity through the province.

 

At its essence, the multiplier effect is the manifestation of interconnectedness and dynamic nature of the modern economy. When investment is made in Saskatchewan, whether it be in infrastructure, technology, or industry, it sets off a series of secondary and tertiary effects that reverberate through the economy, generating additional economic activity and creating new opportunities for growth.

 

Consider, for example, a hypothetical scenario in which a foreign company decides to invest in Saskatchewan’s burgeoning renewable energy sector. This initial investment not only creates jobs and stimulates economic activity in the renewable energy industry itself, but also generates demand for goods and services from other sectors of our economy. Local suppliers of raw materials, construction firms, transportation companies, and service providers all benefit from the increased demand, leading to additional employment and income generation.

 

[12:15]

 

But the multiplier effect does not stop there. As workers in the renewable energy sector and related industries earn income from their employment, they in turn spend that income on goods and services in the local economy. This additional spending creates further demand for goods and services, leading to additional rounds of economic activity and further multiplying the initial impact of the investment.

 

Moreover the multiplier effect extends beyond immediate effects of increased employment and income generation. As economic activity expands, businesses in Saskatchewan experience increased profits and investment opportunities, leading to further expansion, innovation, and entrepreneurship. This virtuous cycle of investment, growth, and innovation fuels the long-term prosperity of our province, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of economic development.

 

In the words of Milton Friedman, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Indeed, the multiplier effect reminds us that every investment decision carries with it the potential to shape the future trajectory of our economy. By fostering an environment conducive to investment and entrepreneurship, Saskatchewan has harnessed the power of the multiplier effect to drive economic growth, create jobs, and improve the standard of living for its citizens.

 

In Saskatchewan we realize that our government’s policies play a crucial role in shaping economic outcomes, including gross domestic product or GDP. Nominal GDP and real GDP are two indicators used to measure economic performance, each providing unique insights into the health and trajectory of our province’s economy.

 

Let’s analyze the impact of nominal GDP versus real GDP growth in Saskatchewan, with a focus on our government’s policies and their implications. Nominal GDP represents the total value of goods and services produced within our economy at current market prices. It reflects changes in both the quantity of goods and the services produced, or real output, and changes in prices, which would be inflation or deflation. In contrast, real GDP adjusts for changes in prices, providing a more accurate measure of a true economic output by accounting for inflation and deflation.

 

The Government of Saskatchewan can influence nominal GDP growth through various policy measures, including fiscal policy and regulatory reforms. Fiscal policy involves government spending and taxation, with increases in government expenditure typically leading to higher nominal GDP growth, as government spending directly contributes to economic activity.

 

Tax cuts or incentives may also stimulate customer spending and investment, further boosting nominal GDP growth. Additionally, monetary policy implemented by the central bank influences nominal GDP growth through changes in interest rates, money supply, and credit availability.

 

Lowering interest rates, for example, encourages borrowing and investment, stimulating economic activity through nominal GDP growth. Furthermore, regulatory reforms aimed at reducing barriers to business entry, streamlining bureaucratic processes, and fostering innovation can enhance productivity and competitiveness, contributing to higher nominal GDP growth over time.

 

While government policies can influence nominal GDP growth, their impact on real GDP growth is much more nuanced. Real GDP growth reflects the changes in quantity of goods and services produced, adjusting for changes in prices. As such, policies that stimulate nominal GDP growth may not necessarily result in equivalent increases in real GDP growth, and that might be led to . . . by inflationary pressures.

 

Inflation erodes the purchasing power of consumers and reduces the real value of output, potentially dampening the real GDP growth. This is one of the main reasons why our government remains opposed to the federal government’s carbon tax. Therefore our government must implement policies that promote sustainable economic growth, balancing the objectives of stimulating economic activity while maintaining price stability.

 

The effectiveness of our government’s policies in driving nominal and real GDP growth in Saskatchewan depend on various factors, including timing, magnitude, and coordination of policy. Fiscal stimulus, for example, may be more effective during economic downturns when private sector demand is weak, whereas monetary policy implemented by the central bank may be more effective during periods of inflationary pressures.

 

Moreover we must consider the potential trade-offs between short-term economic gains and long-term sustainability, ensuring that policies promote inclusive growth, environmental sustainability, and social cohesion. Our government’s policies have a significant impact on both nominal and real GDP growth, influencing economic activity, employment, and the living standards across our province. By implementing prudent fiscal and regulatory policies, Saskatchewan has fostered sustainable economic growth, enhanced productivity, and improved the well-being of all of its residents.

 

However we as policy makers must remain vigilant in monitoring economic indicators, adjusting policies as needed to address emerging challenges. I realize that all of this may seem a bit dry and to some boring, but I cannot overstate the importance of policy decisions in building the framework for attracting capital investment, export growth, and ultimately GDP growth in our province.

 

In conclusion, the success of our government in helping to grow exports and attract capital investment is a testament to the enduring principles of free market and limited government. By embracing these principles and fostering an environment conducive to economic growth and innovation, Saskatchewan has unlocked the potential of its export sector, creating jobs, generating wealth, and improving the standard of living for all its citizens.

 

As we look to the future, let us continue to uphold these principles and to build upon our foundation of success, ensuring a brighter and more prosperous future for generations to come.

 

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I’d like now to read the motion. I move:

 

That this Assembly support the Government of Saskatchewan’s policies that have resulted in the attraction of $17.1 billion in capital investment into Saskatchewan in 2023 and are estimated to increase to 19.6 billion in 2024, including the development of international trade offices; and further,

 

That this Assembly denounces the provincial NDP for their abysmal record in attracting capital investment to the province under their poor leadership and for overseeing the decline of Saskatchewan’s population.

 

I so move.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — The member from Moosomin has moved:

 

That this Assembly supports the Government of Saskatchewan’s policies that have resulted in the attraction of 17.1 billion in capital investment in Saskatchewan in 2023 and are estimated to increase to 19.6 billion in 2024, including the development of international trade offices; and further,

 

That this Assembly denounces the provincial NDP for their abysmal record of attracting capital investment in the province under their poor leadership, and for overseeing the decline of the Saskatchewan population.

 

Is the Assembly ready for the question? I recognize the Deputy House Leader.

 

Hon. Ms. Carr: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that this House do now adjourn.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — The Deputy House Leader has moved that this Assembly does now adjourn. Is it the pleasure of the Assembly to agree to the motion?

 

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

 

The Deputy Speaker: — Carried. This Assembly now stands adjourned until Monday at 1:30.

 

[The Assembly adjourned at 12:24.]

 

 

 

 

 

Published under the authority of the Hon. Randy Weekes, Speaker

 

Disclaimer: The electronic versions of the Legislative Assembly's documents are provided for information purposes only. The content of the documents is identical to the printed record; only the presentation differs unless otherwise noted. The printed versions are the official record for legal purposes.