Whitehorse, Yukon

Wednesday, April 23, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.

Speaker: I will now call the House to order. We will proceed at this time with prayers.

Prayers

DAILY ROUTINE

Speaker: We will proceed with the Order Paper.

TRIBUTES

Tribute to House page Amy Klassen

Speaker: Under tributes, I am pleased to recognize the achievements of Amy Klassen, one of our pages who is here today, who won four gold medals and the intermediate trophy at the Rotary Music Festival which took place last week.

Applause

Speaker: Are there any other tributes?

Introduction of visitors?

Are there any returns or documents for tabling?

TABLING RETURNS AND DOCUMENTS

Hon. Mr. Sloan: I have for tabling today the business plan for the property management agency of Government Services for 1997-98.

Speaker: Are there any reports from committees?

Are there any petitions?

Are there any bills to be introduced?

Are there any notices of motion?

Are there any statements by ministers?

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Youth Works steering committee

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I rise in the House today to outline how this government is honouring its election commitment to provide opportunities for young people to have a direct say in policy development and programs carried out on their behalf.

In the budget speech, the Government Leader announced the Youth Works program. We have budgeted $200,000 to help prepare young people for life and work.

That announcement expressed a vision of young people around the territory designing and administering Youth Works, in association with the Department of Education.

The first step to achieving this vision is to involve young people aged 15 to 24 in the process of designing the program. This will be accomplished by establishing a steering committee comprised of five young people, supported by a facilitator from the Department of Education and the necessary research and secretarial support. There will be broadly based representation reflecting the diversity of Yukon society, including urban and rural high school students, street youth and First Nations youth.

The steering committee is enthusiastic about the opportunity to determine the agenda for Youth Works. Youth have important things to say about their future, and we are listening.

The steering committee will have a two-month life span to develop the mandate, terms of reference and structure for the Youth Works board.

This process allows young people to have an honest dialogue about their community and about how we, as adults, can better support their needs. Based on the steering committee recommendations, the Youth Works board will be established and begin its work of managing the $200,000 trust fund.

I am pleased about Youth Works. This will not be a board that rubber stamps the decisions of adults, but a board that will initiate, create and support the best efforts of our youth.

I look forward to returning to this House and sharing with you the aspirations and recommendations that Yukon youth have developed for themselves.

Mr. Phillips: I rise today to commend the government on this particular initiative. I think that it's a very positive one.

I had an opportunity last fall to attend a conference out at the Cadet Camp, the YES conference.

One of the main recommendations from the youth at the YES conference was that the youth design their own programs, because the youth have the best knowledge and the youth will put together a program that can most benefit the youth, and they wanted to be more involved. So, I applaud that effort.

Having said that, I would hope that they would follow the recommendations of this youth group, because one of the big recommendations from the group the day that we were out at the Cadet Camp was that the YES program be continued and be funded. I know that they have been knocking on the minister's door for some time now, and have had to lay youth off and lay people off in the program.

I would hope that when they get the recommendations from this new group that they're establishing that they will listen to all of the recommendations and they won't just pick and choose. I do applaud the government for this initiative.

The proof will really be in the pudding whether or not they follow the recommendations as put forward by these youth, and I wish these youth well in the deliberations.

Ms. Duncan: We are interested in the minister's initiative as has been outlined today. However, before we comment too much further on it, we would like some more information and details, and perhaps the minister can provide them in her response.

I note that there will be broadly based representation and that this initial committee will reflect the diversity of Yukon society. Presumably, there will be a consultation process for the selection of this group. We are interested in learning more of that, and although there is an indication that there is a two-month lifespan to develop the mandate, there's no indication of when that is going to begin or a more solid time frame for this Youth Works project, and we're looking forward to more information from the minister on the government side on it.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Well, Mr. Speaker, I thank the Opposition parties for their limited support and interest in this initiative. As a government, we are not predetermining the agenda of what the young people themselves are going to come up with. We're prepared and willing to take risks. We're going to trust young people to make responsible decisions, and that's what we've done. That's why I can't be more definite about what they are going to come up with.

There was some mention of the youth empowerment and success program. The Minister of Health and Social Services met with them most recently. Our government is working with youth empowerment and success; however, we are not going to impose what the Youth Works program does. We're going to allow the youth to come up with their own recommendations.

I think it's important to listen to young people. They have valuable contributions to make, and they are taking the responsibility very seriously. I know that the young people are interested in talking not just to other youth but to adults, and I believe that they will do a very good job with what we have given them to do.

Speaker's statement

Speaker: Before proceeding to Question Period, the Chair would like to remind members of guideline 7, which states, in part, and I quote, "A brief preamble will be allowed in the case of a main question and a one-sentence preamble will be allowed in the case of each supplementary question" and of guideline 9, which states that, "A reply to a question should be as brief as possible, relevant to the question asked, and should not provoke debate." The Chair would like to emphasize this.

We will now proceed with Question Period.

QUESTION PERIOD

Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation, Aishihik Lake water

Mr. Ostashek: My question is for the Minister of Renewable Resources.

Yesterday in this House, my colleague, the Member for Riverdale North, questioned the minister about how the government arrived at the decision to direct YEC not to use the licensing range that it was entitled to on Aishihik Lake, and chose instead to dramatically increase the use of diesel to generate Yukon's power needs. I was shocked at the minister's response that he did not know how many CO₂ emissions were going to be produced as a result of this decision.

Just for the minister's information, according to our figures, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide emissions from the Aishihik directive amounted to in excess of 8,000 tons for the month of January and 8,000 tons for the month of February - not to even mention the several hundred tons of nitrogen oxides that were put into our atmosphere.

Can the minister explain to this House why, as the minister responsible for protecting the environment, he was not aware of this tremendous negative impact on our environment?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I'm amazed that the member across the way is speaking the way he is. In 1992, their party made a promise to end the devastation at Aishihik Lake, and now it sounds to me that they were all in favour of draining the bottom two feet of the lake.

It was a tough choice that we had to make, and very little time to do it. We consulted with the people that were there, and with the First Nation. Everybody was on side and agreed with the decision that was made by us, including the Conservation Society.

Mr. Ostashek: If the minister would care to check, and not just listen to his advisors there, he'd find out that we were working to get rid of the devastation at Aishihik.

We didn't do it, Mr. Speaker, by knee-jerk reactions, like this government has done.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Speaker: Order please.

Mr. Ostashek: If we extrapolate the carbon monoxide and the carbon dioxide emissions resulting from this decision over a three-month period, from January to March, we're looking at over 25,000 tons of carbon monoxide emissions into the atmosphere, along with an excess of 1,000 tons of nitrogen oxides. I'd like the minister to explain how he could support a recommendation to Cabinet not to utilize Aishihik Lake without presenting this information to Cabinet? How could he do that?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: A decision had to be made, Mr. Speaker, on whether or not to draw down the bottom two feet of the lake and that's what we had to look at. It was the environmental impact on the lake, and that was more of a reason to make a decision than looking at the CO₂ in the air. We had to make a decision between one of them - which one will have more impact on the environment and on people directly, and that's how we made the decision.

We will stand by it and we have the people behind us on this. It is a people process that we say our government is all about and that's how we're going to continue to do this - with the people's support.

Mr. Ostashek: I would suggest to the minister of environment, Mr. Speaker, that you don't solve an environmental problem if you've got a dump that's polluting one side of town by moving the dump to the other side of town.

This is a very serious matter, as it goes to the very heart of the decision-making process of this government.

How can the minister responsible for protecting the environment support recommendations to Cabinet on a decision of this magnitude by examining only one side of the environmental issue and not the other side. Does not the minister agree that's an irresponsible approach to be taking?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: It's amazing to hear this again from the member across the way who really supports draining the bottom two feet of the lake. People in Champagne-Aishihik sure wouldn't be happy to hear that.

Mr. Speaker, I have for tabling here the technical advisory group's recommendations to us. We took this seriously and it was part of our decision in whether or not we draw down the bottom two feet of Aishihik Lake.

Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation, Aishihik Lake water

Mr. Ostashek: My question is to the same minister.

I don't want to be unfair to this minister, but he has to be aware of the consequences of his decisions. Twenty-five thousand tons of carbon monoxide and dioxide emissions - that's in excess to what we put in the air on a regular basis, along with in excess of 1,000 tons of nitrogen oxides. A very serious situation.

The diesel generators at the Whitehorse dam and elsewhere through the Yukon have been running full bore all winter long. This 25,000 tons of added emissions covers the Whitehorse watershed and affects the majority of Yukon's population - men, women and children.

What is this minister going to do in the short term to mitigate this problem?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: The decision that we made was for a short term. It's not something that we're going to stand behind in the long term. We are looking at air emission regs. We are looking at improving policies in regards to energy, and that's why we have an energy commission, Mr. Speaker, and we will continue to work along those bases and make decisions in that manner.

In the future, I know and we all know and all Yukoners know that the direction we're going as the government will certainly be supported by Yukoners and will be a better way of doing things.

Mr. Ostashek: I would suggest to this minister that he must accept his responsibilities under the Environment Act, and he cannot hide and he cannot transfer that responsibility by hiding behind the technical advisory group or the Yukon Conservation Society. He is the minister responsible for the environment in the Yukon.

I would like the minister to assure this House that in the future he will not bow to political pressure put on him by the MLA for Kluane and his vested interests in Aishihik Lake, but will ensure that proper environmental assessments are done before decisions of this magnitude are made. Will he do that?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: In our commitments, we made a commitment to protect Aishihik Lake.

We made a commitment to work with the people of Yukon, and that's what we're doing and that's what the Yukon Party lacked. That is the way we will continue to operate - with the direction of the people of the Yukon, not without them.

Mr. Ostashek: This minister swore an oath to Cabinet that he would take his job seriously. The MLA for Kluane didn't swear an oath to Cabinet. It's up to that minister to protect the environment and Cabinet decisions, not the Member for Kluane.

Whether this minister realizes it or not, he has sacrificed proper, environmental decision making, on the altar of political expediency by following the advice from the Member for Kluane.

All I'm asking this Cabinet minister to do is fulfill his responsibilities to protect the environment, the oath that he took when he was sworn into Cabinet. Will he do that?

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Point of order

Mr. Ostashek: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. I ask that the member withdraw that comment. It's unparliamentary.

Speaker: A point of order has been called.

Mr. Ostashek: I ask that the member withdraw that comment, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker's ruling

Speaker: A point of order has been called. The member was not recognized to be heard, and I would encourage all members not to use strong language when another member is speaking.

Mr. Ostashek: Where were we when I was so rudely interrupted, Mr. Speaker?

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: I'm certainly going to be working hard in my department, and working hard on the environment. I've always had that position, and I've taken that position from my previous job.

I think what bothers the Opposition most is that we are a people process, and we will continue to do that. When we involve people, and have them part of our decision making and part of the success that we are in, it bothers them a whole lot.

I'm quite surprised that he is concerned about air emissions, in all his proposals in the past about coal-fired plants in the Yukon. It's amazing. Did he bring numbers for the Yukon public to see what CO₂ would be in the air - how many tons of CO₂ in the air? Wrong. He hasn't done that.

He has no leg to stand on when it comes to this. His party has not shown and has not proven themselves in regard to air emissions and environmental issues.

Question re: Fetal alcohol syndrome/fetal alcohol effects

Mrs. Edelman: My question is for the Minister of Health and Social Services. There is still no clear diagnosis of fetal alcohol syndrome or fetal alcohol effects. The minister may be aware that some medical practitioners refuse to diagnose a child with FAS or FAE in case the child becomes labeled negatively in the education system.

Refusing to diagnose also does not let that child and their families access the help they may need desperately. So what is the Minister of Health doing to help define this syndrome?

Hon. Mr. Sloan: Well, it's interesting that the member would bring this forward. I spoke this morning to the Kluane First Nation - a conference on FAS/FAE - and some of the issues we talked about there were the whole questions of definition.

I realize that there is a reluctance, sometimes, to diagnose a child as having FAS/FAE because of the potential stigma and because of the potential problems. At the same time, that, in some ways, short circuits the educational system and the assistance. That's something that we will be trying to do, trying to assist in our developing an integrated FAS/FAE prevention approach, trying to get some definitions and trying to wrestle around with some of those issues.

I suppose what I spoke about this morning was some concerns of mine on the whole question of FAS/FAE, in terms of some of the other impacts that I consider equally serious, in terms of justice, in terms of employment opportunities. I've approached my colleague in Justice and I've approached my colleague in Education regarding some of these issues, and we're going to try to integrate it into a more concerted, integrated approach.

Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, despite numerous years of research, there are still no real numbers of persons in the Yukon with FAS and FAE. Will the minister at least commit to finding out how many persons are affected by FAS and FAE, so that we can plan for the future?

Hon. Mr. Sloan: As a matter of fact, we are planning for the future, and we are trying to gain numbers. We are trying to sort of define the magnitude of this problem. This is part of the FAS/FAE prevention approach. We have some models in place. We are gaining some further evidence from a study done by the Bureau of Statistics, and this will form part of the basis for our approach.

Mrs. Edelman: Mr. Speaker, despite years of work, there is still no coordinated approach for the many agencies that deal with FAS and FAE, and the minister is presently reviewing yet another plan. When will the minister commit to some concrete steps that he will take to coordinate the many agencies in the Yukon that deal with FAS and FAE?

Hon. Mr. Sloan: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that has plagued this territory for many years. I can recall that the first study done to do an assessment on this was in 1985 by Dr. Asante, and I think prior to that, people in the educational community, for example, realized that we had a problem. Since that time, there has been a great deal of research done into this problem. There has been a tremendous amount of work done within the schools in terms of learning assistance on this problem.

I think what is now beginning to impact on society is the fact that we've had entire generations go through a very supportive environment in the schools, only to find themselves at a loss when they reach young adulthood, and I think that not only in terms of prevention, we also have to take a look at the delivery of services and different approaches to dealing with individuals with FAS/FAE in their adult lives.

Question re: RCMP auxiliary police program

Mr. Cable: I have some questions for the Minister of Justice on the RCMP auxiliary police program.

The RCMP auxiliary police program was set up in December of 1992, and at the time the program was set up, the Minister of Justice at the time said the purpose of the project was to supplement existing RCMP resources in the areas of pro-active policing. According to his ministerial statement at the time, and I quote: "This means participation in the Neighbourhood Watch program, vandalism protection, special event crowd and traffic control, building security, search and rescue, and public education programs."

Now, the minister, in her letter to me of January 8th on the subject, stated that the program has been very successful. Just for the record, is this government and this minister committed to the continuation of the RCMP auxiliary police program?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Yes, as the member pointed out, the auxiliary police officer program has been in place in Whitehorse for over two years. The program has been, for the most part, quite successful, and we support it.

Mr. Cable: I think the minister is aware that the members of the program are looking for some legislative backdrop to their activities. In her letter to me, the minister stated that it is important that legislation be developed to ensure the long-term success of the program. Is this her present view?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Let me assure the member that I wouldn't have signed the letter saying that to him if it wasn't indeed my view. Yes, that is my view.

Mr. Cable: The minister also signed the letter saying she was thinking about bringing legislation forward for the spring session. Of course, you can't do that; this is a budget session.

Could she tell us what she's committed to do in terms of bringing this legislation forward? Is she committed to doing it in the fall session?

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: Well, as the member pointed out, this being a budget session, this is the legislation that we're dealing with in this session. We haven't yet completed the legislative calendar for the fall. It is our aim to work toward the development of legislation to address concerns about appointments and indemnification that would provide stability to the program and we will be working on that with the auxiliary police and the RCMP and other interested parties.

Question re: Yukon Energy Corporation, Aishihik Lake water

Mr. Ostashek: My question is again for the minister responsible for the environment. According to CBC Radio, Canadian climate action network reported that global warming could wipe out whole species of animals and destroy the Arctic environment within this century. That is a fairly alarming prognosis.

Since Canada signed the United Nations framework convention on climate change, which compels us, by international law, to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere to a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the climatic system, can I ask the minister, when his government made this decision on Aishihik Lake, did they take into consideration our legal obligations under that agreement?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: The decision on whether or not to lower the bottom two feet of Aishihik Lake needed to be made. That was the issue. The main issue on the table at that time was the environmental impact that would happen.

I am quite surprised that the member across the way will continue to have this line of questioning on air emissions when he, himself, proposed the coal plant in the Braeburn area.

We said that we are a government that is a people process. We will work with the people of the Yukon, and that is the way we will continue.

The coal plant that was proposed in the Braeburn area would have had a tremendous impact on the lakes and waters in and around that area and also on the people of the Little Salmon-Carmacks First Nation, who were not even consulted at all - no letters, nothing.

The member across the way is trying to make an issue about how he is environmentally conscious about the Yukon and is protective of air quality in the Yukon. He doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Mr. Ostashek: Well, I think the minister responsible should quit turning to the Member for Kluane for advice, because he's not getting very good advice.

There was no decision to build a coal plant and the member knows that. He knows that quite clearly. There's going to be one shortly by an NDP government.

My supplementary to the minister: previously, in this House, on April the 3rd, the minister stated that his department was working on emission standards, and that most of the work was done and the standards were ready to go to Cabinet.

I ask the minister, why didn't Cabinet refer to these standards when it made its decision to radically increase the use of diesel fuel to generate electricity?

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: As we said, in regard to the air emissions, it will be coming out this year and we will continue to stick to that. It's going to be going out into the public this summer. It's still in the works and it's still being developed, and you can't refer to something that is not completely developed.

Mr. Ostashek: It's quite clear that this minister and this Cabinet didn't consider any of the downside of the decision not draw down Aishihik Lake. They didn't think of the other environmental problems they were creating. That is what I say is a knee-jerk reaction to a problem they were faced with.

My final supplementary: on April the 3rd, the minister stated that the air emission regulations would be in place, at the latest, by January the 1st, 1998.

So, I'd like to know if it is this government's intention to continue to rely on excessive diesel fuel use to generate electricity until that time, and can he assure this House that on that magic day of January 1st, 1998, that they will cease to use so much diesel fuel for their electrical needs, or are they going to be the first ones to break their own standards, if they bring them out.

Hon. Mr. Fairclough: My government is aware of the situation that we have been put in by the previous government. We're looking at doing many different things that the Yukon Party did not do. One of them is assigning a political person who would be in charge of energy, and coming up with new initiatives.

We will be continuing to do that, and that's the way our government is going to work. We're not going to be making decisions without people's concerns and interests being put forward.

If there is a tough decision to make, we have to make it. That's the bottom line and that's where the Yukon Party failed in their last term.

Question re: Development assessment process within municipalities

Mrs. Edelman: My question is for the DAP commissioner.

All municipalities in the territory have official community plans and decisions made by DAP could impact on these plans.

Mr. Speaker, would it not be appropriate to ensure that municipal officials are appointed to DAP boards when development will be occurring within municipal boundaries?

Mr. Livingston: The appointments to the development assessment board are outlined within chapter 12 of the umbrella final agreement and it's quite specific in terms of providing for the appointment, for example, of First Nations people as well as representatives of government. And "government", under the definitions section of the umbrella final agreement, refers to Government of Canada and Government of Yukon.

Mrs. Edelman: Actually, YTG can sort of appoint anybody they really want to represent them, but a number of community representatives have approached me and expressed deep reservations about this so-called one-window approach to development.

What I'm hearing is that the commission is making the process more difficult, instead of simpler, merely to justify the work of this commission.

Will DAP finally do away with the duplication of studies that has plagued development in the past, and make this process truly one-window?

Mr. Livingston: I rise to respond to the member's concerns that we do, in fact, arrive at a one-window approach. It's a concern that I, too, share and I can assure her that the Development Assessment Process Commission is working with the other two parties at the core table to ensure that we have a one-window process that will reflect the interests of all Yukoners.

Mrs. Edelman: After receiving recommendations from the development assessment process, the government decision bodies will decide whether a project will proceed. Is there any provision for municipalities to appeal these decisions?

Mr. Livingston: The appeal process provided for under chapter 12 and certainly what's being examined, what our sense of what's going to work, is that once a project has moved through the entry stages, that will ensure that all of the required information is, in fact, on the table and available for all parties to review as it will move through the assessment process that will include the technical advisory group that will examine the information. Once the development assessment board or the designated office makes recommendations about how the project will proceed, it will move to the decision body. So the member is quite correct in that.

At the decision body stage, that really is the opportunity for a municipality or other interested parties to make their appeals, and that's how the process is designed at this point.

Question re: Centennial anniversaries program

Mr. Phillips: My question is for the Minister of Tourism. During the time the Yukon Party held office, the centennial anniversaries program was developed to provide financial assistance to communities to develop tourism infrastructure to provide long-lasting benefits, improve tourism potential and take advantage of the economic benefits offered by the Yukon anniversaries.

The NDP, while in Opposition, criticized the centennial anniversaries program to no end, saying the program was a disaster, responsible for dividing communities and having too many restrictions.

I'd like to ask the Minister of Tourism what vision he sees when he comes to developing Yukon's tourism industry, and if he intends to support programs such as centennial anniversaries program and the centennial events program?

Hon. Mr. Harding: The minister asked the question to the minister responsible for Tourism, but the centennial anniversaries program and centennial events both fall under the jurisdiction of Economic Development. We said that we had some concerns about the centennial anniversaries program. There have been a number of problems identified with it in many of the communities, and there are still some problems that are ongoing. The member just recently wrote me a letter about the Whitehorse centennial anniversaries program publicly, with a lot of concerns about the program that he created.

We have decided and made a commitment that we would honour commitments under the criteria of existing CAP programs and we would try and work through some of the hurdles that exist with regard to that program, pending responsible decisions that meet the criteria being made by the proponents of a particular project.

So we've also supported the centennial events program, as was our commitment to honour the commitments of the previous administration. So we put the money in our budget, and if the proponents can come together to meet the criteria of the programs, then certainly they will continue to have the funding.

Mr. Phillips: I'm disappointed that the Minister of Tourism didn't answer, because the minister that did answer is one in this House that has clearly demonstrated to Yukoners and the industry that he has never supported tourism in the past, and still doesn't today.

One of the first proposals to come forward under the CAP was from the Town of Watson Lake to construct a planetarium with a display of the northern lights. With much hard work attributed to the dedication and commitment of many Watson Lake residents, I'm pleased to see this project become a reality, not to mention a world-class facility.

As the minister knows, the AGM, the annual general meeting of the Tourism Industry Association, will be held in the northern lights auroreum this weekend, at which I'll be taking part in proceedings. I'd like to know if the Minister of Tourism will be attending and whether or not he'll be taking part in any ribbon-cutting ceremony to officially open this building, despite his government's blatant opposition to the program.

Hon. Mr. Keenan: Yes, I certainly will be there. I certainly take my responsibilities very seriously, and I will certainly be there. I am certainly heartwarmed - if I might put it in that context - so that I will be there to listen to the people's voices and listen to the direction of the tourism industry and listen to their concerns. As far as cutting the ribbon, no, I have not been asked to cut a ribbon. I do believe that it is a town affair and that the town is going to be working with due diligence toward that, but I'll certainly be there with great pleasure indeed to be able to participate with them.

Mr. Phillips: Last week, they held the first showing of one of the films in the new facility, and over 500 residents of Watson Lake attended. I'd like to ask the minister, in his speech, when he speaks to the Tourism Industry Association and the people of Watson Lake, if he intends to congratulate the Town of Watson Lake for its initiative to develop this aurorium, and whether or not he intends to make a public apology on behalf of his colleagues for the critical approach toward this particular program, and for voting against this program in the budget, and against providing funding for this particular project.

Does the minister intend to come clean and tell the people of Watson Lake that his party never supported this particular project?

Hon. Mr. Keenan: Mr. Speaker, humour is definitely a part of this process, I can see. Inadvertently maybe, but it is certainly a definite part.

The member opposite asking me to come clean, insinuating I'm dirty - really, I don't like that either, but I look at where it's coming from.

As to the actual question from the member opposite, he is certainly going to be there, and I think with his anticipation of my speech and what's going to be delivered with my speech, I think I will just let him hang with the last chapter, biting his nails so that he might be able to be there and listen to my speech, and I certainly look forward to seeing him there and listening to my speech.

Speaker: The time for Question Period has now elapsed, and we will proceed with Orders of the Day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

OPPOSITION PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS

MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS

Deputy Clerk: Motion No. 47, standing in the name of Mr. Phillips.

Motion No. 47

Speaker: It is moved by the Member for Riverdale North

THAT it is the opinion of this House that testing in schools not only evaluates the level of learning attained by the individual student but it also demonstrates the effectiveness of teaching methods and the overall education system; and

THAT this House urges the Government of Yukon to maintain standardized testing in Yukon schools and strive for excellence in Yukon's education system by expanding the Yukon excellence awards to include significant achievers.

Mr. Phillips: I'm pleased to rise today to speak to this motion and ask all members to give it very serious consideration for support.

By supporting this motion today, I believe we can send a clear message to all out there that we feel here that we still can make improvements to our education system in Yukon.

Some members of this House, from time to time, have spoken out against testing, which I think is unfortunate.

I do not believe that testing is bad. In fact, I believe that it helps one prepare for the pressures that one will face in the tests of real life after school. As we all know, life is really a series of tests.

I had a chance to look over our record over the past few years, and it becomes more obvious to me where increased testing has actually helped our Yukon students increase their marks. That's important, Mr. Speaker, because the standards that our students have to meet today to get accepted into universities have risen dramatically in the past several years - 65 or 70 percent is not enough any more.

In 1993, the Yukon Party Minister of Education brought in increased testing in math, because our average mark was consistently below the B.C. average, whose curriculum we follow.

Since the implementation, our math marks have slowly risen to where, today, our average is above the B.C. average. That is, I believe, a credit to the increased testing, but as well as to the superb teachers, and last, but not least, the very hard work of our students, supported by their parents and families.

This improvement will eventually benefit all of us. We changed the number of the marks that counted on the final exams from 25 percent to 50 percent, so we made it more important to do well, and we increased the number of tests.

We, on this side, see the value of standardized testing. Testing not only evaluates the student's knowledge of the subject, but it also demonstrates the effectiveness of teaching methods and assists the teacher in improving their methods over the years.

The testing in math has shown great results, so let's look at where we are with our other Yukon subjects. The numbers that I'd like to read into the record do cause reason for concern. It appears that the only subject that we did better in than our B.C. counterparts in the January marks was math.

For the members' information, I'd like to go through some of the numbers. In biology our average was 64.34 percent; the B.C. final exam average was 70.66 percent. We were six percent lower.

In chemistry, the Yukon average was 68.37 percent and the B.C. average was 74.04 percent. Again, we were about six percent lower.

In commerce, the Yukon was 57.27 percent and B.C. was 65.73 percent. We were eight percent lower.

In English, we were 65.36 percent and the B.C. marks were 69.85 percent. We were four percent lower.

In French, we were 72.9 percent and B.C. was 76.32 percent. We were four percent lower.

In geography, we were 65.84 percent, B.C. was 69.66 percent. We were four percent lower.

In history, we were 68 percent, B.C. was 70.05 percent. We were two percent lower.

In physics, we were 66.26 percent and B.C. was 73.12 percent.

In the only subject that we've really increased the testing and worked on other methods for our curriculum since 1993 - math - the Yukon was 75.33 percent and B.C. was 70.28 percent. We were five percent higher in the one subject we concentrated on.

There was an article in the Yukon News a few weeks ago, where the comments were made by officials in the Department of Education that the final marks were not in yet. Well, I suggest to you that the marks that we have now and that were sent out to all the students in our local schools show that, in fact, Yukoners do need to do some more work in some of these other subjects, but if we initiate some new programs and follow some of the initiatives that have been undertaken by the previous government with respect to math, and carry that forward to other subjects, there is the potential for marked improvement.

As you can see, Mr. Speaker, there is some reason to have a harder look at this matter.

Now, I know that some might say that the number of students that we have in our system is low, and so you can't really compare it with British Columbia.

I don't really support this particular idea. First of all, let's look at some of the bonuses - the pluses - that the Yukon has. We have very high quality teachers. We are fortunate for that. We have some of the best facilities in the country to teach in and some of the best tools to teach with. We have, in the Yukon, one of the highest spendings per capita per student in the country - it doesn't always equate to high marks, but we do spend a lot of money in education - and we have something that I think does make a difference: the lowest student/teacher ratio in the country.

So, Mr. Speaker, why are our marks lower and what can we do to improve our students' results? I think the math results are a good example of things we can do. In math, we increased the amount of testing, but that wasn't all we did. We worked more with the students and we involved the parents, guardians and others to help improve their children's marks, and it simply worked.

I might add that when the public became aware by the articles in the paper that the marks had improved, the only negative comment that we heard came from a former defeated NDP candidate, who now has more control over our education system than any other Yukoner, and that's the Deputy Minister of Education, Mr. Riedl.

I'm sure that the students, the parents and the teachers must have been disappointed to hear the deputy minister say, "Anyone can teach the best kids." Well, I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker, I have a problem with that statement, and quite frankly, I believe this individual owes the students, the teachers and their parents an apology.

It took a lot of hard work and dedication and a lot of people in the education system to achieve those improvements, and the deputy minister should have known that. In fact, in one of the articles in the local paper, they talked to other education officials in the system and some of the comments they made were, "This was a real team effort." Other comments made were: "Group work is a big part of the new teaching philosophy at the school, with students helping students." "The classes also have group leaders who attempt to help the students having trouble." "Teachers put in extra time on the weekend."

This wasn't, as Mr. Riedl would like us to believe, just the result of "Anyone can teach bright students".

The deputy minister went on to say that we should not forget the kids that don't traditionally do well in math. Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't think I've heard anybody suggest that these kids should be ignored. At least, I haven't heard anyone say that publicly. In fact, we have many other programs in our school system just for these kids, and so we should.

As a former Minister of Education, I attended several meetings with Education ministers from all over this country, and I can tell this House that there is a move toward more standardized testing in all subjects, and I think the new Education minister must be aware of that by travelling to Education ministers meetings - with a strong emphasis on the basics of math, science and language.

I would hope that this government will work with other jurisdictions in adopting national standards and increased testing. We should not treat this issue as a political football, but the question we should ask is, what is best for our kids? How can we best prepare them for a successful future? I would like to urge this government to keep this as a priority in their decisions.

The second part of the motion deals with the awards of excellence program that was initiated under a Yukon Party government. I know, Mr. Speaker, that the new government did not particularly support that program, and many students and parents are now expressing concerns to us that they're afraid that this NDP government will kill this program.

I'd like to ask the minister to examine closely how this program has benefited Yukon students before they decide to do away with it.

I'd like to ask the minister to survey each and every parent and student who has received benefits from this program and get their opinions on whether or not they feel it has improved their marks in school and helped them in furthering their education.

It's important to consult school councils, as well, but make sure you talk to those who have worked very hard and achieved positive results because of this particular program.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to suggest to the minister that the awards of excellence program is not perfect, and it does need some fine tuning or some minor changes. There are some students who have shown, over the past year, a great deal of improvement but haven't reached that magic number of 80 percent - that benchmark of 80 percent. I realize that that could be an area in the program where improvement could be made.

I suggested, during the last election campaign, and I'm suggesting here, again, today, that the minister should look at expanding the program, or amending the program to acknowledge the hard work of students who have made marked improvement over the year, but don't quite reach the benchmark.

I'm sure there could be a sliding scale for percentages of improvement, or something of that nature that could be discussed with the school councils, as well as with the parents and students who have benefited from the program. We could come up with some kind of formula that would see students who do make significant achievements over the period of a year recognized in a way that could help benefit them, in the long run, when they decide to go to university.

I believe that both the initiatives that I have talked about here today are very positive in nature. I don't suggest for a moment that testing is the be-all and end-all, and it's the only thing that we should do in our schools. I think there are other programs.

I don't suggest for a moment that it benefits every single student, but testing is something that we are all subject to throughout our lives, and especially once you are out of school. One has to be prepared to deal with the pressures of meeting certain criteria to obtain a job, or to continue with a job, and I think that we should give this very strong consideration.

I would hope that the government would consider this motion in a positive light and encourage the government and members of this House to do what we can to improve our education system.

The marks that I read out here today are from the largest high school in the territory, and the British Columbia marks are an indication. I would think that we have a ways to go, but we have seen some positive results. We have seen it work, and the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, with our math teachers, with our students, with our parents, with students helping students. With a lot of dedication from a lot of people, we can achieve success.

So, with that, I would encourage all members of this House to support this motion that is before us today.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I'm pleased to rise to speak to the motion before us, and it's interesting to note that the member concluded his remarks by saying that he didn't believe that testing was the only method of gauging success from students, but in fact, that's what his motion is about, and that's one of a number of reasons why we would be unable to support the motion as it has been put forward by the Member for Riverdale North.

The member asserted that New Democrats have spoken against testing. We have not spoken against testing. We spoke against what the Yukon Teachers Association - to name only one interested party - referred to as an ill-designed and ill-planned Yukon excellence awards testing that was done with no consultation with the public or with the partners in education.

The member spoke in some detail about math marks having risen, and he was speaking about that as a demonstration of the success of the Yukon Party approach. I want to make it clear to people that the math marks that have risen have occurred at the same time that the participation rates are much lower. That increase in marks is based on a very small number of students who have done those tests, because the cross bar was set higher. I think we need to be proud of all of our students, and I think we need to work at encouraging all students to do well. We definitely need a harder look at the numbers.

The Yukon Party is singing from a single song sheet, and that is not a team effort, and I think that's a very fundamental difference that we need to point out. The member who just spoke went on in some detail that the only negative comments about the Yukon excellence awards had come from the now Deputy Minister of the Department of Education. Now, I will certainly demonstrate that that is false. There are letters from representatives of the Yukon Teachers Association that appeared in the paper, from the school administrators, from the Council of Yukon First Nations, from representatives of Yukon school councils, from a principal who was a Liberal candidate in the last election. There was lots of criticism about the fact that the Yukon Party brought forward the excellence awards without any consultation with the education community.

And, Mr. Speaker, I'm really troubled about the member's comments. We've come to expect personal attacks from that member on people who cannot defend themselves in this House. That's the member who stood up and referred to residents of a group home as criminals in this House when that is not the fact. That's a member who stands up and lays charges against people without any respect for the notion of fair trial or legal proof of facts and convicts in his own mind and puts it out there that his convictions should stand up. That's shameful. Now, the member spoke about some of the -

Speaker: Order please.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: The member spoke about the comments made by the president of the Association of Yukon School Administrators and, unfortunately, the president of the Association of Yukon School Administrators, in 1993, when this program was put in, had to write an letter to the editor - an open letter to the Education minister of the time - because the Education minister didn't talk to school administrators. The Education minister didn't talk to school councils. The Education minister of the day did not speak to the Yukon Teachers Association or the Council for Yukon Indians at the time. None of the people that should have been consulted were.

I think it was entirely legitimate for the president of the Association of Yukon School Administrators to express his concerns about the fact that partners in education were not respected, when the Yukon Teachers Association and the Association of Yukon School Administrators, together, represent some 500 people who work most closely with our students and were not consulted by this Yukon Party education initiative.

I think that I should outline, for the benefit of the member, because we are going to be speaking against his motion, just what our vision of education is and just what some of our concerns are that we don't believe the Yukon Party has paid attention to and should pay attention to.

For four years, Yukon people were extensively involved in a widespread consultation and development process that led to the creation of a new Education Act in 1990. A new era began when the act was put into effect, and a true partnership of educators, parents and students was born. That partnership with children disappeared after the election of the Yukon Party government in 1992. It was replaced with a top-down approach that showed disrespect for First Nations, parents, students and educators, which we believe is fundamentally wrong.

We believe that the principles of the Education Act recognize that the goal of the Yukon education system is to work in cooperation with the parents to develop the whole child, including the intellectual, physical, social, emotional, cultural and aesthetic potential of all students to the extent of their abilities. We want students to become productive, responsible and self-reliant members of society.

We must recognize that the Yukon education system should provide, as a right to each individual learner, an education that's based on equality of educational opportunity.

We believe that the Yukon curriculum in the schools must include the cultural and linguistic heritage of Yukon aboriginal people and the multicultural heritage of Canada.

We believe that meaningful partnerships with greater parental and public participation are necessary in order to have an excellent education system.

Today in this House I stood and announced the Youth Works steering committee. We as a government are prepared to listen to young people, to trust them to make responsible decisions about a $200,000 trust fund, and I think it's important that we listen to young people and, as adults, consider how we can better serve their needs.

It's quite valuable that young people will be involved in designing the criteria for the Youth Works board and the kinds of projects that it might support in the future.

I'm absolutely astonished that the Education critic for the Official Opposition wants to introduce, as his first Education motion, something on the subject of what has been a fundamentally flawed process from its very inception.

The Yukon excellence awards were established by the Yukon Party government in January of 1995 without consultation with teachers, school administrators, school councils, parents or students. On February 13th, 1995, the Whitehorse Star published a letter to Education minister Willard Phelps. This letter was signed by the president of the Yukon Teachers Association, the president of the Association of School Administrators, representatives of the Council of Yukon Indians and the Yukon school councils. The letter expresses outrage at the total lack of timely communication to the majority of stakeholders. It describes how the previous government ignored the recommendations of the Education Review Committee.

To quote, "While the review committee certainly heard that the pursuit of excellence is a goal of the education system, at no time was a monetary reward system a topic of discussion. Once again, consultation must be of paramount importance before the introduction of new programs."

The previous government made a hurried and flawed decision. Our government is working in partnership with schools to find an appropriate way to recognize the efforts and successes of Yukon students.

The Yukon excellence awards are currently under review. This review will open up the dialogue to the education community, including educators, parents, school councils, administrators and First Nations. The Department of Education is preparing an options paper to examine the effectiveness and benefits of the Yukon excellence awards.

The department has also developed a survey for partner organizations and interested individuals to gather their opinions concerning the department's role with respect to student recognition programs.

These options and the survey will be presented to school councils at their spring conference on May the 3rd. We hope to have feedback from school councils, teachers, parents and community members by June the 15th of 1997.

Mr. Speaker, even though we have reservations about the Yukon excellence awards program, we're not making a unilateral decision to cancel the program. We're going out and we're talking to the people who have an interest and who need to be involved and asking them for their views before a decision is made about the future of the program and how it might be changed.

We are working together with the Yukon Teachers Association to address the concerns that teachers have raised about assessment and recognition of student achievement. Teachers have important pedagogical and classroom experience that must be taken into account when reviewing any assessment policies.

Teachers and parents have expressed concern that excellence awards may not be the most effective way of spending our education dollars. We are spending money to reach a very small percentage of the student base. This money might well be more effectively spent on more equitable programs to foster student achievement.

Our government wants to strive for excellence in the Yukon educational system. We are not convinced that the Yukon excellence awards promote excellence. Therefore, we are opening up this program for review.

There was no proven link between rewarding excellence with cash awards and promoting excellence in a school community. Territorial exams do little to motivate poor achievers. The Yukon excellence awards have to do with rewarding scholarship, not assessment of student learning. Rewarding the work of our top scholars is important, but we shouldn't over-emphasize their position in the schools. We need to keep clear the distinction between assessing student achievement and rewarding that same achievement. Linking the rewards to a standardized test may not be the most accurate or equitable solution.

It is important to reward our students who achieve high marks. It is also important to recognize the efforts of students who work hard and improve their marks, even if they do not make 80 percent. Students who work hard at learning need recognition too.

Self-esteem is a vital part of a student's ability to learn, and recognition plays a large part in developing self-esteem. We need to have ways of recognizing the achievements of all students, not just those who are successful on exams.

Again, the Yukon Education Act commits us to providing an education appropriate to the individual learner, based on equality of educational opportunity. We must ensure that all three areas of educational opportunity - teaching, assessment and recognition - are carried out in ways that are fair to all students.

The Yukon excellence awards offer a narrow definition of excellence, confining it to students who make 80 percent, or better, on a standardized exam. The program does not recognize other skills and achievements that make an excellent student, such as working hard, critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity and cooperation. Analysis shows that Yukon excellence award winners are most often students who come from middle- or upper-class families, with a high degree of social support.

First Nation students are drastically underrepresented in the Yukon excellence awards; only two percent of winners in 1993-94, and only eight percent of winners in 1994-95.

The students who have won Yukon excellence awards are students who do well in school overall. We have no proof that students who were not getting high marks before the program was established are now attaining higher test scores. The Yukon excellence awards are not reaching a broad base of the student population.

For example, only nine percent of Yukon grade 8 math students won Yukon excellence awards in 1995-96. Only seven percent of Yukon grade 11 biology students won Yukon excellence awards in 1995-96. Only two percent of Yukon Grade 12 English Literature students won Yukon excellence awards in 1995-96. Only four percent of Yukon grade 12 geography students won Yukon excellence awards in 1995-96.

There are very few rural and First Nation students who receive Yukon excellence awards. We believe it's important to recognize all students' achievements, not just students who can earn over 80 percent on a territorial examination.

Now, let's look at the cost of this new program that the Yukon Party blind-sided the community with. For the fiscal year 1994-95, 369 awards were earned, and accruals in the amount of $148,000 were incurred. For 1995-96, 404 awards were earned, and accruals in the amount of $145,300 were incurred. We anticipate spending $179,800 on the awards in 1997 and 1998. Those monies are being expended on a program that the Yukon Party dreamed up and talked to nobody in the education community about.

Some teachers and parents have indicated that this money might be better spent in areas that offer support to students who have mid-range marks, or students that need additional social supports to strengthen their security during their school years. Some of our bright students are unable to concentrate well during school hours because of the demands of their living situations. It is an unfortunate reality that some kids live in poverty and are not eating properly. Others are in abusive environments. It is very difficult to do well in school with those kinds of problems. These students' life and well-being concerns are so critical that school becomes a secondary priority. We want to examine the possibility of offering more support to students who might experience external barriers to their achievement.

The Yukon excellence awards are redeemable within 10 years of leaving secondary school for tuition costs and books. Students must qualify as Yukon students under the Student Financial Assistance Act. Cuts to funding for colleges and universities mean that Yukon students and the Yukon government will be called upon to pay more for higher education. The excellence awards provide some funding to help with higher education. However, the majority of program awards help those students who are more likely to have family financial support for their education. Our government's review of the awards program will address the question of financial equity. We want to ensure the highest possible number of Yukon students is able to benefit from post-secondary education opportunities.

The member's motion also speaks to testing and assessment. Generally speaking, it is true that testing evaluates student learning, demonstrates the effectiveness of teaching methods and provides an overview of the education system.

The Department of Education assessment action plan forms the basis for departmental activities in the area of assessment. As part of the action plan, the Department of Education established a departmental assessment committee. The purpose of the committee is to oversee the orderly development of assessment policies and activities specifically geared to establishing common Yukon standards comparable to the rest of Canada.

The committee members include the assistant deputy minister for the public schools branch, a coordinator of student information and assessment, the superintendent responsible for student information and assessment, a rural school principal, two urban school principals, the coordinator of high school programs and a senior statistician with the Bureau of Statistics.

We do take assessments seriously. We do have a good departmental committee that's working on ensuring that assessments serve our students and our teachers well.

Standardized testing is most often used as a diagnostic indicator rather than an indicator of individual student performance. We must use effective methods to assess student progress. The results on specific tests do not give us a complete picture of a child. They provide only a snapshot of a particular area of learning. Most standardized tests are mainly multiple choice, because the format is cheap and easy to use, but they do not assess what students actually do, as opposed to what they know.

Teaching only to ensure good results on multiple-choice tests takes time away from encouraging students to develop their thinking skills. Teaching to the test can narrow the curriculum, because certain topics must be covered off and there is no time to consider interesting questions that might take you off topic for a period of time.

There is more to testing than simplistic multiple-choice answers can address. Students who do well in figuring out math problems may not be able to do well in a multiple-choice test if they do not do well in reading and comprehension of the questions. There is no opportunity, in multiple-choice testing, to account for the thought process involved in answering.

Performing well in a test means that you have learned to perform well in a test. Students who do not perform well on tests are not necessarily ignorant of the classroom material. We want to avoid a situation of too much testing and not enough teaching. Preparation for tests can take away valuable time for class discussions and problem solving.

According to one article, written by Dr. Eric MacPherson, almost one-quarter of grade 12 students in a prairie city spent two years preparing for the grade 12 provincial final examinations. Standardized testing ends up emphasizing the dull, trivial and testworthy subjects, not the results of curiosity, insight or passion. Every item on a multiple choice exam has to pass through many sieves of possible answers, until only the most uniform and bland questions survive. Multiple choice testing has also been criticized for inherent cultural and gender bias. The department employs a number of standardized tests that have practical applications for Yukon teachers and students. Not to alarm the member too much, we will continue to maintain CTPS testing, the year-end tests in literacy and numeracy in all grades, and we have the provincial learning assessment program from British Columbia, which is a good testing system since we teach from the B.C. curriculum.

Standardized tests tend to test memory recall rather than higher level, critical-thinking skills. Standardized tests assess basic knowledge when employers are looking for graduates with the ability to work cooperatively and to solve higher order problems.

The Yukon Education Act expresses a commitment to a Yukon curriculum that includes the cultural and linguistic heritage of Yukon aboriginal people and the multi-cultural heritage of Canada. Standardized testing may jeopardize that commitment. We believe that it's important to work on developing local curriculum and on meeting the goals of the Yukon Education Act.

Standardized tests are developed in conjunction with other jurisdictions. This means that questions are often geared to a southern, urban context. Yukon students, especially those in rural Yukon, need testing that is relevant to their experience. We want to ensure that Yukon students are equipped with skills to help them live as contributing members of their own communities.

Tests set by outside educators can put restrictions on northern curriculum. Our government also supports professional development for teachers that focuses on system-wide goals. We believe that achieving gender equity in our school system is a serious and important concern.

So there is a lot more than testing that needs to be the focus of the Yukon education system.

As we engage in a review of the assessment and recognition issues under the Yukon excellence awards program, the department will consider these general questions about testing: What kinds of tests are being used? What are the purposes of testing? What consequences could testing have beyond these stated purposes? Multiple choice mania in the United States has been proven to affect more than just the students. It can influence school enrollment, teachers' job status, student promotion, and even real estate values, and it can do that in a negative way.

One of my colleagues will be introducing an amendment to this motion to respond to what we believe are some of the flaws with the motion presented by the Member for Riverdale North. In closing, I would like to say that the Yukon Education Act outlines a vision for working in cooperation with the parents to develop the whole child, including the intellectual, physical, social, emotional, cultural and aesthetic potential of all students.

We have a responsibility to identify and employ methods of assessment of student ability that consider achievement in all of these areas. I look forward to the task ahead of us in trying to broaden the education system as it applies to our students, and that will include more than testing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Duncan: It is a pleasure to rise today in this House to speak to this motion and to the topic of education. To me, this is doing what we were elected to do, to engage in a healthy and vigorous debate on a topic that is not without its controversy.

In addressing the motion, I looked at the initial premise that testing in schools evaluates the level of learning attained by the individual students, and it demonstrates the effectiveness of the teaching methods in the overall education system.

Testing is a way to gather information, and that is important. Tests can serve as a valuable marker for teachers, parents and students. They can indicate the knowledge level and skills of individual students - where the students or schools stand in comparison with others. However, I would caution members to bring to mind that expression - and I'm sure that I don't have it correct - something to the effect of "lies, damn lies and statistics." Tests can also measure how well students meet stated curriculum goals - what gaps exist in the content of what students are taught.

Testing, however, does not measure the full spectrum of knowledge and skills. It does not take into account qualitative factors in student success, such as personal motivation and home support. It is not a substitute for teacher observation, and it does not solve the problems identified through student and curriculum evaluation.

In preparing for this, the teachers prepare for a test. They don't necessarily prepare for education if testing is our focus. It's easy to teach to a test. Teaching to a test just doesn't challenge or actually evaluate the skills of a teacher. A good teacher uses his or her skills to teach a child a life-long love of learning - how to ask tough questions, how to perceive bias.

One of the members of a local teaching faculty told me that some of our Yukon kids are like the caribou in the Finlayson Lake caribou herd. They've been tested so much that every time a plane flies overhead, their rear end flinches, waiting for the needle.

With respect to testing, the Member for Riverdale North referred to the math example at F.H. Collins.

I was the only member of this House present at a recent presentation by the math department at F.H. Collins, to interested parents, teachers and school council members, and I must say that I found that presentation absolutely fascinating.

There were points that were raised by the Member for Riverdale South. Indeed, there are scores that show significant achievement, and the F.H. Collins school ranks very high among B.C. schools, and there are kinds of interesting ways to interpret the data. However, there are two very, very important points that I learned as a lay member of society, and as a concerned parent, about the way math is being taught.

One is that in that particular school there is a collegial approach to teaching. I must say that I was very impressed with the presentation in that respect. In this collegial approach, all of the teachers are working together. They're working with students and they're working with the remainder of their faculty. There's a real concerted effort and a common approach. I found that very, very positive.

I walked out of that presentation, after an hour of being lectured to, with a very, very disturbing feeling that there are two types of education in the Yukon. There's education in Whitehorse and there's education in the rest of the Yukon.

I did not leave with the impression that a student in Dawson City, or Old Crow - Old Crow isn't a good example, because they don't have grade 12 there yet - or Haines Junction are getting the same level of instruction as a student at F.H. Collins is receiving. I wonder if this is the right approach? I was left with a tremendous number of questions.

However, I digress; I was discussing the point about testing. I'd like to make the point that, above all, tests are the beginning of a journey. They're not the destination itself.

Today's students must be able to be creative, to work with others in team situations, to problem solve and be understanding of the needs of others. You cannot test all the things that youth must be in order to look after us and our society and our planet in the future. If we over-emphasize testing, the next generation may then decide to test us.

With respect to this motion, specifically the Yukon excellence awards, in coming to this debate I wanted to do my homework and I researched the awards as a member not having been present in this House when the awards were discussed.

In response to questions in this House, the minister at the time, when he introduced the awards, stated that the awards were something that were really driven by the minister and he spoke about the very real concern that in Yukon we spend over $11,000 per student and, "We are getting damn dismal results." And I apologize, those are not my words, "damn dismal". They are a direct quote, Mr. Speaker.

Recommendation 38 of the education review said that when standard testing initiatives are implemented, a representative group of stakeholders be involved in the planning and development process. That consultation did not occur. And other people and other members of this House have noted that the Yukon Teachers Association were not consulted about this program.

The program itself was retroactive to the 1993-94 school year. Close to $85,000 was distributed to 174 students, and it seemed that they were, at that particular award year, evenly split along gender lines. However, two percent of students in rural Yukon qualified - seven out of 332, and 18 percent of Whitehorse students qualified - 167 out of 916 students.

Also in researching to speak to this motion, I spoke with a number of individuals and I would like to share with you some comments I received. One person supported the program initially but now does not believe it's appropriate, that we need to look at the broader picture, that the basic philosophy behind the program is flawed. She related an individual experience that her award winner, as a matter of fact, had. In this award winner's experience, teachers were harassing students about the awards, mentioning them daily in class. The students who were eligible for the awards were named. Previously, your marks, your scholastic standing, was a private issue and now, all of a sudden, it was subject to public discussion.

This other person also made the point that testing does not measure what a child actually knows and that the award program was not appropriate for rural Yukon, and overall that the Yukon excellence awards lost sight of what is best for the children.

Another individual - an educator - felt that the awards were a subtle attack on the teaching community, and that really there was no analysis or evaluation that you could motivate children with money, and that really the whole question of the Yukon excellence awards was a political agenda and not an education agenda.

On the list of the top ten corporate "what North America looks for in new hires", marks are number seven. Corporate North America is looking for individuals who are team workers, who are innovators, who are risk-takers.

The students who receive these awards are students who are going to university anyway, and are eligible for other scholarships.

Another individual not wanting to be strictly negative - wanting to offer positive, constructive suggestions - said, "Why not increase the Yukon grant if we are going to do this?" and also noted that the strugglers in our society - those people, and I count myself among them, in the less-than-80-percent range - are also the people who then go on to university and who then become not necessarily the doctors or lawyers - some become accountants or politicians - or, try, that's true - those who are in the professional and trades professions and the producers, the people we count on in our society, are not necessarily the people who are going to receive the Yukon excellence awards.

All of these individuals noted that once something is in place, it is very, very difficult to take it away. It would take real political courage to say that this is not the best use of taxpayers' dollars.

The minister has indicated in her discussion that there will be a discussion paper coming forward to the community. That's a positive initiative; it is a way to examine the awards, just as much as we are doing here, but this paper will consult with teachers and school councils. However, what options are we presenting in that discussion paper? Are we saying, "Leave it as it is"? Are we saying, "Expand the program"? Are we saying, "Give additional dollars to the schools and let them award it or use it where it should most appropriately be used"? Or, are we having the political courage in this discussion paper to say, "Are you prepared to get rid of this and let the politicians examine better uses for our taxpayers' dollars?"

I believe this discussion is part of a much, much bigger puzzle - the use of education resources, how we spend the sum of $93 million, which will be the subject of debate later on this year in this House. Education, to me, is one of the most important discussions that take place in this Legislature.

I mentioned the $93 million. About $80 million of that is O&M, and $13 million capital. There are 6,426 students - that's in our budget document. If you divide those figures, you end up with $14,500 per student. That's slightly erroneous, because Yukon College is included, and there are all sorts of other different ways of arguing that, so let's go back to another figure that was used in this House, of $11,000 per student. Either way, it's a lot of money.

In the context of $180,000 budgeted for these awards that reward a few, could the money be better spent? At a quick glance, and a quick time period to sit in my office and think about what would be the appropriate things, and having talked with a number of people - and, in particular, I go back to listening to that debate and discussion about the math program at F.H. Collins, when I was left feeling a tremendous sense of concern for children attending school outside of Whitehorse. - could we spend the $180,000 setting up, or participating in, some kind of video conferencing that would allow students at high schools in rural Yukon to participate in a program at F.H. Collins or the other Whitehorse high school? Could we use our resources better?

Could we set up a travelling group of teachers - math teachers or science teachers - that did nothing but go between different schools in rural Yukon and teach those subjects? Right now, as I understand it, if you want to take physics 12 in rural Yukon you may have to take it by correspondence. Perhaps more students would be interested if we were able to use this $180,000 in a better way to meet the other needs that are out there.

In short, there are far bigger education issues - curriculum, assisting our education system in dealing with students affected by FAS and FAE.

Ultimately, when it comes to examining education programs, I think we have to look, at a minimum, at three points. There are others, but these are the three points that immediately came to my mind. What is the right thing to do for the majority of our children? Have we done all that we can to look after those who are outside of the majority - the less fortunate, those who are mentally and physically challenged? We must also answer: does our system challenge the challengers, the innovators? Let's consider that three-point checklist and look at the Yukon excellence awards in comparison with it.

Are the Yukon excellence awards the right thing to do for the majority of our children? I think not when only two percent of rural Yukon students are eligible and less than 20 percent of Whitehorse students are eligible. That's not the majority.

Does this do anything for the less fortunate, for those students whose daily lives and ability to learn is disadvantaged - for students who are coming to school without the proper support at home, who are coming to school from a different set of circumstances than others? It doesn't help them.

Do the Yukon excellence awards challenge the innovators in our society - those who are already at the top, so to speak? Yes, it does assist them. There are, however, resources already in place that do this.

Having looked at the Yukon excellence awards in terms of that three-point checklist, and having examined the premise that testing in the schools not only evaluates the level of learning and so on, it isn't the only method. Testing in schools is one method. It's not the only one. It's one.

For these reasons, I believe that the money that is allocated for the Yukon excellence awards, in short, could be better allocated elsewhere to serve a greater majority of students, to serve those who are in need, and, in short, to serve rural Yukon to a far better degree than the Yukon excellence awards at this point in time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Livingston: The motion that has been presented by the member opposite, by the Education critic from the Official Opposition, provides this House with an opportunity today, an opportunity for us to clarify the debate, and to clarify the debate around testing, in particular, standardized testing and what our thinking is around educational issues.

I think it also provides us with an opportunity to be communicating to those that are interested, in our community, what kinds of priorities, in fact, this government does have.

I would note as well, that I think probably all of the members in this House have some common interests around education. We want our schools to function well, we want them to serve our students, we want our students to do well and to be able to move on from public schools, and be successful in their after-public-school life.

The issue is not whether there should be testing in schools. There is no question about whether testing plays a role in schools, but rather how much testing, what type of testing and what weight the various kinds of testing will be accorded.

One of the assertions in the motion presented by the member opposite is that testing demonstrates the effectiveness of teaching methods. I just would draw the member's attention to a headline in the Globe and Mail of last week, Friday's paper, April the 18th, "The Poor Fare Worse in Schools". It states that better-off children end up in gifted programs, with low-income ones in remedial classes.

Well, I could just imagine the perspective that one might take - and maybe I'm a little bit jaded - but the poor schools, their performances on these standardized tests are going to be a little lower; the rich schools, their performances are going to be a little higher.

Indeed, we've seen jurisdictions in the United States where merit pay is accorded on what kinds of performances their students will have on tests.

We've seen grants to school divisions, in jurisdictions not very darn far away from here, that have used a similar kind of a model. I think it would be very unfortunate if we went in that kind of a direction.

There's also reference in this motion to promoting excellence in education, and at first blush, I don't think anyone would have objection to that. But, there is an agenda here, and I'm going to talk just a little bit about that.

For this reason I, too, rise in opposition to this motion.

I just want to make reference to a couple of the comments in this article. I would commend the reading of this article to all members of the House and members of the community that would have an interest in this. In fact, I think we all have an interest in our schools.

The findings, it says, speak of what has become almost an unmentionable in Canadian society: an entrenched class system. And they point to the possibility that Canada's large and growing proportion of poverty-stricken children could create an under-class with all the social chaos that that suggests. Mr. Speaker, we can't support moving in that kind of direction.

It goes on with a professor of psychology from the University of Toronto who talks about, "We are in a circle of not allowing people to climb out of a lower echelon in society." This is Joan Grusec from the University of Toronto. "As a psychologist, I say someone has got to worry about those kids. Someone has got to do something for them." Mr. Speaker, the application of standardized testing, as is mentioned in this motion, will do nothing for them.

I think that's what the issue is here. Before I get into talking about standardized tests, I'm going to talk just for a moment about the awards, because the excellence awards, of course, are something that reference has been made to.

We've seen awards to this date offered in both the math and the science areas. Nothing in English and social studies. Indeed, I would suggest it would be pretty darned difficult to come up with a test that would give a student 25 or 50 percent of their mark for the year that would be in multiple choice questions in English and social studies. What are we talking about? Rote memorization? Just memorizing a bunch of facts that are going to be regurgitated on a test. It's not good enough, Mr. Speaker. Further, I think the fact that we've got 10 percent of the students who are receiving encouragement from this kind of award, maybe a few more because there's some that will be just under the mark that will be hopeful, and 85 or 90 percent of the students that are just not in the game. We're helping just a very small group of students in the education system.

Standardized testing is the real agenda here, Mr. Speaker. The multiple choice test is a primary driving force for learning in this territory and that's what was intended, I suggest, by the previous government. These standardized tests are no more than an instrument for sorting students. They certainly are not an indicator in the kind of way that has been suggested by the previous government.

Indeed, we saw, during the last three years or so, almost all of the educational dollars for new initiatives plunged into this testing program, either for the special awards or for the setting up of a testing task force or secretariat or whatever in the Department of Education.

Indeed, this testing program was put forward for political reasons, not for educational ones, and that's very clear if the previous government would have taken the time to talk to educators, would have taken the time to have reviewed the research on testing - and there's a lot of it out there. For me personally, Mr. Speaker, it was one of the straws that broke the camel's back. It's one of the reasons I ran for office. It was a political agenda, rather than an educational agenda and, as an educator, it was not something I could sit idly by and stand for.

The assessments have consumed an incredible amount of instructional time in schools, and the assessments that have been added to the agenda include Strand tests, cumulative tests, the LPI English placement tests, in addition to the B.C. departmental exams, the school achievement indicators program, PLAP - or British Columbia provincial learning assessment program - in addition to all of the tests designed, administered and marked by classroom teachers.

The Canadian Test of Basic Skills is an additional one, and those are some of the tests that are listed in a report that I'm sure was tabled in this Legislature in April of 1995, an assessment submitted by Didactics Research Services.

The real issue here is how do we support quality instruction and quality opportunities for learning in our schools.

I'm going to make reference to one additional article, and it's one that I'm certainly prepared to table in the House. The article's entitled, "What research tells us about good assessment," and it's contained in an educational magazine of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, which is an international organization of educators and those that are responsible for the supervision of education.

It makes reference to some 30 reviews by educational researchers from around the world and the work that they have done in terms of determining what makes a good assessment. I quote, "Does assessment support change? Interestingly, much of the research supporting the power of testing to influence schooling is based on traditional standardized tests and concludes that such tests have a negative impact on program quality."

It goes on and makes reference to a number of different studies that have been done and notes that standardized tests assess only part of the curriculum. Many of these researchers conclude that the time focused on test content has narrowed the curriculum by overemphasizing basic skill subjects and neglecting higher-order-of-thinking skills.

Reference has been made in this House to the importance that employers, parents and the community place on students being able to problem-solve, function effectively with others, make decisions, and all of those kinds of things. Well, Mr. Speaker, the research is very clear. The standardized test, in fact, tends to de-value.

The article goes on to note, cheerier pictures emerge, however, when the assessments model authentic skills in a variety of methods - including methods that are used in the workplace, methods that are used in a variety of settings that actually look at performance, look at performance indicators, look at processes, and so on, and can actually improve instruction and improve the learning outcomes.

The member who opened debate talked about the tests of real life, and, Mr. Speaker, I think that's a valuable model for us to be using as we kind of think about the different types of tests or assessments that we would use in our schools. As he says, the proof is in the pudding, and the educational research is very clear: standardized tests do not improve instruction, and indeed, because of teachers teaching to the tests and focusing so much instructional energy on simply bouncing back specific information for tests. In fact, it devalues instruction.

On that note, I would like to make an amendment to the motion, and I'd like to read that into the record.

Amendment proposed

Mr. Livingston: I move

THAT Motion No. 47 be amended by deleting all the words after the phrase "THAT it is the opinion of this House that" and substituting for them the following:

"exams are but one of many tools available to educators and the public in assessing student learning; and

THAT this House affirms support for a balanced assessment approach, curriculum leadership, professional development and the use of varied instructional strategies to support quality learning; and

THAT this House urges the government to continue to work closely with partners in education, including parents, educators, students and the community, to promote excellence and equity in Yukon schools as envisioned in the Education Act."

Mr. Livingston: This moves us to a much more positive note.

Speaker: Order. I have an amendment to Motion No. 47 that I will read. It has been moved by the Hon. Member for Lake Laberge

THAT Motion No. 47 be amended by deleting all words after the phrase "THAT it is the opinion of this House that" and substituting for them the following:

"exams are but one of many tools available to educators and public in assessing student learning; and

THAT this House affirms support for a balanced assessment approach, curriculum leadership, professional development and the use of varied instructional strategies to support quality learning; and

THAT this House urges the government to continue to work closely with partners in education, including parents, educators, students and the community, to promote excellence and equity in Yukon schools as envisioned in the Education Act."

Mr. Livingston: I believe that this amendment moves us to a progressive agenda: one that talks about tests and recognizes the value of tests, but recognizes that they are but one type of assessment. The demonstration of skills and knowledge and attitudes through projects, through presentations, through performances of special tasks, of specific tasks, through labs, and so on, are all legitimate forms of assessment and need to be accorded their due weight.

I believe this also helps to move assessment of students out of isolation. Assessment by itself will do very little, I would suggest, to improve the performance of students. What can improve the performance of students is good assessment when it's used in conjunction with professional development for educators, with the expansion and emphasis on good instructional strategies and, as it can follow, good curriculum leadership, both from educational leaders and from the community at large.

I was pleased to hear the critic for the Official Opposition make reference to group work. It is certainly at least a recognition that there are other means, aside from the more traditional and very important lecture format, and so on. The point I am trying to make here is that good assessment is not just testing; it is a variety of methods. Good instruction is not just stand-up lecture; it is a variety of methods. You have to try to fit the right process for the right purpose.

I think that this amendment helps us to do that.

Finally, I think this emphasizes the notion of partnership, and partnership is something that we've committed to. We've committed to it in the A Better Way document; we committed to it, indeed, in 1991, after going through a wide consultative process in designing the Education Act.

The commitment to partnership, I think, is a means for us to develop alternative approaches, to what we saw imposed on education over the last number of years, alternative approaches that will help to ensure that we have a system that offers excellence for students, but one that also offers equity.

I think that we can be moving forward on both of these very important agendas, and helping to prepare students for the 21st century.

Mr. Phillips: Before I speak more specifically to the amendment, I want to speak, for a short time, about some of the comments that were made by some of the previous speakers.

I think if one were to read the debate that has gone on here today, and paid attention to what I said - in particular, about this motion - all along - and we've said all along that the testing is not the be-all and end-all. It's not the only method; it's one of the methods.

I'm somewhat puzzled by some of the members opposite, because we bring in programs all the time in our school system that deal with specific topics.

I was surprised a bit by the Liberal approach to this motion where they said that the reason they can't support the excellence awards is because it only deals with a very small percentage - two percent overall in the territory, and 20 percent in Yukon - and, what I was surprised about is, if you take that Liberal philosophy with the awards of excellence program, and you apply it to all of the other programs in the Department of Education, you would be decimating the special needs program, the specialty programs within the department, that deal with a very small percentage of people, too.

There are very few programs in our schools that recognize individual achievement as the awards of excellence program does, and encourage individuals who, if they work hard, and if they improve, could see a reward. That's not a bad thing to teach our kids. I was brought up that way; I'm sure my parents were brought up that way. If you work hard and do a good job, you might see a reward at the end of the tunnel.

It is only one program. It's not the only program. There are other programs in the schools that recognize the achievements of other students, and I also suggested that there is room for expansion of the awards of excellence program to include those students who didn't achieve the 80 percent mark. I'm open to suggestions on how the program could be expanded. It'll be interesting to see what kinds of results the Minister of Education gets from her survey that she's going to conduct and who she's going to conduct it with.

The minister said that the awards of excellence program is only for the rich families. Well, I've got constituents in my riding, Mr. Chair, that quite frankly aren't rich families. They live in apartments, and some single mothers and single fathers are quite happy that their children are doing better and receiving this benefit toward their future university training. In fact, the mother and the father, in some cases, may not, as it stands right now, be able to put their child through university, but this particular program might assist that child in some way to go to university.

There was a lot of talk by the Minister of Education and by the last speaker about standardized testing. Quite frankly, I'm a little surprised at the NDP position on standardized testing because, like I said, I attended Ministers of Education meetings, and everyone there supported standardized testing. There were one or two Ministers of Education from, I think, Saskatchewan or British Columbia who supported it. In fact, we were all working for it. In fact, our biggest complaint as Ministers of Education is that it was going too slowly.

I know that they were bringing in standardized testing for math, for some of the sciences, and for English. They were looking at those particular programs. They had working groups from different jurisdictions working on developing the tests and bringing them forward. The member who spoke last said that some jurisdictions weren't, but I don't recall any jurisdiction saying they were against it. I just don't recall that. I remember them all speaking out in favour of it.

I guess it looks like the Yukon is going to be the only jurisdiction that's probably going to opt out of standardized testing.

Some Hon. Member: (Inaudible)

Mr. Phillips: Well, the Minister of Education said she never said that, but read the Hansard tomorrow. The minister severely criticized standardized testing in the House here today, said it didn't serve any purpose at all.

So, you know, Mr. Speaker, they ...

Speaker: Order please. Order.

Mr. Phillips: ... they can't have it both ways. You can't severely criticize it and then stay on board and just quietly do it. You have to take a stand on it.

I have a problem with the amendment that's been put forward by the Member for Lake Laberge. I guess, in general, the amendment is not all that bad but it completely ignores the award of excellence program. There's not a word of mention. It deals with the first half of the motion, which is fair, but then it forgets about the Yukon excellence awards program, as if it wasn't in the motion in the first place. I suggest to the member that that was deliberate, that the side opposite says it's going to go out and consult with Yukoners about this program but it's busy with its Deputy Minister of Education crafting a discussion paper which will effectively kill the program, and they're going to do their best. They're going to bring their best sales people on board to go to the school councils meeting and sell them the idea that this is not a good program. The decision's been made. It's just a matter of time and how they sell it.

I'm disappointed with that because this may have affected 20 percent of the students in Whitehorse. I know there was a comment, I think by the Minister of Education, that there was a lack of participation by aboriginal students in the program, or a lack of aboriginal students who had actually achieved the ability to receive benefits from the program. She said it was two percent in 1993-94. A year later, it's gone up six percent, to eight percent. So, something's working. It's not good enough yet, but something's working, and maybe in three or four more years it'll be 38 percent or 48 percent or 58 percent, but I don't think it's going to get that chance. I think this government took a stand on this issue in the first place and has decided that it's toast.

So, the parents out there and the students who have been receiving these awards and benefits better get ready, because they're coming to an end, because this administration has made up its mind. It's going to receive support from the Liberals, who are driven by others, and it appears that they're going to kill the awards of excellence. They'll have to face the parents and the students who are going to lose this benefit, and I think that's unfortunate.

Mr. Chair, there are all kinds of programs in our schools that recognize excellence of all types, from athletics excellence to others. This is one small program that recognizes academic excellence. The member for Porter Creek South talked about a $93-million budget, and we're talking about over $100,000 for a program respecting excellence - and only if the students who achieve the marks decide to go on to further learning in university. It's the only way to get it. They don't get cash; they have to go back to school to further their education - in a time when university costs are sky-rocketing, when it's getting more difficult all the time for all people to afford to send their children to university. This isn't going to help everybody, but neither are some of the other programs we have in our school system going to help everybody.

The Liberals want to kill the program because it only goes to 15 or 20 percent, but there are dozens of programs in our schools that don't help 20 percent of the students.

Mr. Chair, I'm disappointed that it didn't deal with the award of excellence program, even to say that it would be evaluated and looked at and examined by committees, but just ignores it. It just kills it. It just gets rid of it. Like I said before, the initial amendment is not that bad, except that it only deals with half the motion, and if you're going to make an amendment to a motion, then make an amendment to a motion that deals with all aspects of the motion and not just part of it, unless you have an ulterior motive and you're playing politics with this issue.

Mr. Chair, we on this side are going to be unable to support this amendment because it is only a partial amendment. I ask all members of the House to consider that when voting on the amendment. It should include something that talks about the awards of excellence, if we're going to actually deal with this and deal with it in a responsible manner.

It's interesting that each speaker that spoke before me and on the main motion spoke about both aspects of the motion. They spoke about testing and they spoke about the excellence awards, and that's why I have a problem with the amendment.

If you had a problem with the excellence awards, why wasn't it in the motion? Is there not enough political courage to deal with it in the motion, to kill it outright? Because that's what I think the members are planning to do anyway.

So for that reason, the Yukon Party cannot support this amendment to the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Hon. Ms. Moorcroft: I rise to speak in support of this amendment to the motion. I believe it's very important that we set out in a motion that we do want to recognize not just exams as a method of assessing student learning, but that it's important to have a balanced assessment approach. Curriculum leadership and professional development, and varied instructional strategies, are ways of supporting an excellent learning environment for all of our students, and that is something that we need to do.

It is important that the education that our students get today prepare them for the changes in the workplace and for what society and the workplace will look like when they graduate from school.

Now what we have been saying here today in debate on this motion is something that is also being said by organizations such as the Conference Board of Canada, which looks at employability, skills and profiles of what employers are looking for when they want to hire for the workplace of tomorrow.

The critical skills that are required of the Canadian workforce include academic skills, personal management skills, and teamwork skills. Canadian employers need people who can understand and speak the languages in which business is conducted, listen to understand and learn, write effectively, think critically and act logically to evaluate situations, solve problems and make decisions.

Mr. Speaker, I would submit that multiple choice testing does not adequately assess students' abilities to solve problems and think critically. Personal management skills require positive attitudes and behaviours that include self-esteem and confidence, personal ethics, the responsibility to set goals and priorities. These are not things that can be gauged accurately in multiple choice testing.

Teamwork skills of working with others and understanding and working within the culture of a group, making decisions in collaboration with other people, respecting the thoughts and opinions of others in the group - those are not assessed by multiple choice testings.

The member opposite stood up and said that we don't believe in rewarding students, because we want to opt out of standardized testing. The member is twisting my words. We never said that we would opt out of standardized testing. In fact, what I said was that the Department of Education is going to continue to ensure that there is good testing and assessment in place. We're going to continue with the CTBS, which is a standardized testing that is administered to students all across the country. We're going to participate in year-end tests in literacy and numeracy in all grades. There is no devious motive here to eliminate standardized testing.

The member opposite also alleged that there was an ulterior motive. We do not have predetermined plans. The Yukon Party played politics with the Yukon excellence awards. As the Minister of Education, the Member for Riverdale North ignored partners in education. We are going to go out as a government. We would not be spending the time and resources having people in the department prepare an options paper to take out to the public if we were not prepared to listen to what the public has to say. So, the member is completely wrong in his statements that we have a predetermined agenda.

We took the opportunity to call the Yukon Teachers Association and ask them for their thoughts about the Yukon excellence awards, which they found had been ill-designed and ill-planned, with no consultation. It was a test for test purposes only, without consideration for the purposes of the test.

There is no indication that the award would be effective as an incentive for doing better in school. Recent pedagogical approaches indicate that observing performance is better than testing. The Yukon Teachers Association told us that they believe that public education is supposed to prepare students for more than just employment. It is to prepare them as members of the community. We run the risk of teaching to the test when we put too much emphasis on testing, and not having enough time for other kinds of instruction.

We want to present a program that encourages kids to take courses where they feel more sure of getting the award and making money. We don't want to see less of an incentive to take difficult courses like calculus because students figure that there's no point taking it if they cannot get the dollar reward for them.

The Yukon Teachers Association felt that the program put pressure on teachers to produce high marks in the classroom, and that may influence dropping out of math and science programs, as attention is focused on top-notch students.

I think it's important, given all of the discussions we've had about math results, and the increased math results, that the academic math results only reflect 43.5 percent of the students at F.H. Collins in grade 12 math. Only 84 out of 193 potential graduates took the academic math in grade 12. Again, when you look at the number of students across the Yukon, only 41 percent of the students took academic math. So, the results are skewed by how many students are having their marks counted.

Nonetheless, we are prepared to work with the community. We are going to go out and ask the parents that the member opposite felt we should talk to and the students and the Yukon Teachers Association and school councils and teachers and principals and all members of the education community what their position is on the Yukon excellence awards before any decision is made.

Finally, I would commend this amendment to the House, and I would say that if it gives the Education critic for the Official Opposition any comfort, I'm prepared to sit down and look at a further amendment, when we have finished and voted on this amendment, to speak to the Yukon excellence awards and that this House should encourage the government to continue with its plans to consult the education community on the Yukon excellence awards and how to come up with a good recognition system for all students to do well in our schools.

Ms. Duncan: With respect to the amendment, I'd just like to make a couple of points.

It discusses exams and testing, and I would reiterate the point that I made earlier that testing is but one method.

I'd just like to refute a comment that the support for an alternative approach to the one proposed by the Member for Riverdale North was driven by others.

In making my remarks, I sought the opinion of others, as any responsible member of this Legislature would do - single mothers, and yes, recipients of the awards.

In fact, one recipient of the award lovingly terms them the Kraft Dinner awards, because, yes, they benefited that individual, but that individual also said that it was their opinion that the philosophy driving the program was flawed.

I would remind the member that, in addressing this particular subject today, I do have children, I have been through the system, and I'm looking forward to them going through the system. I used a three-point checklist in evaluating the Yukon excellence awards to reach a conclusion in my own mind, and to speak with my own voice.

The majority. It doesn't help the majority of children. Not all programs do, as the argument was put forward. At that point, I introduced, for debate, the whole idea that I believe that rural Yukon is suffering at this point in time in terms of the education being offered. That, maybe, in the course of constructive debate, there could be suggestions put forward that would be worth looking at.

The second part of my checklist was, have we done all that we could do to look for those who are outside of the majority, the less fortunate, those who are physically and mentally challenged? No, it doesn't. There are already programs that do this and there are many of them. Ultimately, when we evaluate anything in this House, it is our responsibility to say, on behalf of the 1,200 people or however many we represent, is this the best use of taxpayers' dollars? In the case of the motion, the original motion, I don't think so. The amendment does not address the excellence awards specifically. It doesn't address the very constructive suggestion and question about service to rural Yukon directly; however, it does address the need to promote excellence and equity in Yukon schools.

The Member for Riverdale North, in discussing the use of taxpayers' dollars, said, "Well, of a $93 million budget, it's only $100,000." Well, only $100,000 goes an awfully long way to various non-government organizations that have been discussed ad nauseum in this House. It goes a long way to a whole list of projects and it would go a very long way to better serving rural Yukon's education needs a long way if we were to look at innovative, constructive suggestions.

Specifically with respect to the amendment, I would put a caveat on it, if you will, or an understanding for clarification in this House, that this House urges the government to continue to work closely with partners in education, including parents, educators, students and the community.

Somewhere in all of that, we must ensure that we talk to former students, and I'm speaking of those students of the 1993-94 year and the 1994-95 year who may have received the excellence awards in our effort to continue to promote excellence and equity in Yukon schools.

I would re-state that, contrary to opinions put forward in this House, I am speaking from my own mind, my own research and with my own intelligence, and I believe that, ultimately, we all have to be concerned - petty, political partisanship aside - about the education of our children. That's the real issue: the education of our children.

Mr. Jenkins: With respect to the amendment, I don't have any quarrel with what the contents of that amendment are. They are very generic in nature, but it basically neuters the motion put on the Order Paper by the Member for Riverdale North. It very much destroys it, the intent. It skirts around the peripherals. It's there, but it's not there in substance.

What it's omitting is the awards program, and when the Yukon Party government announced the awards program for Yukon public schools, it was intended to not only reward students for their scholastic achievements but to provide substantial encouragement for them to stay in school and to go on to post-secondary studies. Yes, the Yukon awards are given to those students in grade 11 through 12 who score a mark of 80 percent or higher on the B. C. provincial exams, but the reward is in the form of a reimbursement for tuition fees and books payable once this student has officially enrolled in post-secondary studies. The purpose of this program is to encourage scholastic achievement. The amendment to the motion does generically speak about that, but this is one of the added tools that is missing, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has been an ongoing critic of that program, referring to it as money earmarked for a select group of gifted students, and elitists. I'd like to inform this House that the previous NDP administration had an excellent awards program, but they rewarded valedictorians and teachers. I would say that the current Yukon excellence awards program benefits far more students than the selective program that the NDP had in place previously.

The motion was put on the Order Paper to address the fears rising in the community that the NDP government is going to scrap the Yukon excellence awards. This amendment to this motion serves notice that that is the intent of this government.

I would encourage this government to be positive about initiatives that have merit. This government fully supports competitions in sports, ensures that athletic excellence is rewarded, but they seem to feel that to reward excellence in academics is somewhat shameful.

I've noted that the Minister of Education seems to base her views on the program of deliberations of school administrators and the Yukon Teachers Association. I'm pleased to see that, eventually, we're going to consult with a broad spectrum and include the students and their parents, and judge the program.

It is essential that our young people be offered an education that is comparable to any jurisdiction in the world. With the competition students are facing in the global market, education is of greater significance than ever before.

The current Yukon government seems to be telling Yukon students that they are aware that students can't achieve excellence, so the government will reduce the standards demanded by learning institutions outside of Yukon to make learning easier for the students here in Yukon. Does this government believe that Yukon is an isolated sphere, where Yukon residents do not have to be competitive? Everywhere in Canada, testing is a form that's accepted. In the Yukon, I guess our Department of Education is going to reinvent the wheel in this area.

If that is the case, this government is terribly naive and is guilty of misleading Yukoners. It would seem evident by the number of outside hires that the government has made, that they prefer -

Point of order

Hon. Mr. Harding: A point of order.

Speaker: Order. A point of order has been called.

Unparliamentary language

Hon. Mr. Harding: The member has accused the government of misleading Yukoners. I would submit to the Speaker that that is quite unparliamentary.

Withdrawal of remark

Mr. Jenkins: Mr. Speaker, I retract my remark. But they said one thing before and now they are doing something else.

It would seem evident that by the number of hires this government is bringing in from outside Yukon that they prefer people that are educated in jurisdictions other than Yukon.

In Canada, we spend more on education per capita than any country in the world. We spend more on the capital infrastructure of schools, we spend more on O&M costs and we have virtually the highest paid teachers in Canada. Legislators cannot be faulted for not providing funding for education. But, sadly, students going through our system are often not as qualified as graduates in other countries that spend considerably less on education.

It hits home with me. I have two daughters, both born, raised and educated in the Yukon. My eldest daughter was successful in accessing the Yukon excellence awards. In fact, today when she phoned, she had just finished her final exam at the University of Alberta and is on her way home.

During the course of the year, she and her colleagues were interested in figuring out a way that they could come back, take their grade 12 over in the Yukon, do very, very well in it, and acquire some more funds to help them further their studies. This was something that was brought up by the students on their own. It was most, most interesting to hear how successfully this program has been received.

On the other side of the equation, my youngest daughter, who completed her grade 11 at Robert Service School in Dawson City, could not find the course selection and she wasn't really as well motivated to achieve satisfactory grade levels for university entrance. She wanted to move to Whitehorse and attend F.H. Collins. This happened in August. She has enrolled in F.H. Collins this fall. She has gone through, and she's become truly excited and, yes, even inspired, by the instruction she is receiving, especially in mathematics. It's amazing what she comes home and says about her math teacher.

It's essential that our education system stimulates, motivates and challenges our students. If it does not, our young people will become more and more disinterested and their achievements will be mediocre at best.

As an elected official and as a parent, I want to see an education system that prepares all Yukon students to the highest possible level that they can achieve.

Testing and exams are one of the tools used to prepared students for the trials and tribulations of life, indeed, let's call it the test of life. The Yukon excellence awards are an added incentive to encourage students to attain this end.

I cannot support the amendment to the motion. It is, in general terms, acceptable, but it omits the one factor that we have come to acknowledge and respect as an added tool to encourage our students to stay in school, graduate and go on to a higher level of learning. That is the Yukon excellence awards.

Hon. Mr. Sloan: I'll speak to the amendment in general, but I'd like to talk a little bit about the concept of testing, and there were some interesting terms bandied around here with regard to testing:

tests of real life. Well, I'm not really sure what's meant by "tests of real life". Generally, I've found in life that most people don't shove a multiple choice at you and say, "Please do this." Tests of life generally have to do with such things as your skills to innovate, your skills to follow through on tasks, your skills to be creative, your skills to work with other individuals. I really seriously question if we can measure those by paper and pencil.

There were a couple of interesting points raised in some of these discussions, regarding the whole question of tests.

I'm not against tests. I've used tests in my professional life as a teacher. I've used them in schools. I think there are purposes for tests, but I think that's it: there are purposes for tests, and tests can be used very creatively, they can be used constructively, but, primarily, the use for tests, as I see it in the educational system, is largely as a diagnostic tool.

I think about the most effective tests that I've seen have tended to be at the lower levels - children entering the system - for identification of early possible problems with reading. Standardized tests have been used very successfully to diagnose difficulties in reading or other subjects and I think, subject to proper interpretation, they can be used very, very effectively.

What I am opposed to is using tests as a measurement of individual worth, and unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, this is what tests often become. The Member for Klondike mentioned that he had a couple of daughters in the school system. I have a daughter, of whom I am probably inordinately proud, who is off at school in, I guess, a very select school in Montreal, pursuing a career which she feels is really where she wanted to go. She arrived there by her own dint of hard work. It's an interesting school because it selects kids from across Canada. You know, what was a really interesting kind of thing, the interesting experience for me this year, was the fact that, during the course of the year, she had what I considered to be a far more interesting test. She was invited by the Canadian Writers Union to Toronto to read some of her work at the writers development dinner, and that's an interesting test because the test, in that case, was administered by people like Mavis Gallant and Susan Musgrave, who recommended her work be read and that she come to Toronto. That's a test.

This is the same girl that, when she was working through at F.H. Collins and, incidentally, achieving very good marks, really had some difficulties with math. There was one memorable evening, as you sometimes work with your child on homework, when we were struggling through one rather complicated algebraic equation, when she looked at me and asked me, "Dad, when am I going to use this?" I looked at the algebraic equation and concluded, "When you build a road." She thanked me for that piece of information and promptly concluded that math really wasn't her cup of tea.

Now, is she a failure? I doubt it. I, as a matter of fact, think she's an extraordinarily successful person because she has learned what her skills are, what her potential is. She's maybe not a math person but I think, regardless, she'll be an extraordinarily successful person, and I would be very loathe to see a test evaluate somebody else's worth by means of paper and pencil.

About a month ago, I had the opportunity to go to the association for learning disabilities of the Yukon and to hand out some awards, and I had the opportunity to meet a young man who had excelled in a rather extraordinary fashion in matters concerning computers, computer technology, was actually working with other students on showing them how to do this. But this young fellow confessed to me that he had problems in certain areas of education, primarily reading.

Was he a failure? I doubt it, and I would really be very, very loathe to assess people as to how they score on particular artificial scales as to their worth. I think that when we get into using tests to sort kids, we really move into some very, very dangerous ground. If we suggest that, because certain people achieve certain scores on certain tests, that somehow they are inherently better, I think we've taken a rather dangerous slide down the road to social Darwinism.