Page Content
Hancock admits budget may result in fewer teachers
While health care remained the popular issue in question period as the legislative assembly continued its spring sitting, education funding rose in prominence following the Calgary Board of Education’s announcement of a $61.7 million budgetary shortfall. Featured here are highlights of some of the proceedings that took place between March 14 and 24, when the legislature adjourned for two constituency weeks.
Education Funding
March 21—Kent Hehr (LIB—Calgary-Buffalo) asked Minister of Education Dave Hancock why the government does not provide long-term, sustainable funding for education as it does for healthcare. Replied Hancock, “This is not going to be an easy budget for education. I’ve maintained that from day one. It’s very difficult. There are programs such as the AISI program that are very important to education going forward that we’re working very hard to make sure get maintained, but we are living in a difficult fiscal time, and we do need to be part of that process and that strategy.” Hehr asked Hancock to admit that the Calgary Board of Education’s anticipated $61.7 million shortfall is a result of government cutbacks. Hancock replied that, while government’s proposed budget represents a 4.7 per cent increase for education, not a cutback, some grants have been eliminated. “Yes, it’s going to be difficult for school boards, and it may well result in school boards doing some things differently and perhaps even fewer teachers,” he said. Hehr asked Hancock whether his ministry has given up on lowering class sizes as recommended by Alberta’s Commission on Learning. Hancock replied that, due to fiscal restraint, the government has decided to focus “class size resources on K to 3, where the evidence does show that it could make a difference in students’ learning, and in high school classes, where small class sizes are important for safety reasons.”
March 24—Harry Chase (LIB—Calgary-Varsity) asked Hancock why, given that the government has abandoned the Class Size Initiative, frozen special needs funding, eliminated enhanced English-as-a-second-language funding, halved the Alberta Initiative for School Improvement and suggested school boards drain their surpluses, he is holding children’s education hostage. “That is absurd,” replied Hancock, adding that school boards’ operating funding has risen by 63 per cent over the last 10 years while the student population has risen by only three per cent. Chase asked Hancock whether, given that the first step of the government’s plan is to bankrupt school boards, the second step is to centralize or eliminate local educational authority. Hancock responded by expressing the government’s continuing support for locally elected school boards. He added that the government is asking school boards only to look at their operating reserves. Chase asked Hancock whether, given the Calgary Board of Education’s anticipated $61.7 million shortfall and the inevitable layoffs, the government believes that children are not worthy of sustainable, predictable funding. “Sustainable and predictable funding? We’re talking about a $61 million shortfall in the Calgary board. That would be a seven per cent increase in their budget,” Hancock replied. “They’ve got $34 million in operating reserves, and to come cap in hand and ask for a seven per cent year-over-year budget is absurd.”
March 24—Wayne Cao (PC—Calgary-Fort) asked Hancock how he would explain the Calgary Board of Education’s anticipated $61.7 million shortfall to those in the education sector looking for work or worrying about losing their jobs. Hancock replied that, while the proposed budget calls for a 4.7 per cent increase in education funding, the elimination of targeted grants will present challenges on some fronts. Cao asked Hancock to outline the government’s policy on school board reserve funds. Hancock replied that the government expects school boards to keep a modest operating surplus of about two per cent. He added that some school board reserves exceed two per cent. Cao asked Hancock whether the government would explore a policy on sustainable, predictable and long-term funding for education. Hancock replied that school boards’ operating funding has risen by 63 per cent over the last 10 years while the student population has risen by only three per cent. He added that the government has three-year business plans and that there is no reason why school boards cannot plan in accordance with them.
Special-Needs Education Funding
March 23—Teresa Woo-Paw (PC—Calgary-Mackay) asked Hancock to describe the government’s progress in implementing inclusive education. Hancock replied that, while progress has been slow, it is important that implementation is done thoroughly as it involves a culture shift. He added that, in addition to Alberta Health and Wellness, Alberta Children and Youth Services and other ministries, Alberta Education has set up a provincial advisory committee of stakeholders to provide oversight and advice on implementation. Woo-Paw asked Minister of Children and Youth Services Yvonne Fritz how her ministry is addressing the issue of communication, which has been identified as a barrier. Fritz replied that the Success for Children and Youth in Care Provincial Protocol Framework ensures that educators, caregivers and caseworkers work together on behalf of children and youth in care. Woo-Paw asked Hancock what his ministry is doing to broaden community engagement. Hancock replied that a number of pilot projects are under way across the province with the aim of sharing the results with the rest of the province. He added that his ministry continues to communicate with the 7,000 Albertans involved in the Setting the Direction for Special Education in Alberta consultation.
School Year Modifications
March 16—Ken Allred (PC—St. Albert) asked Hancock whether there has been any discussion about changing the school year to align midterm examinations with the Christmas break. Hancock replied that there has been discussion both about any time, any place, any pace learning within the context of Inspiring Education and about changing the school year to align with the Christmas break. He added that the school year and the school day fall under the purview of school boards. Allred asked Hancock whether a school year running from August to May would make more sense than one running from September to June. Alluding to summer programs, Hancock replied that students attend school virtually every month of the year. He added that the government needs to look at the whole question of alignment. Allred asked Hancock whether some school jurisdictions modify the school year. Hancock replied that some jurisdictions offer summer school and that examinations are written in August, November, January, April and June. “If we’re going to go to an any time, any place and any pace learning process, we will have to try and develop flexibility in exam schedules,” he said.
