75-Minute Debate (7 March 2024)

From Hansard (7 March 2024)

To view this section on video, click here and start play at 11:27:05 AM.

Contract Negotiations with Teachers

The Assembly was debating the following motion moved by Matt Love (NDP - Saskatoon Eastview):

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That sounds like a great, workable plan. Continuing:

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

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

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

---

After the debate there was a 10-minute question and answer session between members. The following section begins at 12:00:30 in the video.

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

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

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

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

---

The next section begins at 12:03:55 in the video.

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

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

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

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