2011 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 39th Parliament
HANSARD
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
official report of
Debates of the Legislative Assembly
(hansard)
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Morning Sitting
Volume 26, Number 9
|
CONTENTS |
|
|
Page |
|
|
Orders of the Day |
|
|
Introduction and First Reading of Bills |
8443 |
|
Bill M202 — Election Finance Amendment Act, 2011 |
|
|
B. Simpson |
|
|
Second Reading of Bills |
8443 |
|
Bill 12 — Teachers Act |
|
|
Hon. G. Abbott |
|
|
N. Macdonald |
|
|
J. Rustad |
|
|
G. Coons |
|
|
J. Thornthwaite |
|
|
M. Sather |
|
[ Page 8443 ]
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2011
The House met at 10:02 a.m.
[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]
Prayers.
Introduction and
First Reading of Bills
Bill M202 — Election Finance
Amendment Act, 2011
B. Simpson presented a bill intituled Election Finance Amendment Act, 2011.
B. Simpson: I move that a bill intituled Election Finance Amendment Act, 2011, be introduced and read for a first time now.
Motion approved.
B. Simpson: The fundamental principle of democracy is one person, one vote. However, that principle is undermined by money, specifically the ability of candidates in political parties to raise money from organizations that do not have voting rights and the ability of people with financial means to enhance their vote and therefore their influence through cash donations.
The current freedom that organizations and individuals have to donate huge sums to political parties undermines the one-person, one-vote principle and feeds the growing cynicism voters have towards politics in general.
This bill addresses these issues by restricting the right to donate to candidates and political parties to registered British Columbia voters only. The bill also levels the playing field by capping individual donations at $1,000 per year. This is a radical change from the current system that will create a fundamental shift in the relationship between candidates and political parties.
The Election Finance Amendment Act would restore accountability to the electoral system by ensuring that the principle of one person, one vote is honoured and reflected in how election campaigns are financed and will put an end to the possibility and the perception that money can buy influence over public policy.
I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Bill M202, Election Finance Amendment Act, 2011, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Orders of the Day
Hon. P. Bell: I call Bill 12, intituled Teachers Act.
Second Reading of Bills
Hon. G. Abbott: I move that the bill be now read a second time.
This legislation repeals the Teaching Profession Act, dissolves the B.C. College of Teachers and establishes a new teacher regulation regime for the province.
The changes respond to concerns identified in a fact-finder's report by former Education Deputy Minister Don Avison, as well as input received from education sector partners that the college had lost the confidence of B.C.'s education community.
[D. Black in the chair.]
After careful consideration and discussion with our education partners, we've developed a new model of teacher regulation for British Columbia that involves shared responsibility between government and the education sector. The Teachers Act will implement that model.
This legislation establishes a B.C. Teachers Council made up of appointed and elected members to set standards for the profession. Three members of the council will be appointed based on nomination by the B.C. Teachers Federation. Seven will be appointed based on consultation with education partner groups, and there will be five regionally elected teacher members. In addition, there will be one non-voting government appointee.
The Teachers Council will have a more limited role in teacher regulation than the current College of Teachers. It will have two primary functions: to set standards for teacher certification, conduct and competence; and to approve teacher education programs for certification purposes. The standards-setting role of the council, however, is constrained by the minister's disallowance power.
The legislation also establishes a new nine-member disciplinary and professional conduct board, which the minister will appoint from members of the Teachers Council. Teacher discipline processes will be overseen by a commissioner with substantial expertise in administrative law, who will be appointed by cabinet. The commissioner will have the authority to investigate complaints and reports about teacher conduct and competence and to assign board members to hear discipline cases in three-member panels. Those hearing panels will not include more than one BCTF member.
To increase transparency and openness, discipline hearings will be open to the public. Discipline decisions will be made public, along with written reasons, except
[ Page 8444 ]
in limited circumstances. Following a hearing, panels may order a reprimand or suspension or cancellation of a teacher certificate in appropriate circumstances. They may also require limitations and conditions on certificates.
All public school boards and independent school authorities will be notified when a teaching certificate is suspended or cancelled to prevent the holder from being employed as a teacher. The new legislation will continue the existing on-line registry that includes teacher certificate status and discipline history. The employers list will also continue to ensure that prospective employers can access detailed information about a teacher's employment record in B.C. schools.
The administrative functions of the current college will be assumed by government. The Ministry of Education will be responsible for issuing teacher certificates based on standards set by the Teachers Council, maintaining the on-line registry and employers list and administering discipline processes. The ministry will work to ensure a smooth transition to the new regulatory regime.
Regulation of the teaching profession in the public interest is critical to ensuring public safety and student safety. I am confident that this new approach to teacher regulation will address the changes that are needed to meet our commitment to safer schools and public trust.
In closing, I would like to thank both my deputy and the wonderful team at the Ministry of Education who have worked so very hard in the preparation of this new legislation.
Also, I want to thank all of our educational partners, including the B.C. Teachers Federation, who we worked with very extensively with respect to this legislation; B.C. School Trustees Association; School Superintendents Association; principals and vice-principals; BCCPAC, the parents organization; FISA, Federation of Independent School Associations; and FNESC, First Nations Education Steering Committee. All have been contributors to this model.
I'm optimistic that this model as proposed in this legislation will prove to be effective in managing the issues that we shall face in the future. I look forward to the comments of the other speakers.
N. Macdonald: We'll start off with Bill 12, which is the Teachers Act. I'll be speaking for 30 minutes. The background I have is that I'm currently a member of the College of Teachers, which this bill will end and replace with a Teachers Council. I pay my annual dues.
Of course, my background, when people ask what I do, I say: "Well, I'm a teacher." That's what I tell them, and it's not because I'm ashamed of what I do presently. It's just that it is more than a job. The last time I was working in education, I was actually a principal, but the way that I would define myself is as a teacher.
I think that's a big part of what draws you to the profession. More than anything else it's that interaction with children, being somebody who is responsible for not only their safety and well-being but also trying to shape them, teach them about the important things that they need to have, going forward. It's a pretty special thing. I know that the minister has a background as a teacher as well. It is a special profession.
I'm proud enough that I always describe myself as a teacher. I've served as a principal. I've served as a teacher on call. I served as a teacher's assistant. I was a local union activist with the BCTF. I'm very proud of that — a tremendous organization. The training for activists is incredible, learning about due process. I was a local president in the BCTF as well as a parent of children in the public school system.
This bill was introduced yesterday. It is 61 pages. It is a complex bill on an important piece for education in British Columbia. To call it up the next morning really creates a number of challenges for the opposition to lay out a clause-by-clause examination of the bill. The critic will take the time to look at each and every clause and will come and be the designated speaker for the opposition and will lay it out.
There are elements of this bill that were in the public realm, but there are also elements that are not. It is a bill that is complex. It is 61 pages long. It deals with two important issues where a single phrase or a misorganization of a council can have tremendous consequences.
We are dealing with the safety of children, which if you are drawn to education has to be at the front of everything that you do. I mean, I watched as a principal how my teachers organized to make sure that every trip, every part of a day, the safety and well-being of the children was at the front.
When we hear sometimes the Premier talking about bullying, and then you actually see the behaviour, you see that it's only something talked about. When you're in a school system, you have teachers that are watching all the time to make sure that bullying doesn't happen, that they are physically safe, that the cup they use is a clean cup. There are so many things to think about.
Now I'll just take one minute to talk about Sheila Nystoruk, to give an example of an elementary principal who was responsible for a group of kindergarten students. As the half day ended and they would move out to the bus, the amount of thought that went into moving those children from the classroom to where they would either take the bus or meet their parents was incredible.
How you take a group of 15 or 16 children who have never been organized in a way that they would move in cohesion is an amazing thing to see — everything thought through so that each and every day the children would be safe. They would go with the person they were supposed to go with. They would get on to the bus in an organized way. They would be safe, safe, safe all the way
[ Page 8445 ]
through, no mistakes — never. Not one mistake. Recess thought through, school trips, so that when you take them swimming, there is no mistake.
That is what is at stake with a bill like this, to make sure that it is set up in a way that our children are safe — not most of the time, not 99 percent of the time, but all the time. So it's serious from that perspective.
As well, we're talking about due process. We have to be fair to the people that are responsible for our children. These are complex relationships that go on moment by moment. When people ask how difficult this job is, I say it's nothing compared to teaching. It's nothing compared to being in front of a class.
If I make a statement that's silly or I make a mistake, I might hear about it again and again, but I really haven't done any damage to a child. But what happens when you're in front of a classroom…. You can never be sarcastic. You can never say something in that moment of anger that that student will remember for years to come. You cannot make a mistake.
So you have all of these complex interactions that…. If you make a mistake or are accused of making a mistake, you have to be certain that it's going to be dealt with fairly, that the teachers that you put in front of the classrooms are going to have a process that they know will be fair.
Now, I think all legislators would agree that we want children safe, and we want due process, a process that's going to be fair to everyone involved. I'm sure that that is the basis for the legislation. I'm hoping. But it means that there's a special onus on us to make sure that we go through this to make sure that we are setting up a system, an organization, that actually accomplishes that.
When you come in the day after handing over a 61-page piece of legislation, with all the detail and implications that are in this legislation, I think it is really unfair to set into the second reading immediately, but that's what we've done.
Let's talk for a second about where this government has gone in terms of respect for this Legislature. Where does it lead? I would remind members who have been in this House long enough to see a disrespect for the legislative process here in this House a number of times. I would say that in our last two years every major piece of legislation has been passed in this House without using the proper process, and the consequences have been pretty disastrous, I would say.
We did not have third reading on the Clean Energy Act. You know? We didn't. Smart meters, getting rid of the B.C. Utilities Commission. So not only are you stepping away from the process and not doing things properly, but the government creates problems for themselves. That was a lousy piece of legislation, half thought through, that has led the head of B.C. Hydro to quit, that has created all sorts of problems that were predictable — around smart meters, around going for a 30 percent rise in Hydro fees — that have to be somehow politically managed, that this government is scrambling to.
That's an example. Where is another one? How about the HST? That was put through using closure. How did that work out? It's another mess that this government is trying to climb out of, and it will probably be the death-knell — properly, finally — for this government.
They didn't use proper process here. They thought they knew it all. In arrogance, they stepped forward, thinking they didn't have to use the proper process. But again, just like with the Clean Energy Act, it blew up in their face. How about changes to the Election Act? How did that work?
As so often with these half-baked pieces of legislation that don't follow proper process here in the House, they end up with the courts having to tell them: "Hey, you guys are supposed to follow the law every now and again."
Interjection.
N. Macdonald: Yeah, it's pretty pathetic when you think about it.
When we say that we are going to deal with this in a proper way, that we are going to make sure that we look at every clause as we're supposed to, we're serious. We're taking our job seriously, and what we need is a government that does the same thing.
Added to that is, of course, the background of this government and this Premier, in particular, who was really a failed Minister of Education — there's nobody out there that doesn't reach pretty well the same conclusion — a real problem as a Minister of Education, who has already shown, as Premier, a real willingness to just wing it, whether it's views on Senate reform or going into riot TV or whatever — half thought through, probably not at all legally possible.
For us to come here and any suggestion that: "Here, go into second reading. Just trust us…." There's no reasonable person, no person who has watched over the past ten years, who would do it.
That is the reputation of this Premier, and it was what she did as Minister of Education. It was one of the most destructive periods in B.C.'s public education system, and the members across it know. Many of them were here, or they were trustees. They know how destructive it was, how many poorly thought-through initiatives this Premier brought forward.
When we have a bill like this, we need to go through and look at the detail. I'll give you one example of a word change that had huge implications. A word change, and it was a word changed by the Premier when she was Minister of Education.
We used to get funding for students who were substantially below their grade level — if they were substantially below their grade level in their ability to read and write or in numeracy.
[ Page 8446 ]
This Premier, when she was minister, changed it from "or" to "and." Now, it seems like one word, but what it did is that it removed funding for a whole host of people who still needed supports but now had to hit a higher bar before funding was available to the school to deal with the supports. So a one-word difference; the implications for students, massive.
When I look back at that time…. I came back from overseas in 2003 as a principal in the midst of this Premier's era as Minister of Education. Let's just go through a few of the things that she imposed on the public school system. When we're looking at something like this, let's just have a look.
We had an unconstitutional labour negotiation. The Supreme Court of Canada said that the Premier, as Minister of Education, had acted improperly.
We had school closures. In my area we had nine school closures, and that was created when this minister negotiated with teachers, saying that they were going to fund any settlement and then didn't fund it. It created absolute chaos for trustees immediately.
In rural areas schools had to close immediately. Nicholson Elementary, which I taught at, was a combination of two schools. One had closed. A new school that was built in 1996 in Parson was closed, and the students were forced to go into schools such as mine, in Nicholson.
So this Premier did not fund a contract that she negotiated and then changed the funding formula so that rural schools found it more difficult to actually exist. If you're not above a hundred students, it's really difficult to actually have a viable school.
In rural British Columbia, under this Premier's watch, 177 schools closed. Almost all of those were in rural B.C. I had students, kindergarten students, who were on a bus for 50 minutes one way — 50 minutes — driving past a school built in 1996.
Deputy Speaker: I'd like to remind the member that the bill up for debate is Bill 12, and would he please direct his comments to the legislation on the floor.
N. Macdonald: Thank you.
So with Bill 12, you have a piece of legislation that is being put forward. It's being put forward in a hurry. The background that we have with this government is of measures that are half thought through.
This bill was presented to us yesterday, and now we're asked to speak to it today. That's fine. But we speak to it knowing that there is a background of incompetence and a background of creating a mess.
We had legislation in the past that was pushed through that the Supreme Court of Canada had to deal with. We have had decisions made by this government that have closed all sorts of schools.
Our school district looked at four days of schooling. I taught in Africa; we had five days. In Africa they could have five days, but here in British Columbia decisions made, half thought through, led to four-day school weeks. There are still school districts that have four days, or five days one week and four the next.
When we look at this legislation, there is every need to look at every word, at every element, because we have seen the bungling so often that there's every reason to believe that within this bill there is the opportunity for them to bungle again, on something as important as dealing with children's safety and due process.
This Premier, when she was Minister of Education, bungled not only on the things that I've talked about, not only with making cuts to special education; she consistently would make mistakes that showed that she did not understand the funding mechanisms, that she didn't understand FSA. So the confidence that we are asked to have in this bill — it's just not there. Why would it be?
This government has not shown that they understand education issues. They have not shown that they can consistently put together pieces of legislation that are going to stand up over a period of time. Too often the Supreme Court, even, has had to stand up and get rid of the legislation that they've created.
Now, I understand that this minister…. I've known him for a long time, and of course, the confidence I have in his work is of a different quality. So we're going to test that, and I'm sure that he is somebody who is going to want to make sure that he doesn't end up, years from now, having a long list of failings as a Minister of Education. I'm sure he's going to avoid that.
He listens as I go through others' histories, and he says: "Well, that's not going to be me. When I do something, I've thought it through." We're going to test that. I know that the minister enjoys those sorts of competitions, as you will — that he will stand up and defend each element of this bill.
His predecessor didn't bother to do that, and one of his predecessors, who is now the Premier, had a whole history of half-thought-through failures, including her college initiative. I mean, this isn't the first time the B.C. Liberals have tried to make changes to the College of Teachers.
I was a principal when the current Premier told me that all of my staff were going to be fired. She had ordered that all members of the College of Teachers who didn't pay their dues were going to be let go — which was every member of my staff and I think pretty well every teacher in B.C.
When she reorganized the college, teachers said: "Well, if we don't have a say, why are we paying dues? So we're not going to pay dues. We'll put it into a fund. When you have some negotiations with us in terms of what the college looks like, then you can have our fees."
[ Page 8447 ]
Fair enough. If the government wants to arbitrarily set up a system, then do it, but don't expect people to pay into it. In any case, half thought through, the minister said: "Well, fine. If you don't pay your dues, we're going to fire you." So as principal, all of my teachers were going to be fired.
Now, where did that end up? Well, of course it ended up like so many half-thought-through initiatives. It ended up in a bungled mess, one more bungled mess from this current Premier, and she had to step down and back off from the plan that she had. So there's a lot of history there. There's a lot of bungling that's been going on.
When a bill comes forward and there's some expectation to have it simply rushed through without each and every part of it looked at, without each and every line being looked at, you can understand why an opposition is saying: "No, you're not going to push it through." The experience has been that each and every time the government acts in a manner that ignores due process, you run into problems.
As I say, this is an incredibly important bill. I acted as a union leader. I dealt with a number of very complex issues involving teachers. They are complicated. They are issues that…. You need to get the balance right, and you need to make sure that you're fair to the children first, fair to parents, fair to teachers and fair to the school system. It is difficult to do.
It is appropriate that the government would be taking this issue on. I think that many see failings with the current system. It is our belief that the minister has consulted with a wide variety of groups — very different than the type of process that went on with the current Premier when she was Minister of Education, so that could be a good sign.
I understand that this has been in the works for quite a while and that the depth of the discussions was fairly good, but as I say, we'll test that. We will look at each and every section and make sure that within it there are not going to be pieces that courts in the future have to decide are unconstitutional, as previous initiatives from this government have shown to be. So there's a lot of work to be done with it.
The background that I have as a principal and a teacher suggests to me that the vast majority of people that I have worked with in this system — and this will be the minister's experience as well — do some incredible things. I think that with the system we have, we have one of the best public education systems that you could possibly have. We have issues around oversized classes. We have issues around what to do as technology changes. But these are challenges that we should embrace.
This is an important part of what we need to do going forward. We need to get it right. We need to make sure that the things that we put in place are items that are going to serve us well.
We also understand that there are a number of groups that will want to be contacting members and will want to be telling their representatives how they feel on this issue.
Last night we met with representatives of the B.C. Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils. They have their view. There will be principals and vice-principals that have their view. We have teachers. We have a whole host of groups that care passionately about the quality of education, each and every one of them putting children's safety at the front, each and every one of them recognizing that we need to have children's safety as an important piece of what we do and each and every one of them realizing that if we don't do the work properly, there are going to be implications for individuals and, very likely, court cases that come out of the system that we set up here.
So to wrap up, I would basically say that this is the context for Bill 12. I understand that the current minister aims to do better than his predecessor. I am hoping that that will be the case, because the experience I had as a principal was one of one failure after another.
I came back from Africa into a system that had been pushed into crisis needlessly, where we had a Minister of Education that seemed to be more interested in short-term political hits, that even at that time was thinking about the Premier's chair. That was the fact of it. It was one half-thought-through initiative that sounded good politically but had no respect for the political system or for the education system as a whole. That's what I saw. We saw one bungled initiative after another. Like I say, we had Supreme Court decisions going against the government, school closures, four-day school weeks, special ed cuts, one thing after another.
We had a debacle with a previous attempt to reorganize the college. So it is our hope that this is a better piece of legislation. It is our understanding that the thought that needs to go into this sort of bill is there. If it is there and we see that throughout second reading and into third reading, then of course it's an initiative that will be supported not only by the opposition but also, I think, more broadly by all of the educational partners. Maybe not all of them are going to get what they want, but I think that if the balance is right, if the work has been done, we're going to get enough of the support that we need and that the Legislature as a whole can go forward thinking that the good work has been done.
With that, as always, I thank the House for the opportunity to speak on these matters, and I take my place.
J. Rustad: I'm pleased to stand today to share a few words in support of Bill 12. Changes to the College of Teachers or changes to anything in the education system are fraught with so much history. Everybody here who grew up in the province has been in the education system. They've been a student. They've gone through it. Maybe
[ Page 8448 ]
they've been involved, as I was, as a school trustee in the education system. Maybe they've had a chance as a parent to go back and be involved, or even as grandparents.
Everybody seems to have some sort of ties to the education system, so anytime there's something coming forward, it can always be very controversial. But I think Bill 12 is a step in the right direction with regards to some of the challenges we've had.
I just want to read a quote to start off with here from a book called Worlds Apart, written by Thomas Fleming. It says: "The bitter 40-year struggle between the province and British Columbia Teachers Federation for control of public education has proven costly. The disastrous state of labour relations is the most serious impediment to education progress in this province, long polarized in its politics and economic affairs." When you think about that context of 40 years, and how we're sitting here today trying to make a tweak and a change to try to make improvements, there is a lot that needs to be done.
I remember as a school trustee when I was visiting the education system and I was talking with teachers and talking with students — which I got a chance to do quite frequently, and even in this job as an MLA I've continued that practice of going and visiting classrooms — I've always been just blown away by the dedication and hard work by the teachers in the classroom.
In conditions that can sometimes be beyond what you could possibly imagine in terms of the stress, in terms of the chaos that can go on in a classroom, these teachers have been able to take students through this system and to what my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke said is one of the better education systems that we have in the world. That's despite all of the challenges and the politics and the struggles that go on at the high level amongst the.… And the political structure. That always struck me, as I went into the classroom and I saw the smiling kids' faces and I saw how the teachers were able to go through that system.
I think teachers are often unsung heroes in many things because they get sideswiped by the politics and by the struggles and the labour relations issues that we have. That, to me, isn't fair, because the teaching profession is a noble profession. It's one, I think, that we need to put a lot of trust and faith in because they are dealing with our students. They're dealing with moulding those students into the people that they will be, into the future that they will have, and ultimately, into how they will shape the next generation and the generation after them.
Teachers have an incredible responsibility and level of influence on what our future will be. But I think it's important for teachers, for parents and for everybody to have a sense of confidence that what's going on in the system, how the system works, is being done appropriately.
There were, certainly, challenges, as pointed out by the Avison report, with the College of Teachers that needed to be addressed. The structure that was in there was failing. I'd talked to a number of board members with the College of Teachers who told me stories about how things would go and the politics that were being played in it and the structure. For me, I just thought, how can this be? This isn't right. It needs to be changed.
When I look through the bill here and the structure, one of the things the Avison report pointed out as a serious downfall was around the disciplinary actions. That side of the Avison report and that side of what the bill tries to address…. I think in many ways it may not be perfect, but I think it has an opportunity to be able to help rebuild some of that confidence.
I've heard from teachers who have talked a little bit about this bill in the 24 hours since it's been announced, and I've had some feedback on Facebook. Some teachers are concerned that there are going to be witch-hunts, that there are going to be people that may wear a button in to school or talk back to the teacher or those sorts of things, that this will create…. That's not the intent of what's being done here.
We have thousands upon thousands of teachers in our education system. It's not unreasonable to consider or to think that maybe there are a few problems that come up from time to time, whether it's stress or whether it's just not the right fit for an individual that enters the teaching profession. Within that, that's not unreasonable to expect. Yet it's curious, when when you look at the history of the previous college, that there's been virtually nobody that has actually been let go for not actually doing the job. Now, there have been disciplinary issues around abuse and other very serious issues, but statistics just don't seem to support that.
Now, this bill I know is going to create some controversy within the teaching profession and certainly within the BCTF. I read an article today, and I hope I got it right, where the president of the BCTF gave, I think, a four out of ten. From my perspective, four out of ten is actually pretty good, considering that just about everything else is a zero out of ten. So you might look at that as high praise, especially in a system that is so politically charged and that has so many challenges. The mistrust that goes on as part of that system is a challenge.
I look forward to how this bill is going to progress. I look forward to the thoughtful comments from the opposition and the opportunity to see this go through line by line. I've gone through this act line by line several times myself already. I've gone through and looked at this, because it is important. This is an important bill.
I'm confident that as it goes through, people will see the merit and the value that is in this bill. If there are improvements, I look forward to hearing what the opposition may say around the improvements. I've certainly looked through and provided the minister with my own comments as to what I think of this particular bill as well.
But I think this is a good step. This is a good step, and it's important that this sort of a bill has the opportunity to perhaps take just a little bit of that political chaos that is often known as our education system in the province of British Columbia, to take a little step, to take part of that out of the equation and to be able to focus on what really does matter and what really is important, which is about the protection of students and the education of students.
So I look forward, like I say, to hearing the comments from colleagues on both sides of this House around something that is this important, around something that is the fundamental building blocks of our future.
I hope that in the context of the political struggle and what some people often could describe as nonsense that goes on in this chamber back and forth on the politics, some of that can be set aside, that rhetoric, to actually be able to focus solely on what this bill is about, which is about the education of our kids. It is about the profession, and it is about how we assure parents and the people in general that our system is doing what it's supposed to be doing, which is educating our children and protecting our children.
G. Coons: I appreciate the comments from the member for Nechako Lakes, and I'm glad he talked and referred to so much history and the political chaos and how education in the realm has been very controversial.
I do have to clarify that I was a teacher for 28 years. I taught mathematics, I taught special ed and special ed programs, and I did a wide range of curriculum. I did work with a lot of parents and administrators and teachers, as being part of the B.C. Teachers Federation.
The bill before us…. I'm not going to say it gives me great honour to talk about Bill 12, the Teachers Act, because it was just rammed through this morning. We got notification of this bill yesterday — 61 pages. Within 24 hours, less than 24 hours, we're here trying to debate it. We're trying to have thoughtful due process, trying to take seriously every section of this, as the minister indicated that it's a very important piece of legislation for public safety and the safety of kids. We all agree with that.
The problem is bringing it through here without the necessary time and due diligence for people to look at it. When we look at the stakeholders involved — whether it's the parents, whether it's the vice-principals, whether it's the superintendents, the teachers, and you go down the list of all the stakeholders — it would have been very, very appropriate for the minister and that side of the House to give time for people to analyze what exactly is in this piece of legislation.
The minister and the media talk about it being much anticipated, and it's going to be good for students and teachers alike. But we need the time and the thoughtful due process to ensure that this legislation does what it's supposed to do.
The minister: "I believe this legislation will raise the stature of the teaching profession, increase public confidence…and strengthen accountability and transparency." Well, right off the bat the accountability is thrown out the door when there is not enough time in this Legislature to debate and discuss this or to analyze it. So I have a real problem with how this process was brought into this House.
"Above all, these changes will ensure students' safety." We need to ensure that we have the time and the process to analyze the 61 pages of Bill 12, the Teachers Act.
Now, with this act, the current college will be dissolved when the former act is repealed. So what we're looking at is a bit of history. Again, the last time this provincial government tried to reform the B.C. College of Teachers, it didn't go so well. It didn't go so well at all. The current Premier was the Minister of Education at the time. She tried to wrestle something, maybe a leg wrestle — who knows? — or an arm wrestle with the people at the college. The whole process from the previous Minister of Education, the current Premier, was eventually aborted.
A bit of history with the College of Teachers — and I'm glad the member for Nechako Lakes talked about history, because what happened previously was that there was a Bill 51. It attacked the College of Teachers back there, which was established in 1988. Again, the college is a professional body for the province's teachers, including administrators and independent school teachers, and they look after licensing and discipline.
But what happened a few years ago when the current Premier was the Minister of Education…. She nuked the college council, dismissing the 15 councillors who had been endorsed and elected, and put in 20 of her own appointees. Sounds pretty similar when you start looking at other aspects of boards, whether it's B.C. Ferries, the boards where they have their own Liberal-appointed friends on there.
What ended up happening after that is there was a huge fight with the minister trying to interfere and put forth some sort of education policy that failed and still is failing to this day. We see it in this Bill 12, how it's being brought forward. We need to take seriously every section in Bill 12. At this point in time I don't believe we're given the time to analyze it, to look at it. Again, I'm seeing it as just another political game, and that's what this government has been doing quite often.
The member for Nechako Lakes talked about the political chaos, and the political chaos has arisen because of this government's policies in education. They continue to do that with Bill 12. The other side can sit there and muffle off and smile and smirk, but when it comes down to it, this government has created the political chaos, including what's happened with Bill 12 before us today, because of their policies.
It's really interesting going back to the college previously, where the Premier, the ex–Minister of Education
[ Page 8450 ]
of the day, tried to take control of it with her own appointees. What members did was not put their fees into the College of Teachers.
Again, when we look at the history of the college, it is political chaos, as far as this government is concerned, trying to come to terms with it. We're seeing that today with them putting it forward — 61 pages — with no time to analyze it, no time to ensure it's supposed to be doing what it's going to be doing. And going back — what happened?
The Premier — the Education Minister of the day, now Premier — had to cave in and end up creating another type of college and letting it sit and fester until the current Minister of Education rolls in on his horse. I'm not too sure whether it was a third-place finish or second on his horse, but he rolls in on his horse and puts forward one of the most controversial pieces of legislation probably that he's going to put in. What we see is not the time to put in the due diligence that's necessary.
When we start looking at the history of how we got to this point and getting Bill 12 before us, we've seen this government with their policies, including the policies of the current Premier with the history of the College of Teachers, putting in Bills 27 and 28 — again, very controversial legislation which ended up creating tens of thousands of students in classes with more than 30.
Deputy Speaker: Member, I've tried to give latitude to both sides of the House to address Bill 12. I'd appreciate it if you'd direct your comments to the bill. Bill 12 is under discussion.
G. Coons: Thank you, hon. Speaker.
When we look at the history of Bill 12, it's just a small piece of the puzzle, and when we look at all the pieces of the puzzle, there are so many that come into play. So many of them, when you look at Bill 12 sitting perhaps in the middle of the puzzle…. We've got Bill 27 and Bill 28 as big pieces of the puzzle. We start looking at policies where funding has come into play.
The minister talks about — and I believe in his introduction he talked about — thanking the partners involved with Bill 12. He talked about the parents and the superintendents and the teachers and the support workers. Well, we met with the president of BCCPAC last night, who had a lot of concerns with Bill 12, the bill before us.
The minister slaps out Bill 12 the very next day with no time for consultation, no time for analysis, no real time to go out to stakeholders to say: "What do you think of this bill? What can we do to improve Bill 12?" It's just hollow, I think — messages from the minister — when he talks about how consultation has been happening with Bill 12, the bill before us today.
Deputy Speaker: The minister seeks the floor.
Hon. G. Abbott: Just to remind the House that unanimously yesterday in this chamber we endorsed a motion which provided for second reading debate at the next sitting of the House after today, which turns out to be today.
I appreciate that they have detailed questions, and of course those can be addressed at the committee stage of the debate. I would ask the members to consider…. Generally, at second reading one considers the higher-level issues around this and whether they appear to be appropriate. I'd welcome the member's thoughts on that.
J. Kwan: I seek leave to make an introduction.
Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.
Introductions by Members
J. Kwan: Visiting the Legislature building today are a group of grade 5 students from a school in my riding, St. Francis Xavier. They are led by their teachers, Ms. Josef and also Mr. Dela Luna, fondly known as Mr. D. Their parents are accompanying them as well. The students actually woke up, some at 3:30, to take the seven o'clock ferry to come over this morning to learn about the Legislature buildings and also to learn about the work of the MLAs, about what we do and how we represent them and what the current issues are.
I ask the House to please make them very welcome and to demonstrate the best of behaviour.
Debate Continued
G. Coons: Again, when we start looking at the aspects of Bill 12…. I really appreciate that the minister acknowledges the BCTF, the BCCPAC, the FNESC, the principals and vice-principals — all the partners that were involved to bring this forward. But so many of them still have concerns with Bill 12, the Teachers Act. For the minister to play forward, thanking everybody and then putting this legislation out before the stakeholders, including the opposition, have an opportunity to analyze it and to ensure that public safety and student safety are taken into account….
On this side of the House and those in the province, more than anybody, we have a huge investment in maintaining high standards for teachers as far as professional practice and conduct. It's all in the interest of everybody in the province to have that, but we have to understand that the bill before us has so many sections in it.
We look at section 15, which refers to the NWPTA, which is the new west partnership trade agreement. Now, perhaps not too many people know about the new west partnership trade agreement. It was signed and entered into agreement with British Columbia, Alberta
[ Page 8451 ]
and Saskatchewan on April 30, 2010. Again, this ties right into TILMA, and we all know what happened with TILMA. Section 15, as far as Bill 12, has a lot of questions about where TILMA and where the northwest partnership trade agreement are going to bring us as far as this bill.
Now, TILMA was brought forth with no consultation — again, no consultation — and no thought put into the impacts of some sort of Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement with B.C. and Alberta and the impacts on education and educators. So when we look at Bill 12 before us, this is one section that flew out for me when I started to read it.
To this point in time…. I've gone through most of this, but still, it's not just a quick read to try to analyze where the minister is trying to go as he works with all the partners in education. So I think if the minister was truly forthright in what he was trying to put forward today, there should have been time and reflective thought for all of the stakeholders to look at where we're going and where we're heading with this bill in front of us today.
I find it interesting that the member for Nechako Lakes talks about teachers and conditions in the classroom and how there are so many challenges. The bill before us today takes into account where teachers need the help and support as far as making sure there's a college that's working for them.
[L. Reid in the chair.]
At this point in time the conditions in the classrooms for teachers, as the member for Nechako Lakes has pointed out quite clearly, are quite challenging. That's because of the class size numbers that are outrageous and the number of students with special needs that are in the thousands — in the thousands — with the classes with greater than four students with special needs.
I find, as I mentioned before, that Bill 12 is a piece of the puzzle and just ties into the whole chaos that this government has introduced into the public education system. I agree with the member for Nechako Lakes when he talks about how we have one of the best education systems, bar none — despite the challenges, he says. But it's not just the challenges. It's the challenges and the decimation that have happened by this government. Despite that, we still have one of the best education systems in the world.
This bill is for, as the minister mentioned, the unsung heroes — the teachers who are working in the classrooms every day under some horrendous situations, with students with all types of special needs and needs that aren't being met.
So I honestly believe that this bill before us — Bill 12, the Teachers Act — needs to have the proper format placed before us so that we can properly analyze it and do our due diligence on that.
What was mentioned by the member for Nechako Lakes was the Avison report. Now, again, there's still a lot…. The jury is out on the Avison report, I believe. This bill before us came out of the Avison report. I think the government should have done their due diligence to ensure that any situations that were brought forward to the minister were investigated. They failed to do that on their behalf.
I believe that what we've seen…. The bill before us — Bill 12, the Teachers Act — is again creating perhaps even more chaos in the political realm of education. The minister is hoping that it will raise the stature of the teaching profession, increase public confidence in the profession. But when they put forward a bill in the manner that it's been placed before us in this Legislature, it questions the very thought process of the minister and what they were trying to be doing.
The minister hopes that the structures…. "Well, we'll be able to put the issues in the past and earn public confidence." To earn public confidence, the bill before us needs to have scrutiny. It needs to have all of the stakeholders feeling comfortable and confident that they've had a say in the legislation before us.
As I mentioned before, there are 61 pages in Bill 12. It's a bill that's one of the most significant ones, and we need to take it seriously and analyze every section. In order to do that…. This just falls right back on the government's lap as far as having no trust in this government.
It seems like it's been half thought out. There's no understanding, basically, in Bill 12 of what the impacts are going to be on all the stakeholders. I do believe that as we move forward with Bill 12, we've got to ensure that the stakeholders have an opportunity to put forward a voice, to put forward the issues and to make sure that it's there and designed to work for the protection of student safety and build the public confidence.
So I think that there's a lot in this bill, and at this point in time I do believe that the minister has a lot of catch-up work to do. Instead of getting Bill 12 and putting it before us, rushing through this, introducing it and putting it in the very next day…. Again, when we look at children's safety and due process, I think this bill is failing in both those aspects.
I do remember back in the days when the College of Teachers had the chaotic transformation under the previous Minister of Education, who is the Premier right now. This bill, I think, is sort of the follow-up to the mistrials and the missteps of the Premier, who was the former Education Minister.
To build the confidence of parents, of teachers, of principals and vice-principals and of FNESC, the First Nations education teachers, the Premier has a lot of work to do. In the bill before us I believe she has failed to ensure that the chaos that she created back when she was the Minister of Education is going to sort of go up in smoke and disappear.
[ Page 8452 ]
I remember the day that I paid my $90 to another organization and not to the Premier of this province for the dues for the College of Teachers. Again, this Bill 12 before us highlights the atrocities that happened in education under the Premier, the former Education Minister.
I still believe that unless true consultation, true due diligence, is done with the 61 pages of Bill 12, we will still see the chaos that the member for Nechako Lakes talked about and had concerns with. The member for Nechako Lakes got e-mails about this legislation and heard concerns about a witch-hunt.
I'm not too sure if people understand the premise behind that that the member for Nechako Lakes talked about when he referred to the fear of a witch-hunt happening under Bill 12.
Bill 12, as I read it, allows disciplinary actions to be looked after by the principals. Again, through the realm of what's happened in education and the split between administrators and teachers and the concerns with that, I can see that when the member for Nechako Lakes brought up his concern about a witch-hunt happening with teachers, it's a viable concern.
This bill could to some degree put teachers at risk if they feel they have a poor relationship with their administrator and all of a sudden the administrator, for some reason, puts forward an issue or a concern, which may be solved internally and at the local level, to the disciplinary council at the college. Again, it could create an aura of mistrust, a feeling that there is a witch-hunt going on. So I do think, when we're looking at Bill 12 before us, that there are so many concerns that need to be dealt with.
Back when the College of Teachers was operating and was forced onto educators back in 1988…. Again, it was an attempt at the revamping of the College of Teachers, which now will become something else. It all falls back on this government's lap of how they mishandled the College of Teachers fiasco back in 2003.
I remember, as I said, paying my dues to another organization — and not the organization — with the threat of being fired. So Bill 12 just sort of delves right back into the memories of what happened previously when the current Premier, who was the ex-Minister of Education, threatened to fire every teacher in the province if they did not join the college. Again, that's what this government works under, under the threat of….
Deputy Speaker: Member, I might draw your attention back to the bill under consideration.
G. Coons: Thank you, hon. Speaker. Again, I'm relating Bill 12, which is revamping the College of Teachers, to previous legislation and what is being changed.
I do believe that this bill before us, Bill 12, has huge ties into a history, a chaotic history as mentioned before by the member for Nechako Lakes, of how this government treats the educational partners in the province.
Talking about educational partners, I was, probably 15 years ago, part of a parents as partners program. It involved parents. It involved teachers. It involved administrators. We travelled around school to school, looking at issues of the College of Teachers, looking at issues of what's happening in the classroom, looking at issues of how we can work together and be the three prongs of a stool. This Bill 12 before us seems to be a few of the prongs of the chair coming off. Back then teachers, administrators and parents worked together to try to look at benefiting what's happening in the classroom, looking at the safety of children as Bill 12 is trying to push forward before us today.
I do believe that when we start to analyze closely what's in this bill before us, we'll see that it's basically a continuation of a chaotic attempt to push forward B.C. Liberal policies, and Bill 12 before us today continues that aspect.
Now, I honestly believe that Bill 12 has the potential to work. But again, I find it very difficult when during a legislative session — when yesterday we had three or four bills before us in debate, at different areas of debate — this is put forward the very first morning after it was introduced.
I do believe that Bill 12 has concerns from parents — BCCPAC. It has concerns from some of the other partners — the BCTF, the other unions and support staff, the principals and vice-principals, the superintendents.
I do believe that as we move forward with Bill 12 we need to ensure that we have due diligence, that there's time that the minister is held accountable, and we don't get back to the days where T-shirts were created — I believe it was the Krusty T-shirts — because of the involvement of the College of Teachers and where this Bill 12 before us is going today.
The minister looks a bit confused about that comment. But it was T-shirts. Somebody sent me one just recently as a reminder. They were Krusty the Clown T-shirts. It was….
Interjection.
G. Coons: Yeah, you remember them, Bill. Yeah, there we go.
When I look at Bill 12 and the circus of this government in their legislation that they put forward, with a lack of accountability — no transparency, no debate — Bill 12 seems to be following the same realm as what we've seen in the past. Whether it's the HST, whether it's TILMA, you can name and name the legislation put in here that was put through with no debate, rammed through with closure.
I wouldn't be surprised if, at the first opportunity, Bill 12 is sort of laughed upon and smirked upon, and they
[ Page 8453 ]
said, "Let's rush this through" — again, with no debate, closure. We look at this government — the least transparent, the least accountable government we've seen in this province at all.
As we move forward with Bill 12, I just find it amazing that members on the other side could sit back there and talk about teachers and conditions in classrooms and talk about the unsung heroes out there. For years what we've seen…. The predecessor to Bill 12, which we've got before us today, is all on the plate of this government.
I believe the Occupy movement has a lot to do with this B.C. Liberal government, and what we're going to see — and one reason it might be is bills like Bill 12 — is a big movement in British Columbia in 2012, and that's going to be occupy the Legislature, by the B.C. NDP.
On that, thank you so much.
J. Thornthwaite: I rise today in support of Bill 12, the Teachers Act. I find it quite interesting that the members of the opposition, the hon. member for Columbia River–Revelstoke as well as for the North Coast, find it necessary to give the minister a grade. I wanted to compliment them on that, because at least someone is giving report cards around here.
I also wanted to comment that I didn't agree with the grade that you have given the minister on this bill, because I actually would give the minister an A for this bill.
Moving on, I'm a mother of three, and I've actually got one child still in the school system. I've been a school trustee. I have been a sessional lecturer at UBC, so I am very familiar with the teaching profession.
In addition, I'm a member of the Finance Committee, and we've just gotten back from a tour of the province, listening to many education partners. I agree with the member for Nechako Lakes that we do have the best public education system in the world, and this bill, I believe, wants to make it even better.
I have a great relationship with my children's teachers. I have a great relationship with many of the education partners that I have come to know over the years, as well as the partners that I have known recently in the Legislative Assembly who were also in the teaching profession, and I appreciate the members that have spoken before me who are teachers as well.
That's why it upsets me when I read reports in the news that denigrate teachers to a certain extent, or there's been some lawsuit or some negativity that's come to the attention of the media and therefore the public, which takes away from the value of what teachers do for our students and for our children and therefore for our future.
So teachers sometimes get a real bad rap, and I understand that. I've personally attended disciplinary hearings at my school district, North Vancouver school district 44, as a school trustee. I've seen what happens and how those things go about. I know that the majority of teachers are great teachers, and I personally have had nothing but great things to say about the teachers that my children have been exposed to. But it isn't always that case.
It seems like the bad cases make it in the media — as in politics, all the bad stuff is more exciting to the media than the good stuff — and that undermines the confidence of the public in teachers. What this bill is supposed to do is to regain that confidence with the public for teachers.
The number one goal of this legislation is for students' safety. It will increase student safety 100 percent of the time. It will regain public confidence and transparency in the system and will make the teacher regulation system more sustainable and durable moving forward. It will support and foster the growth of a more respectful and effective relationship among education partners and will establish a framework to advance teaching excellence.
So what does that mean? I've actually got a good briefing on the bill and have reviewed the important parts that I think I'd like to address today to give the public a little bit more of an idea. What the new B.C. Teachers Council will look like is that teacher regulation will be shared. It will be shared between government and the education sector. So the B.C. Teachers Council, the disciplinary and professional conduct board and the Ministry of Education are the three main partners that I'm going to talk about.
The BCTC, the B.C. Teachers Council, will be made up of three BCTF nominees and seven education partner nominees, five members elected by teachers and one non-voting senior government appointee. That means the majority of the B.C. Teachers Council will be held by teachers. That's the way it should be, because the BCTC will set education, conduct and competence standards. It will approve teachers' education programs for certification purposes, and the existing standards and bylaws currently in place will be maintained. That is an excellent part of this act.
The seven educational partners that we mentioned include the B.C. School Trustees Association, the B.C. School Superintendents Association, the B.C. Principals and Vice-Principals Association, the Federation of Independent School Associations, the Association of B.C. Deans of Education, the First Nations Education Steering Committee and the B.C. Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils.
We note that yesterday, when the minister tabled this bill in the House, the representative from the B.C. School Trustees Association, Michael McEvoy, and the representative from the B.C. School Superintendents Association, Steve Cardwell, were here in the House to support the minister on the tabling of that bill. I think that is representative of the support that this bill has for students in British Columbia.
The other part of the bill is the disciplinary and professional conduct board. That will consist of a minority of BCTF members, and each disciplinary hearing will be
[ Page 8454 ]
held by three-member panels including two educational partners and one BCTF member. That's the way it should be, because that will regain the trust of the public with regard to the teaching profession. The role of the disciplinary and professional conduct board will be to conduct disciplinary hearings and certification appeals.
The commissioner will be employed by the ministry and will receive complaints and reports and conduct investigations, oversee consent resolution processes and, where appropriate, assign three-member hearing panels that will include one BCTF member. This restores public confidence. It restores public confidence in the education system and goes towards the number one goal of the legislation, as I mentioned at the beginning, which is to increase student safety.
As my colleague from Nechako Lakes has mentioned, he has gotten some feedback. I've also read some of the media reports, and generally speaking, it's been very positive. I think most people think this is a good balance, and as I said, the number one goal of the legislation is to regain public confidence in the education system and improve student safety.
In summary then, Madam Speaker, I disagree with my colleagues on the other side when they say that this is not….
Interjections.
J. Thornthwaite: My colleagues are on this side.
Anyway, I disagree with them in that I think this bill is a good balance, and it reflects the number one goal that we as the Ministry of Education and government are supposed to do. Their number one role is to protect students. This is a student-centred bill, and that's why I'm supporting it.
Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, the member for Alberni–Pacific Rim seeks leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
Introductions by Members
S. Fraser: Thank you, everyone, for allowing me leave to introduce Mr. Nixon and Mr. Duffy, who are here from Ucluelet Secondary School. This is their grade 10 social studies class. They just did a tour with me. They are brilliant, Madam Speaker, so I'd like everyone to help me introduce them to this place and make them feel very, very welcome. By the way, USS rocks.
Debate Continued
M. Sather: It's my pleasure to rise today to address Bill 12, the Teachers Act. It's a voluminous piece of paper stretching to some 61 pages, which deserves….
Interjections.
M. Sather: Well, you know, the members opposite are overwhelmed by the length and certainly impressed by their endeavours to come up with a bill of 61 pages. Yesterday we had a bill — I think it was two pages or one — dealing with forestry, yet there was reasonable time to debate that bill, and debate it we did. However, it seems, looking at the agenda that the government has brought forth with this quick and dirty transaction, that they're not particularly interested in having a fulsome debate on this piece of legislation.
Not only is that disappointing with regard to the integrity of the processes that take place in this House, it's also disrespectful, I would submit, to the public of British Columbia, the parents, the teachers, the educators. All those involved deserve to hear fulsome discussion of a bill that has a lot of meat in it, yet it doesn't seem to be that that's what's going to happen. But then, of course, we're not entirely surprised. We've seen many moves by this government to reduce or eliminate debate.
I guess, though, the part that's particularly disappointing to me is with regard to the minister himself. Now, I want to give him some credit for this. My understanding is, and I believe, that the minister has attempted and perhaps to some degree has succeeded in liaising with the B.C. Teachers Federation.
My belief is that the minister does not hold the level of antipathy towards the BCTF that many members opposite clearly do, including the Premier of this province. So I think he's done a good job insofar as talking to the BCTF about the issues that they want to bring forward with regard to Bill 12, as it has now culminated in this House.
But I am disappointed that the minister seems to be reluctant to hear that debate in this House. That's disappointing to me for a couple of reasons. One of them is that the minister is a capable debater. He is, and I don't know what he's afraid of in us thoroughly discussing his bill. I know he has the capacity to respond in a strong manner to anything that we might say. So it's disappointing to me to see the minister's response this morning.
I hope that the minister is going to reconsider in terms of encouraging debate in this House, because that's what we're here for and that's what we want to do with Bill 12, the Teachers Act. But I guess at third reading there will be more opportunity, if we get to third reading. It's not always that we do in this House. There have been many bills that have been shut down — the HST, and on it goes. So we're looking forward to the opportunity to investigate the bill thoroughly at third reading, and I expect that there we will have that opportunity.
Under this legislation, any new bylaws must get cabinet approval. I kind of wonder about some of these incursions by government, again, into legislative process around a teachers college or the new rendition thereof. It
[ Page 8455 ]
can be problematic if the government has put themselves in charge — one step removed, I guess. With TransLink, that hasn't proven necessarily all that successful.
So this looks to me like there will be certainly more involvement of the government than previously was the case. The history is certainly one of a lot of antipathy by this government towards the B.C. Teachers Association.
The member for North Vancouver–Seymour said that this bill will regain the public confidence in teachers. The public confidence in teachers, insofar as it may have been eroded…. This government has greased the skids of that slide, if there has, in fact, been one. I think that, in fact, teachers still enjoy wide confidence of parents. But when you have a government that continually tries to undermine teachers, then, of course, it has some effect.
It's a political battle that this government is waging because, you know, over the years the B.C. Teachers Federation has had the temerity to challenge the government. Whether it was an NDP government or a Liberal government, the BCTF has, over the years, challenged the actions of government. Clearly, this government does not like that kind of temerity, as they see it.
So we have Bill 12 before us today, which I think we have to debate insofar as the time that's been afforded to do that with the lightning-quick turnaround that we've seen.
There will be a discipline panel instituted. Two of three people on that panel will be appointed by the government. Again, you see more involvement by the government in legislation having to do with teachers. And that's their prerogative, if they want to insert themselves. Certainly, the Premier did that in spades when she was Minister of Education, and it proved to be a very, very negative experience.
So notwithstanding the role of the minister, we have the same person overall in charge of education in the province that we had then, insofar as it's the Premier of the province. We can only hope that the minister has been somewhat successful, or more than somewhat successful, in passing on his normally — outside of this House, anyway — more cautious approach towards negotiating or towards dealing with or talking to teachers than the Premier clearly has, and has shown in the past. I don't think things have changed much as of today.
The new council will have a commissioner who will ensure that the council's processes will meet the test of judicial fairness — particularly relevant for discipline matters. That's a good thing. I think that this new body will need someone to see that fairness is in play. Although I have some questions, certainly, about parts of the bill, I think that's a good thing.
Whether that person will actually be a judge or a retired judge, we don't know yet. Hopefully, if they're going to be talking about judicial fairness, there will be someone who has that kind of authority. So we look forward to seeing what happens in further examination of Bill 12 and perhaps more elucidation of that by the minister.
Now, with regard to the disciplinary hearings, though, I have a few concerns. These meetings are going to be made open to the public, and that may prove problematic in some cases.
If you take, for example, where a student is bringing forth an allegation of sexual misconduct by a teacher, I'm concerned about the privacy implications of that, of a hearing of that nature being before the public. Will that, in fact, discourage students from coming forward, if what they have to say may be very much out there? You know the sensationalism that sometimes is there in the press — there's reason for concern as to where that could go.
Now on the other hand, if you're a teacher, whatever the allegation may be…. It may be other, certainly, than some sort of sexual misconduct. Oftentimes allegations are dismissed. Then that person's reputation is certainly out there to be impugned quite publicly. I don't quite see the point of it. I hope it's going to work out. I hope the intent is purely righteous, if you will, but it smacks a little bit to me of retribution. You know, we had public executions in the past, and that's something we've done away with. I hope it's not going to be an opportunity for anyone to bring these matters of discipline into the public arena in order to score any points of a political nature or otherwise.
Now, the teachers' competence part of the bill that's going to be part…. It's not just improper conduct but competence that can be the subject of hearings. It's not clear to me exactly how that will work. I look forward to the minister explaining that in the committee stage, exactly how that will work. There have been some statements by the minister in the press, but it's not clear to me how, in fact, that's going to be measured or adjudicated or whatever. There have always been mechanisms to deal with competence and measuring competence. The school districts have done that, and they can dismiss people. It is important to evaluate, of course, the performance of every employee in any job. That, of course, includes teachers, as it should.
Now, one of the things, though, that I do want to mention is about the genesis, seemingly, for Bill 12. It was the investigation that the government commissioned Mr. Avison to do, and what came out of that was in some respects rather disturbing. I did look at his report. The Speaker may recall one of the cases that was kind of the headliner, if you will, as an example of malfeasance — I guess the right word this time is malfeasance — with regard to the B.C. Teachers Federation and discipline.
As I recall, it regarded an individual teacher who had been caught viewing child pornography — a heinous thing, obviously. The response was not as it should have been, and that was acknowledged by the B.C. Teachers Federation. But the board, the group that actually looked
[ Page 8456 ]
at this, was not a group that was dominated by…. The majority were not B.C. Teachers Federation members. If you look in the fine print of Mr. Avison's report, and it was small, it's noted there in that very report.
Yet this became the flag-bearer of why those members of the BCTF were excusing their members for heinous behaviour such as that. There has been, certainly, a fair bit of misconstruing the reality out there with regard to teachers and, more particularly, with regard to the actions of the B.C. Teachers Federation.
So we can hope that we're going to have, with this legislation, better relations between government, in particular this government, the B.C. Teachers Federation, the teachers, parents and the school trustees — everyone that's involved in the school system — because clearly the acrimony that has taken place has not been positive for education.
You get different camps that are dividing, and it's unfortunate, because our education system…. Although it is and always has been a good education system, we want to make sure that it remains that way. I think working together…. I think the minister does understand. When he was talking to doctors when he was Minister of Health, they liked his style of communicating with them. I think the minister is good at that. He's a bit different in the House, as we all may be, but I think that he's good at that.
I can't say the same for the Premier. I don't think she has that kind of leadership capability, and I'm concerned that some of the stuff that she says…. Some of the things she said in the House yesterday lead me to be concerned that we're not going to see more war with the B.C. Teachers Federation, but hopefully, if nothing else….
And there are certainly supportable parts of Bill 12. The BCTF and others are supportive. The parent groups feel that they're under-represented with their one member. I worry about that, because parents are the ones next to the students themselves that are affected most directly by the education system. So we want to ensure that they're fully included, that they feel they have a strong role to play and that it's in no way being lessened or undermined. That's a bit of concern that I have as well.
One thing I do want to comment on, though, is that there was in the news yesterday, and it was again in the news this morning, that the B.C. Public School Employers Association is looking at docking teachers' pay 15 percent. I don't think that it's coincidence that it comes out the same day as this Bill 12 is introduced in this House. In fact, what that would do….
Interjections.
M. Sather: The member says: "Conspiracy."
Deputy Speaker: Member, let me draw your attention back to the bill under consideration.
M. Sather: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Like I say, it's been a peculiar sort of introduction of this bill, Bill 12. I mean, first of all it's the bum's rush that we're getting here, where probably the biggest piece of legislation we'll see this session anyway…. Certainly some of the others have been minuscule. Forestry, which is a very important area, is being pretty much ignored, even in the throne speech — missing.
It wouldn't be a surprise that this government would not be particularly interested in the right to take job action. After all, many of their cousins, their mentors throughout this province are extolling that exactly — that the right to strike should be done away with. Everything from public sector pension plans to the right to strike is under attack by the right wing, of which this government is a part. So I don't think it's a stretch.
Bill 12. Let's hope for the best, and we'll see what the minister has to say in third reading. I'm sure there will be other members on this side of the House that will want to debate the bill, but noting the hour, Madam Speaker, I move adjournment of the debate.
[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]
M. Sather moved adjournment of debate.
Motion approved.
Hon. P. Bell moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.
The House adjourned at 11:51 a.m.
Copyright © 2011: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
ISSN 1499-2175