Mr. Hancock
I understand your intentions for change are honorable and sincere, but I am saddened by this response by the campaign that parents, educators and all parties involved in our childrens educations and put forth not as a threat but a plea, a voice that we are advocating for these children who are suffering by these cuts. I invite you to walk through a school and see the quiet child who needs a little extra time with his or her academics so they may have a fighting chance to keep up with their peers. Or what frightens me most is children with special needs of any degree not getting the proper support they need but lets include them in a regular classroom. They deserve this opportunity but you cannot expect this to happen without proper supports in place. So I ask you as a parent and someone who works in the education field to step out of the norm and truly fight for our kids.
Sincerely,
Lynette

Education is the most important building block to ensure Albertans future. Cutting funding is only a short term fix with long term repercussions. Inspiring Education shows that you know what we need to do to keep our children on the leading edge. So please when planning the needs for the education budget remember we need innovative, creative, collaborative team players and problem solvers to ensure Alberta's future in a global economy.
Thank you,
Father of Joel, Josh, and Lily

Minister Hancock
As I listened to, and now have read your comments to the ASBA Fall General meeting, I cannot help but wonder at your obvious annoyance at the Stop the Cuts campaign.
I agree with you that the format of the campaign does not directly propose alternatives for our fiscal dilemma. However, it does raise the profile of the difficulties faced by the education system if large reductions in funding do occur. Making people aware that serious decisions are being made, and being made now, allows them to focus on possible responses to service level reductions that are going to be inevitable. Your Ministry has clearly stated on a number of occasions that Education will have to shoulder its share of a 2 billion dollar government budget reduction in expenditures (at last count). It does not take a very long step to come to a reduction of 300-400 million in K-12 education. This will not be accomplished with small savings here and there but will ABSOLUTELY result in reduction of teaching positions, increased class sizes, longer bus rides, reduced service to special needs children, and many other significant changes to the way we do business. With planning school jurisdictions and schools will, I am sure, make every effort to protect the student. Planning takes time and is better done proactively rather than as a reaction to change.

Our jurisdiction, Rockyview has started to involve our stakeholders in discussions about what reductions may be made in our system. The problem is that in order to do this we have had to make certain assumptions about what scenarios are likely. We are looking for ideas that we can live with in terms of reductions AND looking for possibilities of increasing revenues. If there are no reductions in funding then we may still have efficiencies that will serve us well.

To engage people in discussions about possible changes to education services it is necessary to focus their attention on changes that may directly impact their school. The Stop the Cuts campaign has done this so it has, in my personal view, done a service to the discussion about education in the Province of Alberta.

We are working on the premise that education is an investment in our nation's future. We must prudently plan for the immediate future. I trust that the Ministry is doing this as well.

Thank you

Yours in education
Dr. Bruce Pettigrew
Cochrane, AB

Minister Hancock:

I read with interest your email entitled Start the Chage. In it, you state that you would be the last person who would ask teachers to do more and more with no additional support. I ask you: how can they do otherwise? With this year's round of cuts, there are already fewer teachers, fewer Learning Assistants, larger class sizes, ...
You say in your speech to Alberta School Boards Association, "You and I cannot let the challenge we currently face put the educational futures of our students at risk." Their educational futures are already at risk. Further cuts will put them even more at risk. It is naive to think that fewer resources will not affect students in the classrooms. Where else can school boards make the mandated cuts? Of course our students will be affected. I understand that fiscal responsibilty is required in our current economic times. It is unfortunate that the government did not foresee the bust that follows every boom in time. Nevertheless, having our students and our educational system pay the cost of this oversight is unforgivable. The price is too high.

Greetings David:
The next few steps in your leadership journey are going to be critical. One could always ask why there wasn't better stewardship of our resources during the past three (3) or four (4) terms of government when we were awash in money --- perhaps had we been more careful and invested in the Heritage Fund instead of depleting it we would have a legacy to draw on...
But that is past and we can't retrieve it (only read about it in Rich Vivone's thoughtful book).
Lecturing the Trustees may be less productive than setting out some policy alternatives whereby we actually restore real leadership opportunities to the local school boards. Just as "school based budgetting" has forced individual schools to look for closer at how they can best serve both their communities and specific students, perhaps challenging School Boards in a similar manner by restoring at least some of their taxing powers along with block funding from the provincial coffers (to help maintain an equitable balance among the various regions & school systems) might get real discussion going at the local level.
Perhaps it is time to realize that as important as the provincial government is, with such concentrations of power within the Premier's office and within Cabinet, with all the communication technology (and savvy) in the community (and especially within our young people) that it is highly unlikely that we who are significantly along our life-long learning journey are going to make the best decisions about and for a world that we may have some trouble understanding let alone keeping up with.

So let me propose a real leadership opportunity for you:
#1)
return real power, authority & responsibility to local school boards so that 40% of their revenue has to be raised locally and the 60% from the provincial government will be based on a formula that can tke into consideration regional disparities
#2)
in the process of #1) above, add a proviso that at least one-third of the membership of a school board must be under the age of thirty-five (35) + one-third of the membership must be female.
#3)
that the Ministry of Education itself will become more focussed on supporting and assisting local initiatives to make education effective, efficient and exciting rather than being directive [just like we would not expect the Ministry of Agriculture to try to make farmers in the Peace River country carry out their practices exactly the same as those in the Wainwright or Olds regions, we ought not to presume to think that one-size fits all in the learning world]
#4)
that there be regional policy forums involved students, teachers, parents, trustees, business, and ministry representatives each spring for the balance of this government's political life where at each sector gets to present two (2) major policy initiatives and at the conclusion of each session no more than three (3) must be recommended for considertion by the legislature (with a free vote at the end of the process)

Try these few recommendations out for the next three (3) years and see if you don't get a real resurgence in interest, participation and productive results in education --- pushing Alberta to the top in educational innovation & leadership...

And good luck... you have the leadership capabilities to pull this off...

g.w. sinclair

Without the stop the cuts campaign I fear the provincial conservatives would be able to persuade themselves that parents and educators believe funding reductions are an appropriate measure! I have not met ANYONE who feels this is the right direction. Reducing already skeletal funding will not position learners for the 21st century. We are robbing our public education system for a short term solution to a systemic problem and the people paying the price are the children. This is unacceptable!
Let me assure you as a parent, tax payer and member of the provincial progressive conservative party that I do not believe that reducing education funding is the right move to make. I am disappointed at the shortsightedness of this move and the disrespect being shown to those people who truly want to advocate for students. The provincial government needs to seriously consider whether they are listening to the electorate because I strongly believe the recent Calgary by-election results could be foreshadowing a major shift in provincial sentiment! As a mother, I am begging the provincial government to prioritize our children and STOP THE CUTS!

Gemma, that is exactly what I was referring to. I engaged school boards and the associations this fall in a thoughtful discussion of how we move forward in education mindful of the fact that we are in difficult financial times. That has been translated by the ATA with the support of the ASBA, CASS and ASCTA into a campaign that warns of impending impacts on the classroom. We always need to look at what we are doing to determine if the resources we have re being used effectively to provide the outcomes we aspire to. When we adjusted the budget in year we first went to the department budget for more than 25% of what was required. Then we went to school boards and asked them not to make any adjustment to the classroom, but rather to take the necessary $ from their accumulated surpluses. Education has been and will continue to be a priority for government. even with the modest in year adjustment the budget for education increased significantly from 2008 to 2009. In this fiscal climate it is unlikely that government spending will increase over last year. It is prudent therefore to look at everything we are doing to see if there are things we can do better. Each year pressures of wages and pensions put significant pressure on budgets. Each year we look at new programs, new ways of doing things which add pressure to the budget. If we are to deal with the pressures we must make sure that the resources we do have are used prudently. That means finding ways we can collaborate regionally and provincially. That means getting rid of process which don't yield results. It is not at all about "stopping the cuts". It is about a meaningful dialogue on the value of education to our society, how we can maintain those things that work well while we continually improve to face the realities of a changing world.

Glenn, it is always interesting when we talk about better stewardship when there was more money. I am always tempted to ask what we should have not invested in. Having paid off some $25B in debt, saved $17B in the Sustainability Fund, built some $40B in infrastructure to serve present and future generations, put some $8B into the Heritage Fund and endowments the record is not actually that bad. Most of the spending increases went in fact to those areas Albertans consistently ask for, health and education. It is fallacy to think that as a sub-national government we will be able to build a Heritage Fund which will somehow protect us from the need to pay taxes in the future. A Heritage Fund of several hundred billion dollars would be a major destabilizer in the Canadian mosaic. We will be far better off if we recognize that non-renewable resource revenue belongs to present and future generations and use it for endowments which help us to create knowledge for tomorrow. Knowledge can always be shared and is therefore less destabilizing. knowledge will also help us to build a more stable economy less reliant on carbon energy, However - to save non-renewable resource revenue we must move closer to where we pay our current expenses from our current revenue. We are not too far off that if we consider the amount dedicated to multigenerational infrastructure, but we do need to make prudent, not massive, adjustments and allow the economy to grow past us.

I am not sure I agree with the characterization "lecturing the trustees". I have always believed in frank, open and honest discourse. Is it inappropriate to continue to make the discussion more about the purpose and less about the dollars?

Taxing authority is a very taxing subject. I certainly agree that school boards need direct connection and accountability with and to their voters. However, given the severe opposition of municipalities, and given the fact that property tax is inelastic and anachronistic, i would welcome suggestions on how to accomplish that objective. While I am absolutely of the opinion that government went too far in taking over all of the education property tax instead of just the industrial or perhaps industrial and commercial base as was proposed by in the 70's, even a modest attempt at discussion of change (other than complete elimination) is met with stiff resistance.

As we have asked School Boards, we are also looking at the role and function of the department to ensure that we add value. Throughout the Inspiring Education process trustees and media have constantly asked, notwithstanding continuing assurance to the contrary, if my intention was to eliminate boards. I believe boards have a very important role in connecting education to the community, ensuring the community is actively involved and actively promoting education as an important societal value. It is only if we have that engagement will we be completely successful in ensuring that every child has the opportunity to maximize his or her potential and contribute back t the community as full citizens

I am intrigued by your policy forum concept. We have been running Inspiring Education and Speak Out which I think have been very useful for policy development in education. Now we need the vehicles to continue the discussion.

Thanks for engaging

Susan thanks for your comments. Permit me to respond. You say that "with this year's round of cuts, there are already fewer teachers....". With respect, that is simply not true. No cuts were made until late August. I specifically asked at that time that the reductions to school boards come from accumulated surpluses. School boards have agreed. Nothing has been passed on to the classroom. School board budgets increased significantly this year, even taking into account the mid year adjustment. You say "their futures are already at risk..". Again, with respect, this is also not true. Alberta has one of the best education systems in the world. Our students and schools are well resourced. Could we do more? Could we do better? Of course! Are there some who "fall through the cracks". Unfortunately yes. That is why we are putting so much emphasis on technology, on setting the direction for special needs, on high school completion, etc. We cannot wait for tomorrow to prepare - we must prepare today to continue to be leading edge. When you say "it is unfortunate that our government did not foresee the bust that follows every boom.." I wonder - what would you have suggested we not invest in over the last 10 years? The major budget items are health and education and both have had considerable increases over that period. If more was to have been saved - some would have come from those areas.

Fiscal prudence and planning to make the best use of resources available does not equate to massive cuts or destruction of our children's educational opportunities. Rather it is the job of government and school boards to work together to achieve the best educational opportunities possible so that every child can succeed.

Bruce,I certainly appreciate your perspective and agree with your view about how we approach the fiscal reality we face. As you know that is exactly the process I started with school boards this fall. I don't have any problem with the concept of advocacy and increased awareness. Wouldn't it have been a much more helpful approach however if the campaign had focused on the value of education to our society, the benefit to individuals and the community, and the benefit both short term and long term in recessionary times of investment in education. Rather than achieving a result of people calling their MLAs to encourage them to consider the value of education in balancing our economy and moving from reliance on carbon energy; rather than a positive movement to encourage continued and increased investment in the nature of a true long term stimulus, the ATA, with the support of the ASBA and others resorted to a campaign designed to be confrontational and divisive. This does not help, and in fact hinders the work we are doing to ensure that we continue to build a strong educational system for the future while ensuring that we make the best use of resources we have knowing that, in the short term at least, new resources are going to be hard to come by. Throughout the discussion with school boards I have resisted talking about numbers because all too often the focus becomes the dollars and not the results or the purpose. We will always have to prioritize - there is never enough to do everything all at once. Lets focus on the outcomes we want to achieve and work together, as we have been doing, to achieve them by making the best use possible of the resources we have and understanding what we can do without because it is not adding to our success or because there is a better way of doing it. I have always believed that frank, open honest discussion is important. I fail to understand how being frank with school trustees constitutes being patronizing or in any other way demeaning. School trustees have never held back in telling me what they think, and that is as it should be. The ministry is not only engaged in planning - it has been leading the way. We are examining everything we are doing - the role and function of the deparment as we go forward into the next generation of education system - to determine what that role and function is, how we add value, how we stay out of the way where appropriate, and how we ensure that our role of assurance and accountability does become a burden rather than an advantage.

Chris, I absolutely agree with you! That is indeed what we are working toward. We must also ensure that Joel, Josh and Lily are not saddled with a debt which hinders their ability and that of their children to seize the opportunities of the day and compete in a global economy, participating as full global and local citizens. I have always (whether education minister or not) been a strong advocate for education and will continue. While Alberta did not create this recession nor choose to be part of it, we must prudently plan our way through it so that when we emerge we are stronger and better equipped to broaden our economy away from such heavy reliance on carbon energy. Government has worked hard towards that goal - one of the reasons our investment in education is as strong at is.

Lynette, thank you for your response. Setting the Direction for Special Needs is an ongoing process so that we can make sure that every child, regardless of ability or challenge, has the opportunity to move from where they are to where they can be. Even in recessionary times it is important to keep that moving forward. It is precisely why I responded to the campaign the way I did. I believe advocacy to be very important and I am gratified to hear from so many people who care about education. The campaign however would have you believe that cuts have affected the classroom. We have specifically asked school boards to take the in year adjustment from their surplus and to my knowledge they have done so. No child should be "suffering from these cuts" as there have been no cuts to the classroom. If we work together to overcome some of the challenges we face every year with increases in salaries and pension obligations, and if we do a better job of cooperating and collaborating on things we can do better together there will be no need for significant impact to the classroom.

Minister Hancock:

Re: "No cuts were made until late August. I specifically asked at that time that the reductions to school boards come from accumulated surpluses. School boards have agreed. Nothing has been passed on to the classroom."
Please look at the Palliser School District, for example. In response to fiscal restrictions, Learning Assistants have been laid off. Child and Youth Care Workers were next. Teaching positions have been downsized, resulting in larger class sizes. Do these cuts not affect the classrooms? Of course they do! I am sure that Palliser is not unique in this situation. I suggest that you follow up with the various boards across the province to see how they have responded to the budget restrictions.

Thanks for responding David... Let me continue the discussion by addressing your key concerns:
#1)
Destablizing the Canadian mosaic? What economist were you listening to? Saving money doesn't mean you don't spend it --- but it does suggest that you spend it very thoughtfully, not simply transferring it to the operating budget. RRSP's are designed to ensure that a specific future is possible for an individual; why couldn't the provincial government be as creative (perhaps in a unique way. albeit somewhat akin to Alaska & Norway)? What if you had balanced the budget each of those years without taken the interest from the Heritage Fund, and instead used some of that money for major graduate scholarships in the Arts, Humanities & Sciences. What is, instead of expanding the public service, you had used those savings to create a special post-graduate scholarship program directly aimed at making Alberta industries pollution neutral? If we had been forced to tighten our belts (including going without the $400 bonuses) maybe we all would be a little less greedy and a little more fit to really deal with the next decade --- and maybe we wouldn't have even had a deficit this year. But, since we didn't do that, there seems to be no reason why, now that we are more aware of our wild spending, we could start doing that now. The funds will not be as great, but it would show new leadership and get us all thinking about legacies (while simultaneously inspiring our youngest brains to get back to work helping lead us into a more contemporary tomorrow). The single biggest gift we can give this province (especially since there are not many young people in politics --- or at least in the legislature) is a real infusion across the learning spectrum of money to get real advancement in the arts, humanities, sciences as well as graduate work in engineering. [I would make the case that we should have doubled our med school enrollments but I am sure you don't need me to remind you how much we blew the Alberta Advantage by not being sensible about planning real health reform.)
p.s. one investment that I still am surprised your governments never made in infrastructure was twinning the highway to the source of most of our wealth --- not to mention the concept of highspeed rail from Calgary to the Oil Sands via Edmonton --- one could liken your policies to paving all the side streets in the residential neighbourhoods in Edmonton and then not providing good roads & other means of travel to get to the city centre...
#2)
Taxation... you asked for it, so here it comes... You need to be a real leader here and either establish a provincial component within the g.s.t. (in other words, a provincial sales tax that gets homolgated into a significant H.S.T.) and then give half of that new tax to the school boards AND if that is too radical a concept, then establish within the income tax structure a portion that is designated to local municipalities (thus freeing up the land tax for schools. Again, we all have to come to grips that we have lived beyond our means and in order to get back to the core of what we need [broad based, multi-disciplinary education and training to the end of high school + solid support for tech, trade, professional, artistic and service training at the post-secondary level). This means we each are going to have to pay more in taxes until we get things back in balance.
p.s. i might add that perhaps the reason you get asked the question "are you going to disband the boards" arises from the fact that your governments in the past have tended to do that whenever community-based boards didn't seem to tow the government line (e.g. the Health Boards, the Children & Family Service Boards, etc.). Why wouldn't school boards be next? and perhaps even municipal councils? [of course the danger would be that the argument could then be applied federally and we could amalgamate some if not all of the provinces --- Bcaltasask / Manont / Quenb / Nspeinfld / Territoria --- think how much we could save on legislatures alone as well as adding great challenges to the national spelling bee contests --- but I digress, perhaps!!]
#3)
My point on policy forums is that simply letting people speak their mind is useful for venting, but if you really want serious, balanced, implementable input you need to provide some parameters... limiting the sessions to three (3) real recommendations would require the participants to really dig down and thoughtfully put forward viable, workable options. These then could be taken by the politicians and the public service and molded into real advancements in the welfare of the community as a whole. In earlier days I was part of such efforts in renewable resources in BC and in Aboriginal education in Saskatchewan & BC so I know it can be done. Again though, it takes firm political leadership with an expectation of accomplishment not simply audience.

Anyway, thanks for the continuing discussion...