Tay _ debate. I could ce MARCH 16, 1983 My credentials are that _Thave been involved in the THE OTHER PRESS Minister Bill Vanderza resources, we were able to keep the Whistler situation from turning into a bonanza for the banks, So the Whistler move has not removed any money from current revenues. By developing the stadium and developing a plan for the whole 200 acre area at False Creek,. we'll have created a valve for the people of British Columbia and it’s been said by the Premier many times the stadium will indeed be a facility of use . to the taxpayers of British Columbia. The devel- opment, sale and leasing of land in the False Creek area will be beneficial for taxpayers. Q-Education as an elitist system. Accessability for lower income people. A-We don’t That is done in the colleges. Higher tuition fees are in the Northern parts of B.C. than in the lower Mainland colleges. Some colleges such as V.C.C. are trying to get their tuition fees in line with other colleges in B.C. I feel that the cost of. education should be burdened on the student to some degree but not enough to be a disincentive. It should not deter them form wanting to partici- pate in an education program. Our Grants & Loans systems are some help in that respect. Tuition fees generally do not exceed 10 percent of whatever cost there is and it is my hope that these fees can be kept down. However, this remains to be seen. Q-C.F.S. Bursary/Loan Program. Paying loans,, public eye for eighteen years. °° 9. your own interpretation on them no matter who they are provided by, government, faculty board, or special interest groups. They should be sent for inly draw up some figures to the contrary. . There is probably some truth in whatever the _ statistics provide but you can make them look any -way you want them to. Some of the figures provided by B.C. School Trustees Association (BCSTA) say that provincial interest in education has reduced in the past few years when in fact a larger percentage of the total provincial budget than what it was in ’65, '70, 75. ‘There is a greater share of the provincial pot going into education now than when we were under earlier Social Credit government under WAC Bennett or under the NDP government. Q-What are your credentials for being education minister. A-My credentials are that I have been involved in the public eye for 18 years. I have had substantial contact with the people of the province, in all ‘walks of life. I have past personal experience of raising a family, naturally, and have raised kids who have received an education in B.C. My insights are largely from having been, involved in. ublic life, with the tax payer and having raised a amily in B.C. I have no background as an ed- ucator and have no affinity to a particular univer- sity. Q-How does the Socred government justify mass- ive education cuts, while bailing out ski resorts and B.C. Place? A-In the case of Whistler, the options were that we would have the Royal Bank walk away with all the property for very little cost. Not only property that was. held by the B.C. Development Corpora- tion, land that had been turned into it, also land owned by the province, money that had been invested by the Federal Government and the province as well as a lot of unsecured debts owing to small business people. So, the result of not having done anything at all would have been not, only loss of land that had been granted by the province and the municipality and the money invested by the province and the Federal Govern- ment but also saving of money to a lot of other business involved with the B.C, Dev. company. So without having to invest any money directly and immediately and not having to take current A-Loan programs should be geared to enable students to pay when they have enough income to pay. The repayment of any loan should be defer- red until a student has had enough time after getting out of school to secure employment. There is a school of thought by the ministry that prefers the grant system because it is far cheaper to = ,administer and less bureaucratic. Many student “groups however, seem to prefer, form what we jbelieve so far, higher loan ceilings; what you ecide tuition fees in the Ministry. PAGE 5 could say a more liberal loan appoach, where they repay when they have the income accordingly. There is mixed views on this. Federal protion is all loans. Provincial protion is all grants. Q-The Douglas College Board has not been very vocal in its opposition to your policies. What do you feel are the réasons for this? A-All of funding for colleges except tuition is provided by the Provincial Government. The Min- istry appoints one half of the members plus one, to the Board. As far as the Minisry is concerned, it is up to the Board to be accountable to the Ministry for its expenditures. The Province can- not become actively involved in the administration of the Colleges, so it appoints people it feels will fairly account for expenditures for programs. The difference between the College Boards and the School Boards is that in the College Boards you do not have as strong a bureaucratic organization as with School Boards. They are not as well organ- ized as the BCSTA for example. There has been little criticism coming from the individual School Boards as opposed to what has come from the BCSTA, or individual teacher groups. You don’t have a large organization within the college sys- tem, so you don’t have large organized protests taking place. College Board members may feel closer politically speaking, to the ministry than the opposition. There could be conflict of interest. Q-Will colleges become vocational as opposed to- academic? A-As far as our five year plans are concerned, academic training has a value in society. Too narrow an academic training could limit students in formulating career objectives. A person might not have all the options with vocational training only. The best education is a broad education, but don’t make specialization so predominant to jlimit young people from formulating career ob- jectives. The best education is a broad education.;don’t make specialization so predominant (so as) to limit young people from formulating career objectives.