Call For Boycott Of Extra-Curricular Transportation Survey

On Thursday, May 28, 2009, I found out that District 15 is doing a survey called Winter Extra-Curricular Travel Parental Survey. Apparently the survey was sent out to every parent in the District 15 with instructions to fill it out and return to Superintendent John McLaughlin by June 5, 2009. (Survey reproduced below).

After reviewing the survey we have to say that we are thoroughly disgusted with both the Department and the District. We are calling upon all parents to boycott the survey and reject the Department’s sneaky attempts to find a way around implementing the common sense recommendations of the Coroners Jury into the death of ours sons on January 12, 2008.

It’s obvious to anyone who reads this survey that the Department does not have any intention of following the Coroners Jury recommendations and that they had planned this long in advance of the Inquest which closed only two weeks ago. It’s a slap in the face. Their complete disregard for the office of the Coroner shows how weak the Coroners Act is and how this whole inquest process was designed right from the very start to make the parents believe something good was actually going to come out of the entirely preventable deaths of our children.

We can see now how the politicians and the administrators say one thing and do another and how they really don’t care about the safety of children, for if they did, they would never have sent out this survey to the parents in this District. Instead of wasting tax-payers dollars on a useless survey which completely contradicts the recommendations of the Coroners Jury, they should already be working on implementing the most important recommendations which are 1) the Department of Education take full responsibility for transporting children to off-site extra-curricular activities, 2) nothing less than Class 2 yellow school bus drivers with endorsement B and E driving yellow school buses or Multifunctional vehicles, 3) ban 7 and 15 passengers vehicles, 4) and a bad weather law.
Out of these four main recommendations, all others will follow.

Below is the actual survey in text format and we also scanned the sheet. You can click on the images to see the larger picture. The original was printed on a 8x14 sheet of paper so we had to break it up into three images.

Section 1
check appropriate boxes that apply to you as a parent:
one of questions is I have been a volunteer driver in the past for
extracurricular travel

Section 2 is a rating scale
1 very uncomfortable
2 uncomfortable
3 no clear opinion
4 somewhat comfortable
5 very comfortable

Please indicate your comfort level with extra-curricular travel in the
following weather conditions. In all cases, the vehicle will be equipped
with winter tires;
a) a forecast for freezing rain in the travel area
1 2 3 4 5
b) a forescast for 1-5 cm of snowfallf or the travel area
c) a forecast for 6-10 cm of snowfall for travel area
d) a forecast for 11-15 cm of snowfall for travel area

It doesn't mention what type of vehicle if its a 7 passengers van or a
school bus or multifunctional buses also doesn't mention what class driver when they know perfectly well that the jury recommended only class 2 drivers and outright rejected class 4 drivers.

Question 2

Consider the following scenario: Your child's volleyball team is scheduled
to travel in three rented seven-passenger vans to a tournament in Fredericton. The van meets all safety standards and has been equipped with good quality winter tires. The weather forecast is for 7cm of snow beginning one hour before the team is expected to arrive at its destination.

By the time the team arrives in Fredericton, there will be an expected 2-4 cm of snow on the ground. The team is planning to spend the night in Fredericton. There is no forecast for wind or freezing rain. The team is leaving early enough that they expect to be in Fredericton during daylight hours. The school principal has attempted to get a school bus, but there is none available.

Please select only one of the following responses:

The trip should continue
The trip should be cancelled
Not enough information to make a decision

What do they think they are doing?

What do they think they are doing? Believe me, this was very disturbing to a lot of people. I have received phone calls from many people who said that they are just going to tear it up.

Its sneaky and ill-conceived and shows how little respect that the Department of Education has, not only for our children who were killed in a terrible tragedy, but also for the Coroners Jury which clearly recommended that children be driven to extra curricular activities by Class 2 drivers and in yellow school buses or multifunctional vehicles ONLY.

The Coroners Jury recommended banning 7 and 15 passengers vans. In this survey the premise is that a hypothetical team is going on a tournament out of town. Tournaments are always overnight stays. They never travel back and forth when they are on a tournament. The survey also says they are only using good quality winter tires. Again they don’t mention the class of driver, and the whole issue of the weather which was such a huge part of the Inquest, forming one of its major recommendations regarding a bad weather law seems to be completely ignored. Why doesn’t this survey mention that they are checking with Environment Canada and the DOT and the highway patrol driver if it’s a storm alert. On a regular school day the principal has no authority to close the schools. The Transport Manager is the person who decides whether a regular school days begins when there is a storm alert.

This same person should be involved in extra-curricular activities since the Principal cannot make a decision on his or her own. The Principal must go through the proper channels to get the information about the weather before students leave the school for extra curricular activities. The Principal is responsible for checking with the Transport Manager or are they not. Who decides????? There are so many ways they can find out about the weather and that’s why the Coroners Jury recommended a bad weather law in the first place. This is also why the Coroners Jury recommended Class 2 bus drivers only. They are trained drivers who know what to do in weather conditions.

Boycott this disrespectful survey

This survey is so disrespectful of the District 15 and the Department of Education. To even think of doing this survey, within two weeks of the inquest into the deaths of our sons is so insensitive and shows how far the government will go to ignore the common sense recommendations of the Coroners Jury.

Everyone in this province should be outraged and we encourage parents to boycott the survey to foil the Department’s plans. Parents please think twice before you agree to participate in the Class 4 driver’s training that the Department intends to offer starting in June. Do you really want to take on the responsibility for the safety and the lives of up to 24 children by agreeing to drive one of those huge multifunctional vehicles that will be used to transport children to off site activities? You will be fully responsible and the Department of Education will wash its hands of you, leaving you to deal with any legal consequences.

Instead of driving these huge vehicles with a ridiculous seven hour training program offered by the Department join your children at an off-site game and cheer them on.

Parents be a passenger not a driver.

Leave the responsibility up to the Department of Education which is an important recommendation of the Coroners Jury.

Leave the coaching up to the coaches.

Leave the teaching up to the teachers.

Leave the volunteering up to the volunteers.

Leave the parenting up to the parents.

Leave the driving up to the experts - Class 2 drivers. They are professionals who are highly skilled with extensive training and they do this for a living. They will get our children to the their destinations safely and parents will be worry free.
Isabelle and Ana

Telegraph Journal Article May 22, 2009

Mothers want school transportation cuts reversed

FREDERICTON - Two Bathurst mothers who lost their sons in the crash of a school van, along with the union representing school bus drivers, are calling on Education Minister Kelly Lamrock to reverse cuts to his department's transportation budget.

"The Department of Education is going in the wrong direction," Delalene Harris Foran, the head of Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 1253, said Thursday.
read full story
http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/search/article/675283


May 30, 2009
Letter To The Editor by Delalene Harris Foran,
Provincial President, CUPE Local 1253

Department of Education Can Afford to Fund Extra-Curricular Trips
I want to comment on the article “Mothers want school transportation cuts reversed”. (May 22). I want to make clear that the Department of Education could easily afford 200 extra-curricular trips for each school district.

The May 22nd article was unclear on that point, and readers might have thought it was 200 extra-curricular trips for the province. There are 14 school districts in the province, so that would come to 2800 trips per year. Sports teams and clubs are important activities for our children. The fact that students and their parents are prepared to hold bake sales, bottle drives and other fundraisers to keep these activities alive shows how important it is to them.

$1.4 million is a small price to pay for our children’s safety. It is only 2.3 per cent of the school transportation budget, or 0.14 per cent of the total Education budget.
If you consider that that by 2012 the Shawn Graham government will be handing out $30million in tax savings to the 1,300 richest people in the province, it is clear that this government’s priorities are all wrong.

Delalene Harris Foran
President, CUPE 1253

Letter to Minister of Education, Kelly Lamrock asking for meeting

Hon. Kelly Lamrock
Minister of Education
Place 2000
P. O. Box 6000
Fredericton, NB
E3B 5H1

kelly.lamrock@gnb.ca

Minister Lamrock:

As you know, the Coroners Jury for the Inquest into the crash that killed our sons on January 12, 2008 has returned 24 recommendations, fourteen of which were from a list the parents agreed upon and submitted to the Jury as a group on Wednesday, May 13.

In our view, the two most important of the Jury's recommendations are those concerning 1) the responsibilities of the Department of Education towards students travelling to off-site, extra-curricular activities and 2) Class 2 Drivers.

"Nothing less than a qualified Class 2 yellow school bus driver with endorsements for school buses and air brakes should be used for travel to off-site extra-curricular events. Teachers, coaches and parents, as well as volunteers, should not drive children to off-site events."

"The Department of Education should take full responsibility for the safety of children travelling to off-site extra-curricular events when they are representing their schools."

Everything else flows from these two critical points.

You are now aware that the Coroners Jury recommendations are a complete and utter rejection of your Department's planned Class 4 Drivers Training Pilot Project, which we only learned about through the testimony of your Assistant Deputy Minister Elizabeth Abraham, on Tuesday, May 12, the day before the Inquest finished.

We also discovered that your Department had already sent the Class 4 Drivers Training Program to Tender long before this Coroners Jury sat and delivered its recommendations.

The fact that your Department had already gone ahead with plans to train Class 4 drivers when you as Minister knew full well that we parents have been calling for Class 2 drivers from the beginning is an example of how your Department has not consulted with the parents except for a superficial dinner and one and a half-hour "workshop" with District 2 Superintendent Karen Branscombe five days before the Inquest.

The "workshop" included multiple-choice questions about how we would deal with the transportation of students if faced with bad weather conditionsand the families all agreed on Class 2 yellow scool bus drivers. Nothing was said about a Class 4 Drivers Training Pilot Project which we understand from Ms. Abraham's testimony is expected to be piloted before the end of June. The fact that we were not told about the Pilot Training Project at this meeting only two weeks ago prove that this so-called consultation with the parents was not sincere as you had already made up your mind about the direction the Department of Education was going to take with Class 4 Drivers.

It is because our sons died that new policies are being developed. We expect to be treated as partners in the development of any policies or regulations that may come out of the Corners Jury recommendations. Now that you know the Jury has categorically rejected Class 4 Drivers it is incumbent upon you to meet with us as equals at the table and to work towards safe transportation of all children in the future using Class 2 drivers. We will accept nothing less, which is exactly what the Coroners Jury said in its recommendation: "Nothing less than a qualified Class 2 yellow school bus driver..."

We fully believe that if we do not continue to pressure your Department, the Coroners Jury recommendations will be collecting dust on a shelf somewhere in Fredericton and we will not allow that to happen.

Do not make us have to fight for these recommendations to be implemented. They were developed by a Jury that sat and heard testimony from 33 witnesses over eight days in a Bathurst courtroom. We know that under the current Coroners Act, the recommendations are not binding. However, you cannot ignore the will of a Coroners Jury and the determination of parents who will not give up until we see all children in New Brunswick safely transported to off-site, extra-curricular activities. We do this in honour of our boys who had a future that was taken from them so tragically, in a collision that should have been prevented if your employees had been doing their jobs.

We are waiting for you to reply to us as soon as possible as we are eager to meet with you to discuss the implementation of the Coroners Jury recommendations in an open, honest dialogue.

In addition, there are several other issues which we feel must be raised with your Department, specifically Policy 512 and 513, as well as the proposed new District 15 transportation policies which were submitted to the Coroners Jury as exhibits. We have not seen these documents and want to have a copy of them immediately.

We had to fight to get a Coroners Inquest, an inquest whose motto was "To protect the living." We have been through so much already in the last sixteen months. Do not make us fight to get the Coroners Jury recommendations implemented.

Yours sincerely,



Isabelle Hains and Ana Acevedo

Day Nine: After Nine Days, The Coroners Jury Comes In With Its Recommendations

Plenty has happened since witness testimony ended at 2:30 pm on Wednesday, May 13. We didn't get a chance to post our thoughts to the blog that night because we were exhausted, but today, May 15th, we're going to recap everything that happened since then.

The most important thing that has happened since Wednesday is that the Jury came in with its Recommendations on Thursday, May 14 at 2 pm, nearly 24 hours after formal testimony closed and they convened for their deliberations.

One Hour's Notice

We were told to expect one hour's notice from the Coroner so we were up first thing on Thursday and for the first time we didn't have to go to the courthouse at 9 am. We thought we might get a chance to catch up on the Van Angels website but it seemed that before you knew it, the phone call came at 1 pm to go to the Bathurst courthouse for 2 because the Jury had finished its deliberations.

The courtroom was tense as families, friends, the public and the media gathered to hear the Jury's recommendations. The first two rows were filled once again with parents and relatives and everyone was quiet. You could hear a pin drop in the courtroom.

We didn't know what to expect: were they going to listen to the parents' recommendations that we delivered as a group on Wednesday?

Jury Foreman Jeff Causey Reads the Recommendations

Jury Foreman Jeff Causey read the recommendations, and one by one we breathed a sigh of relief as we realized they actually listened to what we had to say and acted upon the witness testimony which laid bare for the world to see the incompetence and gross negligence of the Department of Education.

It was an almost surreal experience to be sitting there, almost 16 months to the day that our boys were killed, and to hear a Coroners Jury affirm what we had been saying all along. And although we wanted to hear that this tragedy should have been prevented, we knew that the Jury would not have been allowed to say that it was preventable. If they had, it would have been "laying blame" and the Coroner would have removed any such statement from their recommendations before they were announced from the floor of the courtroom.

Fourteen which was ours were included on the list. The Jury knew what was important and made the right recommendations.

Other recommendations we don't have enough information to base an opinion on: for example, District 15 transportation policies which were included are an unknown to us. We have not seen their draft District 15 student tranportation policy documents and know nothing about what they contain so we cannot comment. But we can assure you that if their policy documents say that school children are to be transported by Class 4 drivers they are going to have a fight on their hands.

We Were Right

We were right when we said that the Department of Education had to take full responsibility for children who are being transported to off-site, extra-curricular activities. The Department hasn't taken responsibility for children taking part in extra-curricular activities for nearly 30 years, when they cutbacks that resulted in the creation of companies like Bathurst Van Inc. in 1983. They invented a class of vehicle that fit nowhere in the definition of Commercial or Passenger Vehicle so that they could do as they pleased when it came to inspections, maintenance and driver qualifications.

We were right, when we said that only Class 2 yellow school bus drivers with a "B" and "E" endorsement should be allowed to transport children using the new Mutli-Function Activity Vehicles. The testimony of Mr. Lord on the first day of the Inquest, as well as that of Mr. McKay and Mr. Robichaud gave a chilling picture of the complete lack of driver training and ignorance of the guidelines, policies and regulations of Education Act and the Motor Vehicle Act.

We were right when we said that coaches, teachers, parents and volunteers should not be driving children to off-site, extra-curricular events.

We were right when we said that there has to be a bad weather law so that children are not transported to off-site extra-curricular activities in bad weather.

We were right when we said that there should be a ban on using 15-passenger and 7-passenger vans for transporting children to off-site, extra-curricular events.

We were right when we said that the employees of the Department of Education should be reprimanded or dismissed for failing to fulfill their duties - unbelievable that a Coroners Jury had to actually recommend that the Superintendent, the Principal, and Vice-principals be held accountable for failing to do the job they are paid to do. It is a sad state of affairs when we have come to this.

Among the 24 recommendations, the jury is calling for:

* There should be external audits to monitor compliance of schools and school districts in their implementation of Department of Education Policies 512 and 513. (The policies detail safety regulations for vehicles used to transport students to activities and the requirements for drivers.);

* Hosting schools should have contingency kits available with basic overnight supplies (air mattresses, bedding) should the weather change and hotels or home billets are not available. Hosting schools should be prepared to house a visiting team in the school if necessary;

* All travelling school teams and activity groups should carry with them written contingency binders that include contact information for hotels in all the communities to which they may be travelling, AMEC weather contact information and a current list of the names of schools' vice-principals and principals, the district's transportation manager, director of education, director of finance and administration and the superintendent;

* There should be a concerted effort by high schools and by the New Brunswick Interscholastic Activities Association to create schedules that minimize winter travel;

* The Department of Education should take full responsibility for the safety of children travelling to off-site extra-curricular events when they are representing their schools;

* Nothing less than a qualified Class 2 yellow school bus driver with endorsements for school buses and air brakes should be used for travel to off-site extra-curricular events. Teachers, coaches and parents, as well as volunteers, should not drive children to off-site events;

* A weather law should be enacted preventing students from being transported to off-site extra-curricular events in bad weather. If there is a storm alert, a game should be cancelled. If the weather changes at destinations, students should stay overnight;

* Fifteen-passenger and seven-passenger vans should be banned for student travel across Canada. Only yellow school buses and multi-function activity vehicles (mini buses) should be used;

* The minimum standard on tire tread depth has to be raised to a minimum of 4/32nds and tread depth should be measured across the full width of the tread. Clients should be advised by written recommendation that their tires are approaching replacement time;

* Drivers should drive no more than 14 hours;

* A process should be put in place so that persons employed by the Department of Education who fail to fulfil their duties as outlined in the guidelines, policies and regulations of the department are reprimanded. The reprimand should be recognized and serve as a reminder to other staff that they must do their job or be confronted with a reprimand or dismissal, if need be;

* The maintenance of highway edge drops should be kept seamless at all times, therefore no edge drop;

* All vehicles transporting students must have winter tires; should not be up to student representative councils to pay for multi-functional activity vehicles or for their maintenance. That should be paid for by the province. Student councils also should not have to pay the drivers of multi-functional vehicles if the recommendation for mandatory bus drivers for these vehicles is passed;

* There should be an activity organizer committee in place that would involve parents in planning travel for school activities;

* Only the principal and vice-principal should decide if travel will take place during inclement weather. Therefore, there should be a provincial training model to help them make informed decisions about travel;

* An itinerary or detailed explanation of trips should be sent to each student's parents;

* Additional snow plows and drivers should be used by the Department of Transportation at the time of bad weather all over the province;

* The Department of Transportation Road Patrol should report road conditions to the road supervisor immediately;

* It should be mandatory for all policies in place to be read and signed by all parties involved for the safety of students;

* As part of the recommendations outlined today, all current policies already in place should remain as such and be strictly adhered to;

* Procedures developed by School District 15 in regards to safeguarding pupil transportation should be disseminated to all school districts and through them to all schools;

* The Department of Transportation should review the condition of road shoulders and make the necessary repairs to the section of Highway 8 from the junction of Route 11 south to the Allardville exit;

* The registrar of the Department of Motor Vehicles should advise all licensees that 15-passenger vans are to be inspected twice a year, regardless of who operates them.

Final Coroners Jury Recommendations

Below is the list of 24 recommendations from the Jury at the Coroners Inquest into the death of our sons. (The last three are from the Acting Chief Coroner, Greg Forestell).

Fourteen of the recommendations are based on the list of recommendations that we developed and, in consultation with the other parents, were jointly approved on Wednesday, May 13 at the closing of the Inquest. [Click here to see list of Recommendations that we submitted as a group on Wednesday, May 13]

* There should be external audits to monitor compliance of schools and school districts in their implementation of Department of Education Policies 512 and 513. (The policies detail safety regulations for vehicles used to transport students to activities and the requirements for drivers.);

* Hosting schools should have contingency kits available with basic overnight supplies (air mattresses, bedding) should the weather change and hotels or home billets are not available. Hosting schools should be prepared to house a visiting team in the school if necessary;

* All travelling school teams and activity groups should carry with them written contingency binders that include contact information for hotels in all the communities to which they may be travelling, AMEC weather contact information and a current list of the names of schools' vice-principals and principals, the district's transportation manager, director of education, director of finance and administration and the superintendent;

* There should be a concerted effort by high schools and by the New Brunswick Interscholastic Activities Association to create schedules that minimize winter travel;

* The Department of Education should take full responsibility for the safety of children travelling to off-site extra-curricular events when they are representing their schools;

* Nothing less than a qualified Class 2 yellow school bus driver with endorsements for school buses and air brakes should be used for travel to off-site extra-curricular events. Teachers, coaches and parents, as well as volunteers, should not drive children to off-site events;

* A weather law should be enacted preventing students from being transported to off-site extra-curricular events in bad weather. If there is a storm alert, a game should be cancelled. If the weather changes at destinations, students should stay overnight;

* Fifteen-passenger and seven-passenger vans should be banned for student travel across Canada. Only yellow school buses and multi-function activity vehicles (mini buses) should be used;

* The minimum standard on tire tread depth has to be raised to a minimum of 4/32nds and tread depth should be measured across the full width of the tread. Clients should be advised by written recommendation that their tires are approaching replacement time;

* Drivers should drive no more than 14 hours;

* A process should be put in place so that persons employed by the Department of Education who fail to fulfil their duties as outlined in the guidelines, policies and regulations of the department are reprimanded. The reprimand should be recognized and serve as a reminder to other staff that they must do their job or be confronted with a reprimand or dismissal, if need be;

* The maintenance of highway edge drops should be kept seamless at all times, therefore no edge drop;

* All vehicles transporting students must have winter tires; should not be up to student representative councils to pay for multi-functional activity vehicles or for their maintenance. That should be paid for by the province. Student councils also should not have to pay the drivers of multi-functional vehicles if the recommendation for mandatory bus drivers for these vehicles is passed;

* There should be an activity organizer committee in place that would involve parents in planning travel for school activities;

* Only the principal and vice-principal should decide if travel will take place during inclement weather. Therefore, there should be a provincial training model to help them make informed decisions about travel;

* An itinerary or detailed explanation of trips should be sent to each student's parents;

* Additional snow plows and drivers should be used by the Department of Transportation at the time of bad weather all over the province;

* The Department of Transportation Road Patrol should report road conditions to the road supervisor immediately;

* It should be mandatory for all policies in place to be read and signed by all parties involved for the safety of students;

* As part of the recommendations outlined today, all current policies already in place should remain as such and be strictly adhered to;

* Procedures developed by School District 15 in regards to safeguarding pupil transportation should be disseminated to all school districts and through them to all schools;

* The Department of Transportation should review the condition of road shoulders and make the necessary repairs to the section of Highway 8 from the junction of Route 11 south to the Allardville exit;

* The registrar of the Department of Motor Vehicles should advise all licensees that 15-passenger vans are to be inspected twice a year, regardless of who operates

Frequently Heard Phrases During the Coroners Inquest into the Death Of Our Sons

What ever it takes.

I forget.

I don't remember.

I cannot recall

Honestly, I'm not trying to pass the buck.

It's not my job.

It's not my responsibility.

It's not my Department.

You have to talk to my supervisor about that.

I have to defer to (fill in name).

You have to talk to Mr. McKay about that.

I just trust that it's inspected.

I can't clarify that.

I'd have to check my notes.

I didn't know.

I never saw those Guidelines.

I never saw them before.

I knew about the Guidelines, but they were just recommendations.

They were just Guidelines.

They were not policy.

I never read the guidelines.

It's a gray area.

We always paid our bills.

Money was not an issue.

Money was always an issue.

It's too expensive.

It was cheaper to change the registration.

I was astonished by the amount of money that was being spent on repairs.

Our motto is if it has to be done, we get it done.

We were going to replace the van.

I knew about the weather.

I didn't know about the weather.

He didn't ask me.

It's your decision.

He didn't tell me.

He didn't ask me.

I didn't know about that.

I've never taken a defensive drivers training course.

I got my Class 4 license in about an hour.

I don't remember when I got my Class 4 license.

The roads were bad.

The roads weren't bad.

It's a 15 passenger van.

It's a bus.

It's a school vehicle.

It's not a school vehicle.

It's a commercial vehicle.

It's not a commercial vehicle.

It's a passenger vehicle.

It's not a passenger vehicle.

___

These people should be ashamed of themselves. To think that we entrusted our children to their responsiblity. They betrayed our children.

Day Eight: Class 2 Bus Driver Speaks, Testimony Ends and the Waiting Begins

Today was the last day of testimony at the Inquest. We thought it might end at 12 noon but as it turned out, the morning testimony of Mr. Bob Comeau. Mr. Comeau is a retired Class 2 (E and B Endorsement) Yellow School Bus Driver and former member of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE). Both he and the second witness were on the stand for longer than expected, and for a good reason.

Mr. Bob Comeau, Retired Class 2 School Bus Driver

Both witnesses were excellent in terms of the information that they relayed to the Jury, the families, the courtoom and the media. Mr. Comeau was a well informed, likeable fellow who clearly explained in detail the daily routine of a Class 2 Yellow School Bus Driver. This was important to us because from the very beginning, we wanted to hear the testimony of a Class 2 Driver to show the extreme contrast in skills and training compared to the Class 4 Drivers which the Department of Education is relying upon to drive children to sporting events. We had already heard from three Class 4 Drivers and we knew that there was a serious problem with training and skills. They should not be driving children to off-site, extra-curricular activities.

Mr. Comeau brought with him his 1992 Drivers Training Manual. As it so happened, we were in possession of a more recent copy of the Manual and were able to submit it to the Jury as an exhibit. We also were able to submit a Class 2 Drivers Log book which showed the amount of effort that Class 2 Yellow School Bus Drivers have to go through every day before they even get on the bus. We were amazed by the amount of work that these drivers do to ensure the safety of their student passengers. It took Mr. Comeau nearly ten minutes to read the 75 point "Checklist" that each driver has to check off every day - a pre-inspection of their bus which misses nothing from one end to the other of these Yellow Buses. He told us how Bus Drivers could be audited at any time, their log books examined and if they did not do their jobs they could be reprimanded or dismissed.

Mr. Comeau said there was never a time when a bus driver wasn't available to drive a bus. This contradicts testimony from Principal Coleen Ramsay, Vice-Principal Don McKay and Superintendent John McLaughlin, who said, almost in unison, that
1) buses weren't always available
2) drivers weren't always available
3) it's too expensive

In contrast to Mr. Comeau, their responses to the question about using Class 2 Yellow School Bus Drivers was so similar, that you'd almost think they were coached.

Mr. Comeau was like Curt Bennet, the mechanic who did a complete mechanical inspection of the van after the collision. A profesional who knew what he was talking about, and who wasn't coached. It came from the heart.

Ron Arseneau, Coordinator, School Bus Driver Training, Department of Education

Next on the stand was Ron Arseneaul, Coordinator of Pupil Transportation. Mr. Arseneaul trains Yellow School Bus Drivers for the Department of Education and he was extremely knowledgeable about the Yellow School Bus Drivers Training Manual, which happens to be the same training manual we submitted to the Jury as an exhibit.

Like Mr. Comeau, he was a real professional who knew what he was doing. He was easy to understand and stood up in front of the Jury to show them the details of the manual and the kind of pre-trip inspections that Yellow School Bus Drivers must do before they leave on a trip. In combination with Mr. Comeau, he proved to the Jury that Yellow School Bus Drivers are superior in terms of their skills, training, and professionalism.

One of the questions we had always wanted answered by anyone, the Principal, the Vice Principal, the Superintendent, the Assistant Deputy Minister was: What kind of contract did Bathurst Van Inc. have with the Department of Education?

Finally the question was asked of Mr. Arseneau and we found out that in fact, there was no conveyance contract or contract of any kind at all between the Department of Transportation and the Department of Education because the Department of Education doesn't own the new Multi Function Activity Vehicles (MFAVs), doesn't pay for their purchase or their maintenance (the BHS Student Representative Council does) and therefore, the Department of Education is not responsible for them under the Pupil Transportation Regulations Act - JUST LIKE IT WAS FOR BATHURST VAN INC. AND THE VAN IN WHICH OUR SONS WERE KILLED.

BATHURST VAN INC. DIDN'T HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION EITHER.

This loophole allowed the Department of Education to wash its hands of responsibility for students under the Pupil Transportations Regulations Act. This information from the second last witness was confirmation of everything we knew to be true. The Department of Education did not want to be responsible for the transportation of students to off-site, extra-curricular activities.

Mr. Arseneau also confirmed that they intended to use Class 4 Drivers to drive the new MFAVs and that they were piloting a Class 4 Drivers Training Program in June.

Because Mr. Arseneau went over his time the Coroner asked for an adjournment until 1:30 at which time the final witness, Const. Yves Allain, the RCMP Lead Investigator, would give testimony.

Our Recommendations

At this point, the Coroner asked the parents to gather and go over the recommendations which he told us had to be submitted to Const. Allain before he went on the stand at 1:30 pm.

Ana and I had already submitted our 20 recommendations the night before and posted them on our website at about 11:30 pm. We had spoken to Marcella Kelly, mother of Nick Kelly, who gave us a recommendation for blankets and pillows at the destination school. Alan Cormier, father of Justin Cormier, wanted to see a recommendation about the widening of the road, so we included that too.

As we stood there Mr. Chiasson asked: "Does everybody agree with these recommendations?" and the families said "Yes". We made some minor changes after lunch and added three more points, including the one about employees of the Department of Education being reprimanded for failing to fulfill their duties. When we came back, we passed the final version around to all the parents and they all agreed. Then we had to give the final list of our recommendations to Const. Yves Allain before he gave his witness testimony at 1:30. As the Lead Investigator, he had to hand our recommendations over to the Crown Prosecutor who, in turn, gave it as an exhibit to the Coroner, Greg Forestell.

Const. Yves Allain, the RCMP Lead Investigator

Const. Allain was the Lead Investigator for the RCMP. He recounted the night of January 12 and it was difficult for us to hear that again, as we thought we wouldn't have to revisit that terrible night.

Const. Allain handed over our recommendations to the Crown Prosecutor, who gave our recommendations to the Coroner as an Exhibit.

At 2:00 pm it was over.

One Hour's Notice

Greg Forestell addressed the Jury, instructed them in their responsibilities and by 2:30 the public portion of the Inquest was complete. Now we had to wait for the Jury to come up with their recommendations. We were told to be available at one hour's notice.

Revised Final Recommendations to the Coroners Jury

We want a Van Angels law in memory of our boys that includes the following recommendations to the Coroners Jury:

1. The New Brunswick Department of Education to take full responsibility for the safety of children travelling to off-site, extra-curricular events when they are representing their schools.

2. Nothing less than qualified, Class 2 yellow school bus drivers with endorsements B (valid for school buses) and E (valid for air brakes) for all student travel to off -site extra-curricular events. Teachers, coaches, parents and volunteers should not be driving children to off-site extra-curricular activities.

3. A central student travel office at the Department of Education monitoring all student travel to off-site extra-curricular events.

4. Department of Education, Environment Canada and Department of Transportation work together with central office to receive special in-depth weather forecasts, storm alerts, weather advisories and road condition updates.

5. A weather law preventing students from being transported to off-site extra-curricular events in bad weather. If there is a storm alert, the game is cancelled. If the weather changes at the destination, students stay overnight. The weather protocol should be used for co and extra-curricular.

6. At destination, a list of hotels readily available.

7. At destination, bedding (blankets and pillows) available.

8. New Brunswick Interscholastic Athletic Association (NBIAA) adapt scheduling and rules to reduce team travel for winter sports.

9. 15 passenger and 7 passenger vans banned for student travel across Canada. Only yellow school buses and Multi Function Activity Vehicles (MFAVs) are built to withstand impact in a motor vehicle accident.

10. Mandatory winter tires for all vehicles in New Brunswick (NOT M&S Tires, it has to have snowflake and peaked mountain symbol).

11. Widen roads from the edge line to the shoulder of the road on RUA Highways

12. An evaluation of the current Motor Vehicle Inspections process in New Brunswick with a view to eliminating grey areas, increasing the number of Auditors in each district and setting higher standards for Motor Vehicle Inspections across the board.

13. Improve communications between Inspection Stations and the Motor Vehicle Branch so that mechanics are fully aware of their responsibilities.

14. Minimum standard on tire tread depth has to be raised to a minimum of 4/32 and tread depth should be measured across the full width of the tread. Clients advised that their tires are approaching replacement time.

13. Multimedia public awareness campaign on driving while fatigued and the dangers of winter driving in this snow belt province.

14. DOT Inspection of Multi-Function Activity Vehicles (MFAVs) held to the same standard as yellow school buses, every six months in DOT garages only, not in private sector garages.

15. Spot inspections of MFAVs and log books for pre-trip inspections.

16. DOT implement a trigger value for road drop edge maintenance to 2.5 inches (compared to Nova Scotia trigger value of 4 inches).

17. If the estimated time of arrival (ETA) from an off-site extra-curricular activity is after 10 pm, then the team is to stay overnight. No night driving after 10 pm.

18. Transportation to off-site extra-curricular activities be part of the core funding provided by the Department of Education. Transportation of students should not be dependant on fund-raising on the school level.

19. Drivers should drive no more than the recommended hours of driving. (14 hrs on duty time).

20. Process in place to ensure recommendations from this Coroners Inquest are monitored, audited and enforced.

21. On an on-going basis, counselling to educate children on grief and suicide prevention as part of the school curriculum.

22. We want some kind of process in place so that persons employed by the Department of Education who fail to fulfill their duties as outlined in the Guidelines, Policies, and Regulations of the Department are reprimanded. The reprimand is recognized and serves as a reminder to other staff that they MUST do their job or they will be confronted with a reprimand or dismissal.

23. We want the new Multi-Function Activity Vehicles (MFAV) to be held to the same standards as yellow school buses as noted in the Pupil Transportation Regulations Education Act 2001-51, specifically School Vehicle Driver Responsibilities (sections 11-18) and Vehicle Specifications and Maintenance (sections 19-22).

24. When there are upgrades or new purchases of MFAVs, that they must include air brakes.

Day Seven: Guidelines Ignored, Children Put in Peril While Gov't Dreams Up Drivers Training Schemes To Make It Look Like They're Doing Something

Today marks 16 months since Daniel and Javier were killed on that lonely stretch of Highway 8 outside of Bathurst. Little did we know 16 months ago that we would spend this day in a courtroom attending a Coroners Inquest into the death of our sons.

Again, the two front rows were filled with parents and relatives and by 9 am we were sitting in anticipation of the first witness. We knew that John McLaughlin was going to testify so we were prepared with a long list of questions that we had already submitted to the Corner and Crown Prosecutor.

John McLaughlin, Superintendent of District 15

John McLaughlin is the Superintendent of District 15, an area that stretches all the way from Tidehead to Miscou Island in Northern New Brunswick. McLaughlin is the only employee of the District Education Council, (what used to be known as the School Board) and he is the senior administrator in the District for the Anglophone sector.

Crown Prosecutor George Chiasson asked McLaughlin if he was expected to be aware of Guidelines 512, 513 and Policy 504, the main guidelines and policies that have formed much of the discussion over the past seven days of testimony.

“Yes”, McLaughlin said, explaining that policies are mandatory while guidelines are “recommendations” or “best practices.”

We would like the Department of Education to explain how a Guideline that specifically refers to policies and regulations of the Education Act (as do both Guidelines 512 and 513), can be considered a “recommendation” or “best practice” when the policies and regulations they refer to are mandatory. These guidelines, policies and regulations are interlinked and cannot be separated.

The Department of Education can’t have it both ways. Just like the issue about the Commercial vs. Passenger Vehicle status, they only want to deal with the parts of Guidelines 512 and 513 that suit them best – while betraying our children in the process.

At this point in the Inquest, we’re not surprised to hear that nobody takes guidelines seriously: if even one of the persons connected to this collision had paid any attention to the guidelines, we wouldn’t be sitting in a courtroom in Bathurst listening to one witness after another tell us “I can’t remember” “I forget” “It’s not my job” or “It’s not my responsibility”. There have been a few stellar moments, like when Cpl. Annie Nielson, Greg Sypher, Curt Bennet and Timothy Daley appeared as witnesses, but today’s testimony was a low point.

Long History to Guidelines 512 and 513

McLaughlin admitted there was a “long history” to Guidelines 512 and 513. He said the first draft appeared in September 2002 and it wasn’t until September 2007 that they were introduced. Meantime Policy 504 has been around in one way or another since 1977!

Even though everything we have heard so far proves nobody follows the guidelines or the policies, McLaughlin expects us to believe that schools “strive to meet everything in the guidelines as much as they can.”

We know that is just rhetoric, like an empty promise, it means nothing. Mr. Lord didn’t know about the guidelines, former Vice Principal Don McKay said yesterday that the guidelines are “just recommendations” and even the Principal Coleen Ramsay hadn’t even bothered to read them when they arrived in September 2007.

We pray that the “recommendations” that come out of this inquest are taken more seriously than the guidelines and policies that were supposed to protect our children and keep them safe that awful night.

How little our children must have meant to the people in authority that they couldn’t even follow something so simple. Whether it was a guideline, a policy or a regulation, what does it matter? It was common sense.

You use winter tires in the winter in this province.

You stay in a motel overnight in bad weather.

You keep vehicles maintained properly when they are transporting precious children.

These guidelines and policies were worked on for nearly five years and they were written in black and white for a reason – they were to be followed for the sake of the children’s safety.

McLaughlin did clarify one important issue for us when he confirmed that our children were, in fact, the responsibility of the Department of Education that night. Up until today, nobody would confirm that students who are attending extra-curricular events on behalf of their schools were actually the responsibility of the Department.

In fact, at one point this winter, we were told by Ron White of the Department of Education that sports was not part of the curriculum and therefore, our boys were not under the jurisdiction of the Department when they took that fateful trip to Moncton and back. This was something that tormented us for months. We felt that nobody was taking responsibility for our children. So to hear McLaughlin say that they were responsible for our boys gives a tiny bit of closure. Not much, but it is better than nothing - which is what we expect to come out of this inquest given the fact that under the current Coroners Act, the Jury’s recommendations are not binding. This is a huge failure of the Coroners Act and another reason why it must be completely overhauled.

Elizabeth Abraham, Assistant Deputy Minister of Education

Elizabeth Abraham came to the witness stand holding three large binders, the contents of which she referred to quite a bit in her testimony.

She spoke extensively about Policies 512 and 513 which grew out of the guidelines of the same name. She couldn’t recall ever reviewing the guidelines when they were in force: “I can’t remember, it might have been a formal meeting, it might been my staff who sat me down or it might have been at a meeting with other ADMs, but I cannot recall” she said of the guidelines.

She did, however, have considerably more involvement in the development of the new policies since the crash and she explained the differences, minor that they are, between the old guidelines 512 and 513 which were in effect at the time of the crash, and the new policies which were introduced on February 27, 2009.

New Drivers Training Program RFP (Request for Proposals) Comes As A Shock

She talked about the implementation of the new policies and spoke of a proposed training program that the Department intends to pilot as early as the end of this school year.

This was a shock to us, especially when we found out that they’ve already tendered an RFP (Request for Proposals) for a Driver Training.

Abraham said the training could be a mix of on-line / classroom / hands on / or practical training targetting potential volunteer Class 4 drivers whom the Department intends to put behind the wheels of the new Multi Function Activity Vehicles (MFAVs).

Apparently, they’re also going to drive seven passenger vans which we figure they’ll have to rent since the Department can’t own them. (We’re unclear about that. The idea of 7 passenger vans was something that just cropped up and was never fully explained. That’s another issue which we’ll talk about later, because we don’t agree with the use of 7 passenger vans. They’re just mini 15 passenger vans and they should not be used to transport children to off site extra-curricular activities.)

The Drivers Training was interesting for another reason: there they are developing courses filled with content that they’ve already decided upon BEFORE this Inquest makes its recommendations. We thought that was callous, and showed no respect for our children and us as parents.

Class 4 Drivers Training Program

Ms. Abraham explained that the training program will consist of seven hours – you count ‘em – seven hours training on the following subject areas:

Rules of the road
Seat belt use
Weather and road conditions
Inclement weather
Driver fatigue
Effects of drugs and medicine
Review of Policy 512 / 513 and other policies in development
Pre and post-trip inspectionb
Air brakes
Log books
Preventative maintenance
Six months MVI

How they intend to cover all that in seven hours is beyond us. Would you like your children driven to extra-curricular events by someone who took a seven hour course?

Compare that to the intensive week long training course with extensive follow up, defensive drivers training, annual refresher courses, etc. that Class 2 Drivers take. It makes the seven hours look like a half-hearted attempt to deal with the safe transportation of children.

There is only one way to transport these children and it’s with a unionized, full time Class 2 yellow school bus drivers who do this for a living. They don’t have to be driving yellow school buses, they just have be behind the wheel.

Department of Education Ignores Trained Class 2 Bus Drivers at Its Own Peril

This whole Class 4 drivers training course idea is a waste of money – and that’s taxpayer’s money mind you, not the kind of money that comes from the sale of chocolate bars.

Abraham said it’s going to cost $300 to train each person and they’ve put aside $100,000 for this training. Problem is, these people only drive seasonally, maybe 10 to 15 times a year and how many of those trips are out of town in winter months? By the time the next year rolls around, the Class 4 “trained” driver won’t have sat behind the wheel of one of these MFAV’s for a year.

Meantime, we have a cadre of trained, professional, and skilled yellow school bus drivers who would love to drive the MFAVs (but not the 7 passenger vans) and the Department of Education simply chooses to ignore them at it own peril.

It’s illogical, but what else can we expect from the Department of Education, the same Department that says “safety” is one of its core values.

Fred Blaney, Engineering Services, Department of Transportation

The next witness was Mr. Fred Blaney, Executive Director of Engineering Services for the Department of Transportation. Mr. Blaney was called to address the issue of road width and the condition of that stretch of Highway 8 where the collision occurred. He explained the ins and outs of highway construction, and concluded that at the time of the crash, the highway “was built as it should have been.”

He also spoke about the drop off at the shoulder of the road where the collision occurred. He said that he became aware of the drop off after the July 2008 RCMP Reconstruction report but that nobody had any direct communication with him about it.

Blaney verified that he had been to the crash site today and there was indeed a drop off but when the Jury asked if it had been fixed yet, he answered “I was there today and it didn’t look like it.”

When the Jury asked, “When will it be fixed?” he said “I can assure you that the DOT is aware of it.”

16 Months Later and We're Still Waiting for the Drop Off to Be Fixed?

As of today, it’s been 16 months since our children were killed. We wonder how long it will take this to get fixed now that Mr. Blaney has been asked the question by a Coroners Jury?

We’ll let you know.

Gary Spencer, Vehicle Management Agency, NB Department of Transportation

The next witness was Gary Spencer, Enginer, Assistant Director of Operations for Vehicle Management Agency at the Department of Transportation.

Mr. Spencer explained how the 15 passenger vans owned by Bathurst Van Inc. (and all the other private companies that had been formed to purchase school vehicles) had been purchased by the Department of Transportation. He said that there were a total of 12 15 passenger vans which were being converted to maintenance and cargoe vehicles by removing the seats and installing a crash barrier. Spencer confirmed that these 12 vans will NOT be transporting students.

He further explained that there were 28 “other” type of vehicles which had been “offered as a gift” to the province. Now this is where things started to get confusing, and we’d like some clarification.

Department of Transportation Offering 7 Passenger Vans to Schools? NOT a Good Idea!

Spencer spoke about 7 passenger vans and this is something that we do not agree with whatsoever. We do not want children being transported to off-site extra-curricular events in 7 passenger vans. These are just mini 15 passenger vans and we are completely against their use by the schools. In fact, after we heard that, we decided to include the banning of 7 passenger vans in our recommendations.

If the Department thinks we are going to put up with that, it’s got another thing coming.

Although Mr. Spencer assured us that the vehicles under his control will get the best mechanical service, he had us worried when he said DOT contracts out some of its work to local garages. Who decides if the shop is competent to do the work? Now that’s an interesting question. We pray it’s not the same one that was doing the inspections on the white Ford Econoline in which our sons were killed.

Tomorrow, May 13, 2009

We already know that tomorrow is going to be the final day of testimony. We expect to hear from Rick Arseneault, who is responsible for Pupil Transportation at the NB Department of Education; a retired Class 2 Yellow School Bus Driver, and; Const. Yves Allain, the lead RCMP investigator.

When the testimony formally closes, we submit our recommendations to the Coroner and then the Jury meets to make its own recommendations. We aren’t exactly sure how this works but we understand that we should be prepared to return at one hour’s notice to hear the Jury’s recommendations. This could happen as early as Wednesday afternoon or any time Thursday or even Friday for that matter. We don’t know.

The Struggle Has Just Begun

One thing for certain, this Inquest may be over, but our struggle is just beginning. We know we’re going to have a fight on our hands with the Department of Education over Class 2 drivers and we don’t intend to back down.

Day Six: Shame, Shame, Shame. They Didn’t Do What Had to Be Done

Today was a very important day at the Inquest because we finally got to see the people who played such a critical role in the decision making process the day our sons were killed…. Or should we say, they “didn’t” play a critical role because they didn’t do their jobs. Shame on them.

The first two rows and part of the third were filled up with parents and relatives. Everyone listened intently to witness testimony. It’s tiring and difficult to hear the testimony which doesn’t help matters. You have to lean forward to hear the witnesses speaking.

Bathurst High School Principal, Coleen Ramsay

First on the witness stand this morning was Principal Coleen Ramsay, who started off her testimony by telling the Crown Prosecutor that she “thinks” the van was “six years old.” That the Principal of the High School can say 16 months after the tragedy that the van was six years old is unbelievable.

It makes you wonder why she would say that? Is it to plant the seed of doubt in our minds that she really doesn’t remember? Has she been coached by a team of lawyers and public relations experts at the Department of Education who told her and others what to say so that it has the least negative impact? You can’t believe anything else she says after that because everyone in the city, the province and the country knows the van was 11 years old because it’s been plastered all over the news.

She said she didn’t know the weather was going to be bad that day.

She said that usually she would be asked her opinion on school travel and she would advise a coach “to err on the side of caution.” She said the driver did not ask her opinion that day.

She said she never read the guidelines and she didn’t know that the van was supposed to be inspected every six months. She never looked at the maintenance records. She never asked for a school bus driver to drive kids to sporting events. She had nothing to do with canceling school, or canceling a game because ultimately it’s the coaches decision. She also said that when it comes to the vans and maintenance, “Our philosophy is we do what has to be done.”

Pass The Buck

Well, Miss Ramsay, you didn’t do what had to be done that day and neither did anyone else. Instead of taking responsibility for the safety of children, you and everyone else passed the buck on to the coach who already had enough on his hands, teaching and coaching.

President of Bathurst Van Inc.

She spoke about her role in Bathurst Van Inc. She said she was the President of the company because “it’s a role you take on when you become principal of the school” and “nobody else wants it.”

Vice-Principal Don McKay and Vice-Principal George Willet, as well as Norman Conde, another teacher, filled out the rest of the Board, McKay taking on the role of Vice-President.

Ramsay said that in 2001, she thought she should find out what she was president of so she wrote to Harry Williamson and he sent her a package which contained some documents including the Letters Patent. This was submitted as Exhibit 46.

The business is described in the return for 2004 “to assist Bathurst High School with transportation”. Yet, incredibly, Bathurst Van Inc.did not have a bank account and, as she explained to an incredulous courtroom, its reason for existence was because it was the only way BHS could operate a Student Activity Vehicle.

Ramsay confirmed that the Student Representative Council (SRC) paid for everything associated with the van from its fundraising activities which included the following:

A student fee
Magazine gift wrap novelty fundraiser
Rebates from cafeteria
Bay Breakfast
Student Activity Fees
Graduation
Donations

The money from these fundraisers went to pay for the purchase of vehicles, their upkeep and maintenance. To think that our sons, and we too, actually sold cards, wrapping paper, chocolate, and that our boys sold Kinsmen Bingo Cards to help pay for these vehicles makes us sick.

They couldn’t even put winter tires on the vans with the money that these innocent children were more or less pressured into raising. If you didn’t sell at least $100 in those fundraisers, you could not participate.

On top of that, we had to pay $200 student registration fee for our sons to actually play basketball. Ramsay said there is no guarantee that the money which may be targeted for basketball actually goes to basketball.

Grade 11 Kids Sign Cheques

We found out later that the treasurer of the Student Council is a Grade 11 student. What’s the chance they are going to argue over a cheque with the Principal or Vice-Principal? What kind of power relationship is that? You can just see it: these kids had no control whatsoever over the money that they were raising for Bathurst Van Inc.. Just sign the cheques and hand it over. Thank you very much kiddo!

We couldn’t believe that there was no contract between the school and Bathurst Van Inc. What kind of a set up is that? It’s shocking. Here are the Principal and Vice-Principals who taught our children every day and that they would endanger our childrens’ lives in a van that was poorly maintained; had worn and scalloped tires; front end out of alignment; a broken self adjuster cable; left brake adjustment not working and out of adjustment; low tire pressure and rust holes. It is beyond comprehension.

How are bills paid? Apparently, Hatheway Ford submits an invoice to the person in charge of the finances for the SRC (not a student, mind you, we can’t have them handling the funds, after all, they’re only in Grade 11). That person is Nancy Hodnett, a nice enough seeming women who like a lot of people connected to this case, seems to have been completely left out of the loop. A relative newcomer to Bathurst High School, she volunteered to help with the finances of the Student Council in 2006 after Norman Conde, another member of Bathurst Van Inc., moved on to something else. Nancy described how she found herself receiving invoices for the maintenance of vans owned by Bathurst Van Inc. She remarked that she was “astonished” by the amount of money that was going to Hatheway Ford for maintenance. If she was astonished, imagine how we felt when we found out that she had never heard of Bathurst Van Inc. until after the crash that killed our boys.

Who was the activity organizer? According to Ramsay, it was the “person who takes the team away and they would have to report to Don McKay.” Don McKay’s name came up a lot today, as it has in almost every other day’s testimony. He spoke after Ramsay, coming up on the stand at 11:20 am.

Vice-Principal Don McKay also Vice-President of Bathurst Van Inc.

Mr. McKay is the former vice-principal of Bathurst High School and he was the Vice-President of Bathurst Van Inc. for many years. His name appears on every maintenance record associated with the white van, and nearly every witness has mentioned him as being the point man for Bathurst Van Inc.

He admitted the Industrial Department at the High School did work on the van, albeit minor, it was still illegal. Only a qualified, certified commercial vehicle mechanic should have been allowed to touch that van.

He admitted that he did not know the van was to be inspected every six months.

He said he didn’t know the difference between all season tires and winter tires.

When asked why he didn’t put on winter tires, he said “Price was an issue on all vans, whether it was the price of the vans or tires.”

McKay said there was no grumbling about the cost of maintenance on the white van, despite the fact that the Student Council, through Bathurst Van Inc., had spent nearly $4000.00 in less than one year on repairs.

“Work was done, bills were paid” said McKay.

Yet, they couldn’t seem to get the money together to buy winter tires for the white van while the new red van had brand new winter tires. Why? As far as we're concerned it's because the white van was on its way out and was going to be replaced, so why bother investing any more money in that old piece of junk.

McKay said that they usually replace the tires every two years, but we know for a fact that the tires were not replaced every two years because they were down to bald status, which is 3/32 (4mm) which is one step above rejection. We know that these tires had been on the white van for 52 months (that’s 4 years and 4 months) and they had nearly 116,000 kms on them but their warranty expired at 100,000.

Prove Us Wrong and We'll Print a Retraction

We challenge you Mr. McKay to show us the proof that we are wrong and we will gladly retract this statement because we sincerely hope this is not true.

McKay explained how drivers got permission to use the van. He said that there was no special training and he personally never took a defensive driving course. He “got his license and that was it.”

He knew next to nothing about the rules and regulations governing transportation of children: when asked if he was aware that the white van was described as a “bus” in the Regulations 512 and 513, he said he always thought it was a passenger van and besides, he thought the guidelines were just recommendations. McKay didn’t even use the official log book, preferring the one that he made up himself.

Besides, he said that they only used the log book for out of province travel and that there was no log book for in province travel, which of course, was another violation of the Guidelines and Policies. Rather, McKay said he created a “Trip Authorization and Vehicle Record” which he said was made for Dan MacDonald, another teacher who was involved in van usage, to give out to drivers when they need vans.

To clarify, Mr. Lord already testified that Mr. MacDonald did not give him anything but the keys to the van when he left for Moncton that day.

Coaches / Drivers Had to Ask for Guidelines 512 and 513 - If They Knew About Them In the First Place

McKay explained that the information in Guidelines 512 and 513 would not necessarily have been discussed with drivers (no surprise to us). He said they met with coaches at the beginning of the season but they did not discuss these guidelines. If they had, this all would have been prevented and our children would still be alive.

He said that they’d tell drivers the things they needed to know, for example, Policy 701 which he described as being more for how to conduct his “own behaviour”, when actually, Policy 701 is about the responsibility teachers have towards children:

Policy 701 section 1.0
“ensure that adults in the public education system understand the magnitude of the responsibility conferred upon them when parents and communities entrust their children to the public education system;”

Other areas he would discuss with drivers is schedules, any information from the NB Interscholastic Association, procedures for getting keys, credit cards and the van.

When asked if teachers would be given copies of the Guidelines, he said yes, “if they wanted them.”

Truth is, however, that the Guidelines and Policies were not were given out. How can someone ask for something that they don’t even know about?

Paul Robichaud, Jaw Dropping Testimony

Paul Robichaud, a young teacher who volunteered as a coach with the girl’s basketball team was a perfect example of how that played itself out in real life. Mr. Robichaud also testified today. He described his coaching experience with the girls team and how he was completely unaware of any Guidelines or Policies regarding transportation of students.

He seemed sincere, but it was frightening to know that this young man was put in such a position by his senior administrators who knew better.

What was even more chilling was his description of how he got his Class 4 license. More than one jaw dropped in the room when he revealed that he had never driven the 15 passenger van before - but he got his license in about an hour after writing a test and going for a spin around town with the driver examiner. (He also had to get a physical exam, but there was no driver training whatsoever). After the crash, he took a defensive drivers’ course.

Lame Excuses

Meantime, McKay gave the lamest excuses we have ever heard as to why the van was only inspected once a year. “It was difficult to make arrangements,” and “We had been doing it the same way for so many years,” and besides it was only “a guideline.”

If our children had given that excuse for not doing their homework or for being late for class they would have been severely disciplined, but there’s no after-school detention for Mr. McKay or anybody else. They didn’t do their homework.

He said “we knew” on January 11, of the possibility of bad weather. “I spoke to Wayne and he indicated he had spoken to Moncton” and he said he’d “drive slow” if he had to. Besides, McKay said, there was no protocol in place for him to contact the driver in Moncton and tell him to stay there because the weather had turned bad in Bathurst. “It never crossed my mind.” Anyways “The coach decides.”

Mr. McKay said a lot today. We could go on and on about all the things he and so many others were supposed to do but did not. Had one of them stopped for a minute and asked the important questions about the way our children were being transported, if they had read the Guidelines and Policies and Laws that were supposed to uphold, then our children would be alive today. But not a single one of them did.

Shame On Them

All we can say about Mr. McKay, the Principal Coleen Ramsay, the coaches and drivers and still unidentified “activity organizer” is that they betrayed our children and took our sons away from us. Shame on them all.

Tomorrow's Testimony

Once again, we have no idea who will testify tomorrow but we think it's going to include the Superintendent of District 15, an expert on tires and a Class 2 Bus Driver.

Guidelines Were Already There for Everyone To Follow But Everyone in Authority Ignored Them

GUIDELINES NO LONGER AVAILABLE ON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WEBSITE BUT YOU CAN GET THEM HERE

Excerpts from the Guidelines 512 and 513 and clickable links to the PDFs are below:

Guideline 512 Student Activity Vehicles in PDF Format
Cover page
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4

Guideline 513 Transportation to and from Off-Site School Related Activities in PDF Format
Cover page
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Appendix A, Requirements and Restrictions Established Under the Motor Vehicle Act for the Operation of Commercial Vehicles, Page 1
Appendix A, Requirements and Restrictions Established Under the Motor Vehicle Act for the Operation of Commercial Vehicles, Page 2
Appendix B Pre Trip Vehicle Inspection
Appendix C Drivers License Requirements

Policy 504, Appendix B Pre Trip Vehicle Inspection

EXCERPTS FROM GUIDELINES AND POLICIES

Guidelines 512, Student Activity Vehicles

Principal’s responsibilities

4.1
A school principal should not permit students to be transported by a student activity vehicle to an off-site school-related activity unless all the requirements to this guideline and Guideline513- Transportation to and from off-Site School-Related Activities are met.

4.2
Overall responsibility for the student activity vehicle should be assigned, by the school principal, to one member of the school personnel. This person will be responsible for ensuring that the vehicle is registered, insured, maintained and equipped in accordance with this guideline.

Maintenance and other recommendations

4.16
A student activity vehicle should undergo a motor vehicle inspection every six months.

4.17
All defects or mechanical problems should either be fixed or reported immediately to the assigned person responsible for the
vehicle.

4,18
A procedure should be in place for situations involving a vehicle break down inside or outside the school district. This should be known by all drivers of the vehicle.

4.19
All required vehicle repairs should be made promptly and be performed by a certified mechanic.

4.20
The vehicle should be equipped with a fire extinguisher and a first aid kit.

4.21
The driver of a student activity vehicle should participate in a basic defensive driving skills training.

4.22
Care should be taken to ensure that tires are the proper size for the vehicle, tires should be inspected on a regular basis to ensure that they are in good condition. The use of snow tires during winter months is recommended.

4.23
Where possible it should be made apparent to motorists that the vehicle is transporting students; for example, by inscribing the school name on the side and back of the vehicle or by using reflective lettering to indicate "students on board".

___

513 Transportation to and from Off-Site School-Related Activities:

Section 4.0

Principal's responsibilities

4.1 A school principal should not permit students to be transported to an off-site school-related activity unless the requirement of this guideline are met.

Activity Organizer's reponsibilities

4.2 When organizing school-related activity that requires the conveyance of students by a motor vehicle, an activity organizer should:

a) for curricular and co-curricular activities, use only school buses or other school vehicles (as defined in Section 3.0)
b) for extra-curricular activities, give preferential consideration to the use of a school bus for suchy conveyance; and
c) not authorize overnight conveyance (i.e. travel through the night) to and from an off-site school-related activity.

Note: Provincial requirements for the maintenance and operation of school buses are identified in the Pupil Transportation Regulation.

4.3. An organizer of an extra-curricular school-related activity should only arrange for the conveyance of students to an off-site location in a vehicle other thana school bus when:

a) the off-site activity is an extra-curricular activity as defined in section 3.0;
b) it is not practical or not possible to use a school bus; and
c) all recommendations set out in section 4.0 of this guideline are followed.

4.4.

The activity organizer should ensure before each trip that;
a) the school has a readily accessible record of the names of the driver(s) and all passengers.
b) The driver has a readily accessible record of all the passengers, and
c) There is appropriate adult supervision of students being conveyed.

4.5

In circumstances where students are being conveyed in a rented, private or student activity vehicle classified as s abus (defined in 3.0), the activity organizer should also ensure that:

a) the vehicle and the driver meet the standards set in this guidline;
b) the driver or at least one of the passengers in the vehicle is trained in emergency first aid; and
c) all requirements and restrictions established under the Motor Vehicle Act in relation to the operation of commerical vehicles are followed. These rules apply to the hours of service for drivers, commercial log books, and out-of-province trip permits (see Appendix A for a description of the specific requirements and restrictions).

Vehicle Guidelines

4.6
The student should not be conveyed to an offsite school related activity in a rented, private vehicle classified as a bus or a
student activity vehicle unless
(a) is equipped with a fire extinguisher and a first aid kit
(b) has a received a pre-trip inspection in accordance with the requirements set out in Appendix B.

_____

Guideline 513

Section 4.16
No vehicle should be used to tow a trailer at the same time as it is being used to transport students to an off site school-
related activity.

Section 4.19
Groups travelling out of town should be prepared to stay overnight if weather or road conditions present a hazard.

_____

Guideline 513
Appendix A

Requirements and Restrictions Established Under the Motor Vehicle Act For the Operation of Commercial Vehicles

A vehicle is considered a commercial vehicle if it has the capacity to carry nine passengers (10 persons in total including the driver) or if it has a registered gross weight of or in excess of 4500 kg. As such, all motor vehicles classified as a bus under the guidleine are considered to be commercial vehicles.

As commerical vehicles, any time a vehicle classified asa bus is used to transport students; the following rules governing the operation of commercial vehicles must be followed.

Drivers' Hours of On-Duty Time

As per the Commerical Vehicle drivers Hours of Service Regulation (2007-39) established under the Motor Vehicle Act and the Federal Commerical Vehicle Drivesr Hours of Service REgulations (Canada), (1) no motor carrier shall request, require or allow a driver to drive and no drivers shall drive after the driver has accumulated 13 hours of driving time in a day and (2) no motor carrier shall requiest, require or allow a driver to drive and no driver shall drivef after the driver has accumulated 14 hours of on-duty time in a day. The driver must take at least 8 consecutive hours of off-duty time before driving again.

The driver must have documention in the commercial log book (see next section) of his / her on-duty time if traveling a distance in excess of 160 km (one-way) from the point of departure or oarticipating in a trip which will not return to the point of departure at the end of the day (maximum of 14 hours of on-duty time) to begin a minimum of 8 consecutive hours of off-duty time. This would include most out-of-province and overnight trips.

It is important to note that "on duty" time includes all the time than an individual works during a day including the time they spend driving. For example, if an individual came in to work at 8:00 am, worked until 4:00 pm, and then drove a sports team to another area, coached behind the bench and then drove back home at 1:05 am, that individual would have more than 14 hours "on duty" time.

Commercial Log Book

The commercial log book is a record of the driver's actions and must be completed accurately whenever the commercial vehicle
a) is used for a trip out-of-province
b) travels more than 160 kim (one-way) from its home terminal; or,
c) is used on a trip of a duration of more than 14 hours (i.e. the driver does not return to the home terminal at the end of the day to begin a minimum of 8 consecutive hours of off-duty time).

For any trip meeting one or more of these criteria, the driver must complete the Driver's Daily Log and theDriver's Vehicle Inspection Report (found on the reverse sideof the Daily Log).

Instructions on filling out the Daily Log and the INspection Report can be found on the back of the log book. In addition to filling out the Daily Log and the INspection Report, the driver must also indicate the number of hours of service that they have had "on duty" (see previous section) for the seven day period immediately prior to the trip. This information is entered in the appropriate column on the inside front cover of the log book.

Log books can be purchased from many major service stations.

Trip Permis -CAVR* and IFTA** Permits

*CANADIAN AGREEMENT OF VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS and **INTERNATIONAL FUEL TAX AGREEMENT

For travel within the Atlantic Provinces, specialized trip permits are not requ9ired.

When travelling into Quebec, all commercial vehicles must apply for trip permits. For information on the trip permits required, contact the Educational Facilities and Pupil Transportation Branch of the Department of Education or the school district transportation office.

If a vehicle is other than a provincially owned school bus and has a capacity for 20 or more passengers (or weighs more than 13,767 kg), a trip permit (International Fuel Tax Agreement or IFTA) is required to travel into Maine. The permit will cost $50.00 (USD), is valid for three days from the time of issue and can be obtained by calling the Maine Bureau of Motor Vehicles at (207) 624-9000 ext. 52137. The permit will be issued via fax. Provincially owned school buses do not require an IFTA permit.
____

Guideline 513
Appendix B
Pre Trip Vehicle Inspection

DAILY:

Note: Daily items should be checked by the driver of the vehicle.

Check fluid level in engine / power steering / hydraulics / brake / clutch / coolant - if applicable
Check all engine belts / hoses for leaks and wear
Check tires for cuts / pressure / loose nuts / rims / wear
Check that all lights are clean and working
Check brake and clutch operation
Look for visible leaks arund and under the vehicle
Start engine / check all guages and instruments / horn
Inspect glass and body for damage
Check windshield wiperse / fluid
Check for unusual noises

WEEKLY:

Note: Weekly items should be checked by the individual assigned for the repairs and general maintenance of the vehicle

Check the tranmsission / differential / transfer case / gear boxes / hydraulic system for fluid level and leaks, applicable
Check battery fluid / terminals / cables
Check for loose bolts / loose or bare wires
Check exhuaust system for looseness and leaks / springs
Check air filter / connections

Important reminder: If you are traveling out-of-province, overnight or a long distance, see Appendix A to determine specific requirements and limitations that may apply in relation to trip permits and completion of log book information.

Fee Chart for Motor Vehicle Branch, Dept. of Public Safety

On Friday, Charles O'Donnel, Registrar of the Motor Vehicle Branch, spoke about a "Fee Chart" which inspection stations use when deciding what to charge a client for a Motor Vehicle Inspection. You can click on the image below to bring up the Fee Chart on the website.
The Fee Chart is a 8 X 14 page photocopied page which lists eleven types of vehicles, the cost associated with a Motor Vehicle Inspection, how often it is supposed to be inspected (annual or semi-annual) and the type of sticker it would get after it passes inspection.

We scanned the 8 X 14 page and you can VIEW it HERE.

For a PRINT version, CLICK HERE.

Mr. O'Donnel was asked what type of an inspection the van should have received and he said #7.

Below is an image of what #7 looks like. It clearly states the van is supposed to get a semi-annual inspection, which it never did for nearly ten years. You can click on the image to bring up the full page.

We Want Confirmation from the Coroner of the Type of Vehicle - Commercial or Passenger?

Not all 15 passenger vans are created equal and just because the van in which our sons were killed had 15 seats doesn't mean it was a passenger vehicle under the New Brunswick Motor Vehicle Act.

According to the Transport Canada Collision Investigation Report which was released last July, 2008, this van was considered a 'bus' used to transport children to off-site extra-curricular activities so it was a commercial vehicle and a bus under the New Brunswick Motor Vehicle Act.

Source: Transport Canada Collision Investigation Report, Page 11
Click here to view Report http://www.cbc.ca/nb/media/pdf/transport_canada_report.pdf )

But after Charles O'Donnel, the Registrar of the New Brunswick Motor Vehicle Branch, testified on Friday, there was some confusion about whether the van our sons were riding in that night was a passenger vehicle or a commercial vehicle.

To us, it is abundantly clear: it was a commercial vehicle, and as such, it falls into a different category under the Motor Vehicle Act with a higher standard for inspections and maintenance, especially tires.

However, some media were certain that witness testimony lent credence to the theory that the van was classifed as a passenger vehicle, which has a considerably lower standard for inspections and maintenance, especially when it comes to tires. So now we have a situation where one major media outlet is calling it a passenger vehicle and another is calling it a commercial vehicle.

We can understand why they would be confused - with all the "expert testimony" it can get very jumbled up and it didn't help that the witnesses from Hatheway Ford, who testified before Mr. O'Donnel, were unclear about the van's status. David Hatheway, co-owner of Hatheway Ford, said it was a "gray area" - a statement which was never clarified by the Crown Prosecutor. This is just another example of the failure of the Coroners Act. If we had standing, our lawyers could cross examine the witnesses. As it is now, they just walk off the stand and everyone is left scratching their heads about what was just said.

The reason we are certain it is a commercial vehicle is because we have been working on this case for 16 months and we know the Motor Vehicle Act as well as the Education Act's Regulations 512 and 513 regarding pupil transportation and vehicle maintenance.

For us, there is no gray. It is black and white. This vehicle was a commercial vehicle and should have been held to a higher standard of Motor Vehicle Inspection by a different mechanic who specializes in commercial vehicle inspections.

The Motor Vehicle Act is very clear about commercial vehicles and Motor Vehicle Inspections. This vehicle should have had an MVI every six months by a qualified commercial vehicle mechanic and if it had, its tires would not have passed even a minimal inspection. As was explained by Greg Sypher of UNB's Transport Group on Wednesday, Commercial Vehicles have different rules for inspection. Using the concept of quarters, he showed the jury and court room that the standard for Commercial Vehicles is higher than that of passenger vehicles.



A number of other rules apply to the operation of commercial vehicles, including the keeping of a log book and limits of on duty time, which the jury has heard numerous times in witness testimony this past week. We base our belief that the van was a commercial vehicle on the evidence given by Mr. Sypher, of UNB's Transport Group, which produced a report on the collision for Transport canada in July, 2008. (Source: page 11, Transport Canada Collision Investigation Report http://www.cbc.ca/nb/media/pdf/transport_canada_report.pdf )

Sypher testified along with Cpl. Annie Nielson, RCMP Accident Reconstructionist, on Wednesday and Thursday, giving a detailed technical interpretation of the conditions leading up the crash.

In the Transport Canada report, it clearly says that the 15 passenger vehicle was a "commercial vehicle".

"Commercial Vehicle Status

Under Section 1 of the Provincial Motor Vehicle Act (M-17), a ‘commercial vehicle’ is defined as “… a motor vehicle designed or adapted for the carrying of freight, goods, wares or merchandise, but does not include a private passenger vehicle.”

A ‘private passenger vehicle’ is defined by the Act as “… a motor vehicle designed and used primarily for the transportation of persons without remuneration and does not include a bus or taxicab.” Part IV.1 of the Act, which deals with commercial vehicle safety, further defines a commercial vehicle as to include a vehicle defined as a ‘bus’ under Section 1. In this section, a ‘bus’ is defined as “…any motor vehicle designed for carrying ten or more passengers and used for the transportation of persons”. The E350 had a designed seating capacity of 15 persons, including the driver. It was also designed for the transportation of people. Receiving compensation for transport activities is not a qualifier for determining if a vehicle is a commercial vehicle. Based on the provincial Motor Vehicle Act, the E350 is considered a bus and a commercial vehicle.

As a commercial vehicle, the E350 must be operated in compliance with applicable regulations including Commercial Driver Hours of Service, Trip Inspection Reports & Records and Carrier Profile Compliance."

The fact that we have to ask for confirmation shows the weakness of the Coroners Act. If this was a real court, there is no way the parents, the media or the jury would have walked out of that room not knowing what type of vehicle our boys were killed in.

We all agree on a few things:

1. The driver was supposed to keep a daily log book and he didn't for at least two years.

2. The driver was supposed to do a pre-trip inspection (he said he did but because he didn't keep a daily log, we have no way of confirming that other than his testimony).

3. The driver was not supposed to accumulate more than 14 hours of on duty time but he did 16 hours.

4. The van was supposed to be inspected every six months and that never happened since it was purchased by Bathurst Van Inc. in 1999.

These are all part of the requirements of Commercial Vehicles under the Motor Vehicle Act.