Blue Like You

Archive for the ‘education’ Category

4 pm Update - John Tory finally opens his mouth - McGuinty ‘hypocritical’ on separate schools:Tory.

(Original post)

How is it that Faith-Based schools are so unthinkable that an election was lost over it, but Race-Based schools are not a problem?

Kathleen Wynne is not impressed, or so she says:

Education Minister Kathleen Wynne fears that it will spur other cultural and religious groups to lobby for their own separate schools within a public system.

So why are you even allowing it, Dalton???

Only in Ontario.

Something to think about next time you pay your taxes - School Board Trustee Should Resign. (Sun)

If you are one of those complacent Ontarians who shrugs off municipal elections as not worthy of your time, please read today’s Sun editorial - Breaking the culture of silence. Those in Toronto need to pay special attention:

…The Falconer report calls for a trustee job description, training and a code of conduct specifying prohibited behaviours.

But that can’t replace the good judgment and common sense which some (not all) trustees clearly lack.

Only voters can fix that, and right now few bother to vote in school board elections, meaning trustees rarely face serious challenges and can be re-elected largely on name recognition.

What the Falconer report indicates is that too many students are paying a high price for our apathy.

And that price is often their safety.

At a provincial level, please pay attention to the myopic words of Ontario Education Minister Kathleen Wynne, and the Sun’s response:

“It’s not my experience that there is an invasive culture of fear,” she said.

With respect, if fear imposes silence, as the task force found, how would she necessarily have known?

Complacency and apathy come at a cost.

In the case of Jordan Manners, that price was too high - The life of a child.

Well, the unions were solidly behind McGuinty during the election, and now begins payback time.

The labour movement is demanding that the province take a more aggressive stance in safeguarding union jobs. That usually means more money for them and more taxes for us.

Funny thing is that usually the lefties scorn corporate tax incentives, but they still want their high-paying, union jobs protected.

Anyway, at the end of this Star article (Unions turn screws on Liberals) there is an interesting bit of information about the infamous ‘Working Families Coalition‘:

Representatives of the building trades, teachers and firefighters were all at the convention. But their unions all worked along with the CAW to help elect Liberals in last month’s provincial election, either directly or indirectly through the “working families” coalition. They are unlikely to join any concerted anti-government protests.

It will be interesting to see how this all works out.

Meanwhile back in Caledonia, resident Ken Hewitt made it clear in an open letter to Michael Bryant that he expects much more involvement from the Minister than a quick photo-op:

In any event my concern lies with the comment you made regarding the HDI; a group that has no legitimacy, nor do they have lawful jurisdiction over land that has yet to be settled in any formal claims negotiations. I fully support and agree with your comment that no builder or developer should consult with such group, and that fees were not expected to be paid to any group; that they should trust the legal titles and registration process prescribed by the province. My question is why then does the provincial government not stand behind those statements. Furthermore your statement that,” natives will not be forcibly removed from any site” only serves to guarantee more protests like Caledonia’s. Most of us live our lives with an understanding that with behaviour come consequences. You have taken the consequences out of the equation and have given them a false of sense of power that will bring harm on them as well those they affect.

Today, as a result of your statements, the HDI has decided to test them by stopping a builder in Brantford indefinitely. The terms are to consult and to pay fees that you said he would not have to. I am afraid that he will be faced with little choice as your (our) government abandons him and leaves him on his own. You should know that just recently the HDI was involved in stopping a dump that was given the provincial go ahead to move forward. While that is a win for the environment, the fact that they are no longer there would suggest that the environment was not their agenda and that they have been or will be paid fees as well.

So the McGuinty government is going to have a few challenges in the next little while. I wonder how much more of our money they will spend to try and make it all go away?

Christina Blizzard still questions the integrity of the OLG, in spite of the supposed clean-up after lottogate earlier this year - Lottery still not a safe bet.

…As Sun Queen’s Park Bureau Chief Antonella Artuso reported last week, over the past year, one in 20 big jackpots went to lottery insiders — either retailers or people employed by the lottery corporation.

And while a spokesman for the OLG says the reason for that is there is now greater scrutiny of wins over $50,000, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that something is horribly wrong…

…The government is happy to wash its hands of whole issue. Their mantra is that they’ve implemented the recommendations of KPMG auditors and the ombudsman - so their work is done.

I don’t think so. Because as long as you’re relying on lotteries as a major source of government revenue, you have to ensure the integrity of the process. As long as your hospitals, your schools, your police forces, are paid for from the proceeds of gambling, you’d better make darn sure it’s fair…

The reference to schools being funded by gambling proceeds reminded me of a post from Nov. 18. I had been surprised to find out that the TDSB topped the list of Canada’s richest charities, pulling in a staggering $2.4 billion dollars.

Interestingly, the Ontario Trillium Foundation ranked first in the most generous foundation category. A reader reminded me that funding for the OTF comes largely from lottery proceeds.

So, just remember. If you buy a lottery ticket in Ontario, not only do you have reason to still question the fairness and integrity of the system, but you are also putting money into the hands of a corporation that turns around and gifts it to rich ‘charities’ like the TDSB with their most interesting experiments in public education…

Just thought you might want to know.

This one is sure to get the old school-funding debate rolling again!

The Halton Catholic District School Board has pulled “The Golden Compass” from school library shelves after receiving complaints that the book was written by an atheist.

The comments following this CTV report are fascinating.

I’m not entirely sure where I sit on this one, but I think it’s safe to say that the public funding of the Catholic school board in Ontario remains a contentious issue.

In the interest of fair play I am showcasing the ‘other side of the education story’, in sharp contrast to Leonard Baak’s highlighted comment from several days ago. Mr Baack advocates for a single public school system, which includes the defunding of Catholic schools.

The following editorial was published in the Goderich Signal Star on October 24, by Cathy Cove who is a freelance writer for the Signal Star (no direct link available). In the article, she references a London Free Press editorial that was published in the Signal Star on Oct. 17.

In her article, Cathy points out the hypocrisy of the McGuinty government which frantically extolled all the horrors of ’segregation’ if faith-based school funding were allowed to exist in Ontario.

Here is Cathy’s editorial:

GHOSTS OF RELIGIOUS SCHOOL CHOICE WILL HAUNT GOVERNMENT

An editorial in the Signal -Star entitled “Faith-based school debate is not over yet” (October 17) suggested that there was a “debate” that took place during the provincial election on the issue of allowing other faiths to opt into the public education system.

Let’s not kid ourselves. Nothing close to a “debate” happened. I’m even hard-pressed to suggest that any rational discussion on the subject was engaged in anywhere in the province.

What we witnessed was something else entirely.

We saw a premier defending is own religious choice yet no one else’s, while playing on the fear that allowing other religious choice into the system would lead to “segregation” of children or worse.

That line of reasoning is not only archaic, but more proof that neither the premier nor his election team did their homework.

If they had they would have known that schools of other religious choices exist in Ontario now thanks in large part to the funding they get from the provincial government itself.

Does the government suggest that schools like the five Ukrainian Eastern Rite school, Burkevale Protestant School (Penetanguishene), Eden High Christian School (Niagara), or the Christian School Cooperative (Rainy River), or the new native school in Toronto are bastions that breed segregation and work to weaken the public system? These are all schools other than Catholic currently being funded by the public tax dollar. No segregation or weakening of the system happening at these schools.

The mantra of the media, expert panels and talk radio seem content on blaming the outcome of the election on John Tory because it unearthed old feelings about religion and education which were never fully satisfied in the days of Bill Davis.

While Ontarians got sucked into a perfect storm, what we failed to recognize is that the Ontario of 2007 is not Bill Davis’s Ontario. Not by a long shot.

Ontarians also failed to realize that the question of funding and faith wasn’t initially brought to the forefront by John Tory for his campaign.

The first salvo in the current education funding wars was fired by the Grand Erie public board this past February when it asked other school boards to join them in lobbying the Ontario Public School Boards Association to move to one single publicly funded school system.

Locally the lobbying effort proved fruitful when at a March 27 board meeting the Avon-Maitland District School Board trustees voted to support the one system concept and encourage the Ontario Public School Boards Association to do the same.

It didn’t seem at the time that the Avon-Maitland trustees could agree on why they were supporting the move.

In his recounting of the decision journalist Stew Slater reported that South Huron trustee Randy Wagler insisted that the move to one system was all about finding efficiencies.

His colleague, former chair and Stratford trustee Meg Westley felt differently. Quoted, trustee Westley stated “if you’re going to allow one religious group to have their school system publicly funded, then you have to have it for all.” She added, “It’s a bit discriminatory.”

I thought it oddly counter-productive for the Avon-Maitland DSB to so overtly hop onto the bandwagon in support of a move to one system, without consideration for what it threatened to do to our other local coterminous Huron Perth Catholic School Board.

The HPCDSB must have indeed felt the heat. In June Director Larry Langan and board chair Ron Marcy sent a letter to parents and parishes within its jurisdiction supporting their existence. The letter shared that the Catholic schools in Ontario “enjoy the publicly stated, unqualified support of our government and all major opposition parties.”

Mr. Langan and Mr. Marcy also challenge the notion of efficiency, suggesting that “their assumption that amalgamations lower costs is incorrect.” They remind that historically amalgamation of boards, as we saw in 1998 actually cost taxpayers more money, not less because costs rose to the highest denominator. The HPCDSB resisted amalgamation in 1998.

Bigger does not mean better when it comes to small town and rural communities. Moving to a mega-system moves boards farther away from the individuals they serve. Local control of schools by its community would be at risk.

When left to their own devises and by their own admission both the Avon Maitland and Huron Perth Catholic boards work well together, but they also, thus far, have respected the rights of the other to exist.

The Huron Perth Catholic DSB has also publicly supported the move to bring other faiths under the public education umbrella.

While pundits believe the issue is over, I don’t.

As for “discussion” and “debate” on the future of faith funding in Ontario. That hasn’t even begun, but I predict it will under McGuinty’s watch. Just how he deals with it will indeed be interesting to watch.

Toronto Sun’s Angelo Persichilli said it best in “Don’t Mess with Tradition” (Oct. 2) “The Charter of Rights and Freedom, rightly or wrongly, has successfully been used to challenge the Canadian constitution and the BNA act. Some could even argue that the Charter has made the BNA act and the Constitution irrelevant. I’m betting another battle will happen in Ontario pretty soon, and McGuinty will have to choose between funding everybody or nobody. I think I know what he will decide. Catholics, consider yourselves warned.”

The region needs to look to those best practices, such as our own Stratford community where Catholic and public schools are sharing facilities, and experiences.

Hopefully, we can achieve efficiencies and cost savings without compromising the option of faith-based education that Ontario’s Catholic schools offer to parents who choose that option for their children.

In the end Ontario is still left with systems that are suffering from too few students and where resources are being spread to the max.

Civil, positive discussion about what comes next is far preferred to that of threats or bandwagon politics.

- Cathy Cove, freelance writer for the Goderich Signal Star.

I agree with Cathy that this discussion is far from over. It will continue, as it should because if not, then we resign ourselves to complacency. We should always be striving for improvement, and sometimes that requires thinking ‘outside the box’.

We need civil, enlightened discussion on this subject; not fear-mongering.

And that is exactly why the election was a poor time to introduce it.

There is a commendably civil debate still going on several posts back - School controversy not over yet.

This was the post that featured an elaborate comment from an even earlier post by Education Equality president Leonard Baak. Since then, Mr. Baak and others have been carrying on a spirited debate regarding public education, and specifically Education Equality’s push for a single school system.

Advocates of other points of view have been joining in.

More issues have come up tangentially, including the current TDSB’s contemplation of a school for blacks only.

Lorrie Goldstein’s column in today’s Sun, Black School a phony fix, suggests that a one-off pilot project like this is not going to address the underlying problems facing public education today.

I personally don’t think that getting rid of public funding for Catholic schools will “fix” it either, although it would be one way of addressing the religious discrimination issue that concerns Mr. Baak and others. Another way of course would be to follow John Tory’s prescription, but Ontario has already rendered its verdict on that subject.

Goldstein’s common sense suggestions of merit pay, proper discipline, vouchers and charter schools (among others) are worth considering.

Just like health care, there are some serious issues in Ontario. Will the McGuinty government one day have the intestinal fortitude to look for real answers rather than pandering to the unions?

I’m not holding my breath.

During the Ontario election the faith-based finding issue was front and centre.

My Sept. 17 post (You’re being duped, Ontario) has drawn the attention of Leonard Baak, who is the president of Education Equality in Ontario, which advocates for a one school system.

Mr. Baak seems to feel that one of my anonymous readers has slandered him (at Tue Sep 18, 06:43:00 PM EDT), so it’s only fair to highlight his response here so that he can explain his position:

(Thu Nov 08, 08:37:00 PM EST)

Ya gotta love anonymous slander.

For the record, I am neither a disgruntled father nor did I ever want my kids in the Catholic system. Nor is my passion for one school system a reflection of personal anger. If Mr./Ms. anonymous has any evidence to support this, please do tell.

An extreme overcrowding situation in my local public school led me to try — unsuccessfully — to enrol my kids in our local Catholic elementary school. It was my second choice. I do not think sectarian religion has any place in publicly funded education — never have. The duplication also costs hundreds of millions of dollars a year that could be better spent in classrooms and on vital programs and educational supports (special ed, ESL, specialist teachers (gym, librarians), etc). The separate Catholic school system is a shameful and inexcusable waste of valuable education resources. The lost opportunities stemming from that waste result in real pain that is evidenced every year in endless rounds of school board cutbacks.

My local public school was too overcrowded to accommodate all of the students in its attendance zone and could not legally add any more portables. The school board’s solution was to bus junior kindergarten kids 90 minutes a day (45 minutes each way) to a less crowded school for a two and a half hour school day. I would not subject a four year old to that. For that reason, I applied to and was turned away by my local Catholic elementary school. I ended up enrolling the kids in a private school for two years at a cost of over $1700 per month to escape an overcrowding situation that my (non-Church-going) Catholic neighbours could escape for free by virtue of the “colour” of their faith.

I was shocked to discover, upon appeal to the Ministry of Education, that these publicly funded schools had an absolute and unfettered right to reject non-Catholic children until grade 9 and to reject non-Catholic teachers at all grade levels. This in a society that professes to value the fundamental equality of its citizens? I grew up in Nova Scotia, where such blatant discrimination has never been tolerated (it only continues to exist in Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Alberta — Ontario most blatantly).

As a practicing Christian, I was equally shocked that this discriminatory status quo is not opposed by and is even defended by other Christians — or people who profess to be of that faith. If they really loved their neighbours as themselves (remember the Great Commandment?), they would insist that all religious schools be funded equally or not at all. Everyone, including Catholics, should be equal before and under the law. Catholic and Christian teaching demands no less.

And don’t give me any garbage about Catholics supporting the right of other faiths to their own funding. Polls during the recent election showed that only 15% of Ontarians supported extended religious school funding. Even if they were all Catholics (which they were not), Catholics make up 34% of the Ontario population. That would suggest that most Catholics support one school system as well or are unabashed and unapologetic bigots who favour educational choice and religious school options only for their own kind. I’ll charitably assume the former.

Catholic school/Church vested interests in Ontario only offer quiet and ineffectual platitudes to other faiths with regard to extended religious school funding and only because if they didn’t, they’d look like bigots. They typically only do this when the heat (and scrutiny) is on their own system. During the election, many Catholic teachers openly supported the Liberals with their unconscionable, bigoted, Catholics-first-and-only status quo position on religious school funding. The Catholic trustees, teachers union, and principals’ council all applauded Liberal announcements in news releases and public comments while ignoring the fact that the Tories offered ever more money. While saying they support equal rights for other faiths, they were quietly working against those who proposed to make it a reality. They knew damned well that dividing a limited pie even further would be detrimental to all children in the existing publicly funded systems. You can see it already in current education funding.

English Catholic school boards generally receive hundreds of dollars more per pupil per year than their coterminous English public boards. French public boards similarly receive substantially more per pupil per year than their coterminous French Catholic boards, which are always the larger of the French boards. French boards universally receive thousands of dollars more per pupil per year than their coterminous English boards, whether public or Catholic. This is not favouritism of Catholic over public or of French over English, but a clear recognition in the education funding formula of the inefficiencies of smaller boards serving more dispersed student populations. The smaller boards receive higher funding to allow them to offer an educational experience of comparable quality to their larger counterparts.

My motivation is opposing the continuation of the separate Catholic system is that I agree with most Ontarians that it is wrong to segregate children by faith and it is a gross injustice to provide publicly funded school choice to the members of a single privileged faith alone. I am also interested in seeing better stewardship of the funding committed to public education and religious neutrality in government. I think a single public school system is the best way to accomplish that. Religious schools, if they are to be funded at all, should be funded at arm’s length through modest tax credits that are not significant enough to promote an exodus from truly inclusive and multicultural public schools.

Attempting to ascribe my actions to hateful motives is dishonest in the extreme.

Regards,
Leonard Baak.

Thank you, Mr. Baak. I have several readers who totally agree with your point of view.

I personally feel that the status quo is unacceptable because it discriminates according to religious faith. But what about Eden High Christian School in Niagara, and other such anomalies?

And already there is a Toronto school for gays and lesbians (Oasis).

How do we explain the Toronto District School Board talking about a school for blacks-only?

Just where does the Minister of Education stand on all this NOW?

All those Catholic teachers and parents that supported Dalton McGuinty may live to regret that decision before the next four years are up - H/T Brian Lemon and ASTTR.

Because Liberal governments don’t usually aim for the right thing; they try to do the popular thing.