In Ontario, in education, it still pays to be Catholic.

103 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lord Palmerston

The trotting out of the "oppressed Catholic" talk here by several posters is really disturbing.  Yeah Catholics are soooo oppressed in today's Ontario (where all three major party leaders are Catholic).

Fidel

Machjo wrote:

Fidel wrote:

 Democracy is the right's most hated institution still.

On the contrary. The majority group, be it ethnic or religious, loves democracy (not to be confused with justice) because it legitimizes a 50% + 1 majority dictatorship and suppresion of the minority.

And whenever they do manage the rare 50% plus one, it's usually a phony majority still when compared to how many people didnt vote.

OL12 OL12's picture

Lord Palmerston wrote:
Yeah Catholics are soooo oppressed in today's Ontario (where all three major party leaders are Catholic).

And even the Green party leader LP -- Frank de Jong is Catholic as well (and he likes the one school system idea, I might add).  The fact that all four leaders are Catholic actually creates perfect conditions for a move to one school system -- provided they are not all intolerant bigots (Frank de Jong is obviously not).  Both Quebec and Newfoundland had Catholic leaders when they dismantled denominational schools. It kind of takes away the ability of the religious elite to play the "persecuted" card, not that anyone with an IQ over 50 would believe that those atop the pedestal of educational privilege are persecuted anyway.

 

Fidel

Up here in Northern Ontario, they would often burn barns down if the spelling of their surname looked funny and especially if you were Catholic. It wasnt so long ago there were orangemen and even klan meetings here. Not long before I was born, they used to burn  crosses on the hill in centre of town.

Unionist

Well, maybe they'll just burn down all the Catholic schools and problem solved. Thanks for the update from the front lines, Fidel.

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Well, maybe they'll just burn down all the Catholic schools and problem solved.

A complete waste of time and effort. Burning down Queen's Perk would be much more productive. And besides, she's not my queen. And the red chamber in Ottawa could do with some redecorating.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

OL12 wrote:

Machjo wrote:
Let me get this straight. The school is publicly funded but is not accessible to the public? Hmmm....Undecided

Welcome to aparthied brother -- Ontario style!

If you are a white (Catholic) kid, you get to go to the white (Catholic) school and teach there when you grow up.  If you are black (non-Catholic), we have a different school for you.  Of course, if the black (public) school in a given area has better facilities, programs, or test scores, white (Catholic) kids can still go there if they want.  White (Catholic) kids can also teach at the black (public) schools when they grow up.  The reverse, black (non-Catholic) kids getting into white (Catholic) schools, is only possible if the white (Catholic) school is underenrolled and desperate for a few more holy enrolment grants.  Blacks (non-Catholics) teaching at white (Catholic) schools is out of the question unless they are desperate and unable to find a white (Catholic) teacher.  When black (non-Catholic) teachers are hired, it is bye-bye blackie as soon as a qualified white (Catholic) teacher can be found.

That's the way it has been in Ontario since 1841.  Let me hear you say "Amen", white (Catholic) parents and teachers.

This all has the support of the ONDP and Ontario's other big three parties.  Only the Greens can see the wrong in it.

I must tell that to my niece and nephew who send their children to a catholic school since I am sure they didn't know it was a race issue. They are like Obama from a north american white mother and a black immigrant father.  To say there are no catholics who are black and send their kids to those indoctrination centres is inaccurate.  I don't know the percentage but in most catholic communities I have seen recently (my family is catholic but not me) I notice that there seem to be a larger percentage who are Filipino or Latin American or Korean.  Lots of us white folks have fled the church leaving plenty of room in the pews for immigrants from catholic countries.  

___________________________________________

Soothsayers had a better record of prediction than economists

Sunday Hat

Lord Palmerston wrote:

The trotting out of the "oppressed Catholic" talk here by several posters is really disturbing.  Yeah Catholics are soooo oppressed in today's Ontario (where all three major party leaders are Catholic).

For the record, I wasn't the one who used the word "apartheid". Too bad that disgusting choice of words would set off your alarm bells

OL12 OL12's picture

 

Sunday Hat wrote:

OL12 wrote:
Catholics pay the same taxes as anyone else, but have 50% more job opportunities than their non-Catholic neighbours.  Sweet.  Another bonus deal for Catholics.  And the ONDP is party to OECTA's efforts to keep that sweet deal for Catholics -- to their shame.

It's a papist conspiracy! We won't be governed by Rome! Quickly! To the Orange Lodge!

It says a lot about your character, Sunday Hat, that you would make light of very serious waste and discrimination that has real consequences for all Ontarians generally, but for non-Catholics in particular.  Suggesting, even by implication, that opposition to the preferential treatment of Catholics is rooted in anti-Catholic sentiment is particularly reprehensible.  Where is your evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy?

Supporters of one school system just want equality -- and if it were white people who sat atop the pedestal of educational privilege, the situation would be no more or no less objectionable.  This really has little to do with religion.  It has more to do with wasteful spending and discrimination on prohibited grounds (religion, race, or ethnic group).

It is bad enough that non-Catholic parents must sometimes shell out money that their Catholic neigbours don't have to pay, that your kids may have to be bussed well past the nearest publicly funded school to attend another school, that those of your non-Catholic ilk have a third fewer teaching opportunities than their Catholic neighbours, or that your religion does not get the government assistance the Catholic faith does; but when someone (presumably Catholic) then rubs your face in it by suggesting that YOU are persecuting HIM by daring to protest HIS preferential treatment, it is beyond outrageous.  We only want fair and equal treatment.

It is really hard to believe that a person who would object to his neighbour seeking equality, or who would make light of that, could be either Catholic or Christian.  Perhaps you are in the great majority of Catholics: those who trundle their kids off to Catholic school while sleeping in on Sunday morning because the Government of Ontario relieves you of the need to be involved in the spiritual and moral upbringing of your children.  You could use the lessons you might get from the pulpit, my friend.

Religious intolerance was a real and dreadful reality in 19th century Ontario and was perhaps the most significant factor leading to the creation of Catholic separate schools.  We are so fortunate it has been virtually eradicated today, save for a few like you who would callously dredge it up while suggesting, without so much as a shred of evidence, that others are religiously intolerant.

Fidel

Apartheid? Isnt that where they segregated people onto narrow strips of land outside major cities controlled by whites? And they were abused by police to extremes? Our colonial administrators would never do anything like that in Canada, would they?

OL12 OL12's picture

Fidel wrote:

OL12 wrote:
  Where is your evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy?

We have had many immigrants to Canada and professionals trained in other countries and experiencing higher than white Canadian average unemployment levels. Over 200,000 Latino argricultural workers have been working seasonally here for 20 and 30 years and can't apply for citizenship or so much as EI benefits. And they'ev worked hard at back-breaking work in Canada's agruicultural industry for a large part of their working lives.

A Ryerson study of a couple of years ago revealed that somewhere over 650,000 first and second generation Asian emigres left Canada and many citing a lack of job opportunities. And the study revealed that we let some of Asia's best educated and well trained professionals leave our fair country. The reaons for the exodus could have been everything from nepotism and corruption at local levels, to plain old racism right here in Canada. The colour of the street in our major cities is varied, But some say as you ascend the floors in buildings and office towers of some well known Canadian businesses, banks, and even government buildings, the colour of the street tends to disappear as you make your way to the top.

And this is evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy?  What is your point?

OL12 OL12's picture

Sunday Hat wrote:

Lord Palmerston wrote:

The trotting out of the "oppressed Catholic" talk here by several posters is really disturbing.  Yeah Catholics are soooo oppressed in today's Ontario (where all three major party leaders are Catholic).

For the record, I wasn't the one who used the word "apartheid". Too bad that disgusting choice of words would set off your alarm bells

The choice of words was completely appropriate, although I can understand how the privileged folks seeking to protect Ontario's educational aparthied might want to avoid the negative connotations of the word.  The meaning of the word long ago expanded to include any sort of "policy or practice of separating or segregating groups".

See the definition of "aparthied".

Fidel

OL12 wrote:
  Where is your evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy?

We have had many immigrants to Canada and professionals trained in other countries and experiencing higher than white Canadian average unemployment levels. Over 200,000 Latino argricultural workers have been working seasonally here for 20 and 30 years and can't apply for citizenship or so much as EI benefits. And they'ev worked hard at back-breaking work in Canada's agruicultural industry for a large part of their working lives. I can't imagine a group of workers in Canada who are mainly Catholic and discriminated against moreso.

A Ryerson study of a couple of years ago revealed that somewhere over 650,000 first and second generation Asian emigres left Canada and many citing a lack of job opportunities. And the study revealed that we let some of Asia's best educated and well trained professionals leave our fair country. The reaons for the exodus could have been everything from nepotism and corruption at local levels, to plain old racism right here in Canada. The colour of the street in our major cities is varied, But some say as you ascend the floors in buildings and office towers of some well known Canadian businesses, banks, and even government buildings, the colour of the street tends to disappear as you make your way to the top.

OL12 OL12's picture

Fidel wrote:
The point is that racism does exist in Canada. And some say there is evidence that racism is systematic in our fake G8 country, our Northern Puerto Rico with a few polar bears. We're not talking about a country or province that is perfect in every way except for its separate school system in place since Confederation, no. We have racism, and we have corruption at the highest levels of government. And we are still forced to endure an obsolete Westminster electoral setup that was invented before electricity. So here's my question to you: What is your point?

You quoted my question to Sunday Hat regarding his "evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy" as if you were providing such evidence and then you immediately went off topic.

I agree with you there are other injustices to correct in Canada such as the ones you identify, but that doesn't relate to my question that you quoted -- or to the focus of this discussion:  how it pays to be Catholic in education in Ontario.  I just didn't know what you were driving at.  Thanks for the clarification.

Fidel

OL12 wrote:

Fidel wrote:

OL12 wrote:
  Where is your evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy?

We have had many immigrants to Canada and professionals trained in other countries and experiencing higher than white Canadian average unemployment levels. Over 200,000 Latino argricultural workers have been working seasonally here for 20 and 30 years and can't apply for citizenship or so much as EI benefits. And they'ev worked hard at back-breaking work in Canada's agruicultural industry for a large part of their working lives.

A Ryerson study of a couple of years ago revealed that somewhere over 650,000 first and second generation Asian emigres left Canada and many citing a lack of job opportunities. And the study revealed that we let some of Asia's best educated and well trained professionals leave our fair country. The reaons for the exodus could have been everything from nepotism and corruption at local levels, to plain old racism right here in Canada. The colour of the street in our major cities is varied, But some say as you ascend the floors in buildings and office towers of some well known Canadian businesses, banks, and even government buildings, the colour of the street tends to disappear as you make your way to the top.

And this is evidence of an anti-Catholic, Orange bogeyman conspiracy?  What is your point?

The point is that racism does exist in Canada. And some say there is evidence that racism is systematic in our fake G8 country, our Northern Puerto Rico with a few polar bears. We're not talking about a country or province that is perfect in every way except for its separate school system in place since Confederation, no. We have duplication of expensive and inefficient government bureaucracy like few modern countries in the world put up with. We have racism, and we have corruption at the highest levels of government. And we are still forced to endure an obsolete Westminster electoral setup that was invented before electricity. So here's my question to you: What is your point? Is it our goal to clean up Bananada by closing down the separate school at a time in Ontario on school at a time? I think the NDP's energy conservation and efficiency proposal would save more money and the environment at the same time. As you can tell, I didnt vote Liberal in the last election.

Fidel

The Klan and Orange order idiots and rightwing militia whackos arent supposed to exist in the States either. But they do. Racism in Canada isnt based so much on skin colour as are more subtle angles to it, such as the spelling of your last name, which often implies religious affiliation etc. Today they don't burn your barn down in places like Northern Ontario - they just don't hire you if they can help it.

OL12 OL12's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:
I must tell that to my niece and nephew who send their children to a catholic school since I am sure they didn't know it was a race issue. They are like Obama from a north american white mother and a black immigrant father.  To say there are no catholics who are black and send their kids to those indoctrination centres is inaccurate.  I don't know the percentage but in most catholic communities I have seen recently (my family is catholic but not me) I notice that there seem to be a larger percentage who are Filipino or Latin American or Korean.  Lots of us white folks have fled the church leaving plenty of room in the pews for immigrants from catholic countries.

I'm afraid you totally missed my point, my friend.  I wasn't talking about whites and blacks, I was talking about the privileged and the non-privileged in the Ontario school system, represented by the purely symbolic labels "white" (Catholic) and "black" (non-Catholic) respectively.

You bring up an interesting topic for another day, however:  the relative diversity of Ontario's public and Catholic school systems.

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

Not long before I was born, they used to burn  crosses on the hill in centre of town.

Would that have been in Prince George, Hedy?

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Not long before I was born, they used to burn  crosses on the hill in centre of town.

Would that have been in Prince George, Hedy?

Sault Ste Marie on Moffley Hill, two hills down from the highschool I attended. There was an orangeman and suspected Klan member/mason in the hood where I grew up. He ended up murdering his wife with a shotgun about the time I was born. He did about four or five years in prison for it.

Sunday Hat

OL12 wrote:
I can understand how the privileged folks seeking to protect Ontario's educational aparthied might want to avoid the negative connotations of the word. 
I don't think I'm the one avoiding the negative connotations.

Machjo

OL12 wrote:

Lord Palmerston wrote:
Yeah Catholics are soooo oppressed in today's Ontario (where all three major party leaders are Catholic).

And even the Green party leader LP -- Frank de Jong is Catholic as well (and he likes the one school system idea, I might add).  The fact that all four leaders are Catholic actually creates perfect conditions for a move to one school system -- provided they are not all intolerant bigots (Frank de Jong is obviously not).  Both Quebec and Newfoundland had Catholic leaders when they dismantled denominational schools. It kind of takes away the ability of the religious elite to play the "persecuted" card, not that anyone with an IQ over 50 would believe that those atop the pedestal of educational privilege are persecuted anyway.

 

 

What was I thinking?! I was raised Catholic, my mother is Cathoic, I'd gone to an Ontario French-Catholic school in Ottawa in elementary school before moving to BC, and even did my confirmation (under peer pressure from classmates, teachers, and family) ... and turned away from the Catholic Faith. Well, I guess that shoots my opportunities down in Ontario politics, doesn't it. :D

Machjo

And for those who are offended at the word apartheid, I can't remember if I used the word in a post above, but if so, my apologies. I'll use the word unjust instead. Is that better?

janfromthebruce

unjust is fine, "apartheid" is rhetorical and inflaming. This is about equality and justice for all in order to provide the best opportunities for all kids for their educational needs - public.

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Not long before I was born, they used to burn  crosses on the hill in centre of town.

Would that have been in Prince George, Hedy?

Sault Ste Marie on Moffley Hill, two hills down from the highschool I attended. There was an orangeman and suspected Klan member/mason in the hood where I grew up. He ended up murdering his wife with a shotgun about the time I was born. He did about four or five years in prison for it.

I wasn't aware of that. Well, that's reason enough to protect the Catholic kids in their own separate publicly funded schools, I guess.

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
I wasn't aware of that. Well, that's reason enough to protect the Catholic kids in their own separate publicly funded schools, I guess.

I wasn't trying to suggest that either. What I am suggesting is that Catholics were not always considered to be the first class A-1 citizens they are made out to be in comments above. And somewhere arpund 200,000 agricultural workers from Latin America, and mostly Catholics, are certainly not treated like first class citizens in this country either. In fact, they have very few rights in this country after putting in 20 and 30 years  of their working lives as seasonal workers here. Carry on.

Unionist

Fidel, I mean this very sincerely. My folks made it (through sheer dumb luck) through genocide not that long ago, based on racial and ethnic hatred and segregation and the rest of it. But we don't need separate public schools, separate neighbourhoods, or a separate country. Catholics - longer ago in history - suffered oppression in many countries, and discrimination and second-class status in Canada. I'll leave you to draw the conclusion.

ETA: Just read your addition about Catholic farm workers from Latin America. I guess if they were Protestant, they'd be getting decent wages and working conditions. In the meantime, they'll need separate publicly-funded Catholic schools, to perpetuate their oppression I guess. I just honestly don't get you sometimes.

 

Fidel

So because your parents suffered under a dictatorship which rounded up and murdered Jews(and Catholics etc), there should be no Catholic schools in Ontario? I think I'm seeing things your way now. Carry on. 

Just read your ETA: No, I don't think Protestant Latinos should be treated any worse than Catholics. What I would expect from Canadians, if I were Latino myself, would be some understanding of the repression in the country I might be coming from.

My father spent five years in n. Africa and Italy and Holland, and finally Belgium during the war, and as much as he disliked being bothered by Jehovah's, for example, he always cut them some slack knowing what they went through in Europe. He said he didnt fight in the war so any religious group could suffer some more here in Canada.

OL12 OL12's picture

Not of direct relevance to this topic, but of interest to followers of the publicly funded Catholic education debate:

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/lgbtq/catholic-school-fires-teacher-changing-god-given-gender

This discussion centers around the termination of a Catholic teacher in Alberta for a gender change.

Lord Palmerston

Fidel wrote:
I wasn't trying to suggest that either. What I am suggesting is that Catholics were not always considered to be the first class A-1 citizens they are made out to be in comments above. And somewhere arpund 200,000 agricultural workers from Latin America, and mostly Catholics, are certainly not treated like first class citizens in this country either.

These Latin American farm workers are not super-expolited and treated like crap because they are Catholic.  I'm sure the non-Catholics among them are treated just as badly.

OL12 OL12's picture

Fidel wrote:
I wasn't trying to suggest that either. What I am suggesting is that Catholics were not always considered to be the first class A-1 citizens they are made out to be in comments above. And somewhere arpund 200,000 agricultural workers from Latin America, and mostly Catholics, are certainly not treated like first class citizens in this country either.

The key word here is "were" (past tense).  In ancient Ontario, there may have been intolerance against Catholics, but it was mutual -- Catholics were intolerant against Protestants in 19th century Ontario as well.  It it total and complete BS to suggest that Catholics are persecuted or the victims of intolerance in Ontario today.  Catholics are now the largest religious minority in the province (34% of the population according to the 2001 Census) and arguably the least in need of protection.  In many ways, they are socio-economically advantaged.  Also accoring to the 2001 Census, Catholics suffer suffer lower unemployment and have a higher level of educational attainment (high school, college, university) than the Ontario averages.  Within the school system, non-Catholics are now the people facing intolerance and "non-Catholic" includes a much more varied lot than is covered by the "Protestant" label.  Non-Catholics are the primary religious victims today, not Catholics.  Catholics are at the top of the social order.

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Fidel wrote:
I wasn't trying to suggest that either. What I am suggesting is that Catholics were not always considered to be the first class A-1 citizens they are made out to be in comments above. And somewhere arpund 200,000 agricultural workers from Latin America, and mostly Catholics, are certainly not treated like first class citizens in this country either.

These Latin American farm workers are not super-expolited and treated like crap because they are Catholic.  I'm sure the non-Catholics among them are treated just as badly.

Amen.  If these agricultural workers are exploited, it is because they are from a poor country and will work on the cheap, not because of their religion.  It is absolute BS to suggest otherwise.  Catholicism is the faith of privilege in Ontario.  We are talking about Ontario today, not the Ontario of our great-great-great-great-great grandfather's generation.

Unionist

OL12 wrote:
Non-Catholics are the primary religious victims today, not Catholics.  Catholics are at the top of the social order.

OL12, don't overdo it please. You can oppose public funding of religious schools. You can oppose the Church and its influence in education. You can oppose segregation in our school system. You will find broad agreement here and elsewhere on those issues. But when you start making comments about "Catholics" vs. "non-Catholics", you definitely lose at least one ally here.

 

OL12 OL12's picture

Unionist wrote:

OL12 wrote:
Non-Catholics are the primary religious victims today, not Catholics.  Catholics are at the top of the social order.

OL12, don't overdo it please. You can oppose public funding of religious schools. You can oppose the Church and its influence in education. You can oppose segregation in our school system. You will find broad agreement here and elsewhere on those issues. But when you start making comments about "Catholics" vs. "non-Catholics", you definitely lose at least one ally here.

It's not Catholics vs. non-Catholics, Unionist -- it's about waste and discrimination.

As for overdoing it, it is the BS assertion, without any evidence, that Catholics are somehow persecuted or hard done by in Ontario today that is over the top.  That is simply preposterous and shouldn't go unchallenged.

Machjo

Fidel wrote:

Unionist wrote:
I wasn't aware of that. Well, that's reason enough to protect the Catholic kids in their own separate publicly funded schools, I guess.

I wasn't trying to suggest that either. What I am suggesting is that Catholics were not always considered to be the first class A-1 citizens they are made out to be in comments above. And somewhere arpund 200,000 agricultural workers from Latin America, and mostly Catholics, are certainly not treated like first class citizens in this country either. In fact, they have very few rights in this country after putting in 20 and 30 years  of their working lives as seasonal workers here. Carry on.

 

I do agree that catholics suffered discrimination too in the past. One way to counter that is to simply introduce world religion courses in school teaching respect for all. No need to go from discrimination to reverse discrimination.

Lord Palmerston

OL12 wrote:
As for overdoing it, it is the BS assertion, without any evidence, that Catholics are somehow persecuted or hard done by in Ontario today that is over the top.  That is simply preposterous and shouldn't go unchallenged.

Agreed.

Machjo

One thing I should point out is that those harbouring prejudice against Catholics certainly don't help the cause of opposing special legal privileges for Catholic schools. I suppose one solution in any campaing for a just education system is to be equally outspoken for equality for all religious faiths and non-believers in Ontario and for respect for Catholics. This would make it clear that our opposition to the special privileges for Catholics is nothing personal against Catholics but would apply equally to all.

Lord Palmerston

Green leader Frank de Jong presents the case for one system here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqSfLKF0Qhc

 

Machjo

I don't fully agree with one unified school system though. It's clear that French-medium and English-medium schools will have different needs as far as teacher training, materials, culture, etc. are concerned. Same with schools teaching indigenous languages, etc. But I could see only one unified English-medium school system, one unified French-medium school system, etc. This would save on translation costs within each system.

OL12 OL12's picture

Regarding this idea that efforts to move Ontario to one school system are "Catholic vs. non-Catholic"; they are not.  Our efforts are about achieving fairness, equality, and fiscal responsibility.  It is about one group of people that suffer no disadvantage that might warrant their preferential treatment getting preferential treatment anyway.  It is about the waste of enormous sums of money on duplicate school systems serving overlapping jurisdictions.

The fact that people are described in terms of "Catholic" and "non-Catholic" in the discussion reflects the unfortunate reality of the situation.  It is the Ontario Government (all parties) that forces such terminology to be used by daring to discriminate for and against people based on the "colour" of their faith.  With regard to educational rights, our government blatantly and brazenly distinguishes between persons based on faith (normally a prohibited ground for discrimination) -- specifically discriminating based on whether they are Catholic or non-Catholic.  That is reprehensible in itself (both to non-Catholics and many Catholics), but it also has the unfortunate consequence of leading to discussions that necessarily make the same distinctions.

If people do not want such distinctions to be made, they should take the issue up with the Ontario Government, because such distinctions are made in Ontario law. The Government does have the authority to change things -- they choose not to.  Don't take issue with those who are merely describing the reality of the situation accurately and who are understandably upset about it.  We hate making these distinctions more than anyone (since the distinction in law legislates a situation in which non-Catholics have inferior rights), but they inevitably result from the reality of Ontario law.

Machjo

From an incrementalist standpoint, if it should not be possible to eliminate the separate school system, then one first step could eb to at require at least those schools receiving public funding to accept pupils on a first-come-first-served basis and not on religious grounds. Then, if a non-catholic parent decides to send his child to a public Catholic school for reasons of convenience, etc., then the onus would be on the school ot figure out how to accommodate him. That could be a start at least.

Machjo

And the requirement in my post above is not farfetched when we consider that in the Swedish system, even privately owned schools receiving any public funding through their voucher programme are bound by the first-come-first-served principle. So how much more a state-owned school which Ontario's public Catholic schools are.

Lord Palmerston

Machjo wrote:

I don't fully agree with one unified school system though. It's clear that French-medium and English-medium schools will have different needs as far as teacher training, materials, culture, etc. are concerned. Same with schools teaching indigenous languages, etc. But I could see only one unified English-medium school system, one unified French-medium school system, etc.

Language rights are not at stake in this debate:

"To realize that vision, OSSN seeks the establishment of a single secular school system for each official language, namely English and French public school boards."

 

Machjo

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Machjo wrote:

I don't fully agree with one unified school system though. It's clear that French-medium and English-medium schools will have different needs as far as teacher training, materials, culture, etc. are concerned. Same with schools teaching indigenous languages, etc. But I could see only one unified English-medium school system, one unified French-medium school system, etc.

Language rights are not at stake in this debate:

"To realize that vision, OSSN seeks the establishment of a single secular school system for each official language, namely English and French public school boards."

 

 

Fair enough.

Machjo
Fidel

OL12 wrote:

It's not Catholics vs. non-Catholics, Unionist -- it's about waste and discrimination.

This same thought was shared by western world economists at start of the decade, and it said that government spending as a share of economic output should be reduced to somewhere between 15 percent and a third of GDP. But there is a wide array of excessive government wrt the unique setup in Canada. Our's must be the one of the few countries in the world to have this weird arrangement with weak central government and twelve provincial and territorial sub-governments, a model of duplicative excess and inefficiency constructed by 19th century ideologues Canada probably has more government bureaucracy than 90 percent of countries in the world. Reducing this kind of excess doesn't interest some Canadians apparently. The focus is on a specific religious group seen to be pulling the whole country down from their point of view.

 

Lord Palmerston

I don't think the education budget should be trimmed at all - and the "saving money" argument doesn't appeal to me.  I support ending the separate school system on principle.

Fidel

The it's the right thing to do also appeals to my better judgment, LP. I can't argue against that very well.

mahmud

Fidel wrote:

OL12 wrote:

It's not Catholics vs. non-Catholics, Unionist -- it's about waste and discrimination.

This same thought was shared by western world economists at start of the decade, and it said that government spending as a share of economic output should be reduced to somewhere between 15 percent and a third of GDP. But there is a wide array of excessive government wrt the unique setup in Canada. Our's must be the one of the few countries in the world to have this weird arrangement with weak central government and twelve provincial and territorial sub-governments, a model of duplicative excess and inefficiency constructed by 19th century ideologues Canada probably has more government bureaucracy than 90 percent of countries in the world. Reducing this kind of excess doesn't interest some Canadians apparently. The focus is on a specific religious group seen to be pulling the whole country down from their point of view.

 

About time to reduce the confederation to one of Canada, Quebec and Nunavut. France has about 62 million inhabitants and one ministry of education. Canada has half the population and 13 ministries of education. Ridiculous !

Machjo

mahmud wrote:

Fidel wrote:

OL12 wrote:

It's not Catholics vs. non-Catholics, Unionist -- it's about waste and discrimination.

This same thought was shared by western world economists at start of the decade, and it said that government spending as a share of economic output should be reduced to somewhere between 15 percent and a third of GDP. But there is a wide array of excessive government wrt the unique setup in Canada. Our's must be the one of the few countries in the world to have this weird arrangement with weak central government and twelve provincial and territorial sub-governments, a model of duplicative excess and inefficiency constructed by 19th century ideologues Canada probably has more government bureaucracy than 90 percent of countries in the world. Reducing this kind of excess doesn't interest some Canadians apparently. The focus is on a specific religious group seen to be pulling the whole country down from their point of view.

 

About time to reduce the confederation to one of Canada, Quebec and Nunavut. France has about 62 million inhabitants and one ministry of education. Canada has half the population and 13 ministries of education. Ridiculous !

 

Seeing that education defines the culture of the next generation, you would think we'd support one single nationwide federal ministry of education. The problem though is that, unlike France which, like England albeit to a much lesser degree, has for the most part subdued its indigenous cultures (where do you think we learnt it from?), in Canada, the english have failed to subdue the French-Canadian population and the First Nations are still in a fighting stance of sorts. As a result, we're always trying to balance out competing interests. Clearly Quebec would never give up its ministry of education to the federal level. First Nations educaiton on reserves is funded by the feds. Then each province has its own identity. Canada is a UN of sorts, an international conglomeration.

mahmud

Machjo,

I am not arguing for one federal ministry of education, but three. Canada, Quebec and the Aboriginals. I do wonder what is exactly this arangement that makes Ontario, PEI, Manitoba and the whole provinces of Anglo-Canada so different if not a modern day British tribalism.

Machjo

mahmud wrote:

Machjo,

I am not arguing for one federal ministry of education, but three. Canada, Quebec and the Aboriginals. I do wonder what is exactly this arangement that makes Ontario, PEI, Manitoba and the whole provinces of Anglo-Canada so different if not a modern day British tribalism.

 

Good points. Be aware though that the First Nations themselves are as diverse from one another as English-Canada is from French-Canada. I'm sure they're not interested in just assimilating into the more powerful Cree or Inuktitut communities either. For them it might be better to have one a ministry of department of education for each nation with federal transfer payments to them I suppose.

Pages

Topic locked