Make the case for one Ontario School System

This letter to Kathleen Wynne by Alan Borovoy and Noa Mendelsohn Aviv of the CCLA raises some good points as well.

 http://www.ccla.org/schoolfunding/letter-religious-schools.pdf

I think one or both old line party leaders should grow spines and dare to piss off voting Catholics in Ontario with a secular school system once and for all. It's either that or fix the school funding formula. And that'll happen about the same time hell freezes over.

Interesting...you want the old-line parties to be to the left of the NDP on this issue?

Is there a way to discuss this issue without yapping on and on about these political parties? I'm not referring to you, LP.

Perhaps this thread with the appropriate title and some non-partisanship it could be possible.  I'll give you 10-1 odds on no.  I'm not referring to you Fidel.

It's a simple matter of equity. Either we have to fund all forms of religious schooling or none of them. I might be amused to see who gets elected to the Satanic School Board, but we'll all probably be rather less amused when taxes go up to pay for the plethora of new educational bureaucracies.

Maybe not supporting one secular school system for all is why the NDP is basically dead in Ontario, and has been for a long, long time now.

Time to wake up and smell the roses. Try something different for a change, something with principle, and enough with living in the past, this is the 21st century, not the 18th. Create some exccitement, some buzz with some exciting new progressive policies to go along with your band new leader. Seriously, and in all honesty, what do you have to lose!!!

Jesus, doesn't the ON NDP ever get tired of losing. And I don't mean losing closely, but basically getting slaughtered since when, was it 1995. That's close to 15 years ago, and it appears it is going to be the same ole story for the next 15 years.

Who pandered to the Catholic vote for several decades in a row?

The NDP isnt in government pandering to Catholics now, and it's not the NDP shortchanging the public school system by $1.2 billion dollars or whatever the amount is today.

And it is interesting that you want to post tongue-in-cheek like this when the reality is we're still dealing with another old line party legacy, an obsolete electoral system invented before electricity and causing parties to have to play these stupid politicks as a result. Well, I say it looks good on them. If you dont appreciate impotence at Queen's Park, then the solution is simple: dont vote for it!

I asked for non-partisan discussion - but NorthReport's post will do in the meantime! Well said.

Yep, great policy with the economy in the tank.  Let's worry about divisive politics.  How about you all come up with some ideas for the unemployed.  (Don't see 1/10th of the posts compared to this thread)

I think that might resonate a bit more with Ontario. 

When the economy is in better shape this objective will gain much more momentum.

Ontario was a conservative province for 50 years to Mike Harris/Eves.

We're experimenting with Liberals since 2003.

McGuilty's Liberals have 22% of registered voter support under them and 100% of power in a traditionally conservative province within a formerly Liberal country experiencing yet another neoliberal ideology-induced downturn. 

And more and more Ontarians arent impressed. 

And you invoked Jesus in your sermon.

This school issue, and I don't mean to pick on Ontario, seems like a golden opportunity for the NDP to gain some serious credibility and support, at least in provinces where they are not doing well, or don't even exist. The NDP has to walk the talk. If we don't, what does it say about our principles? 

I grew up in Quebec, went through the Protestant School Board of Greater Montreal system (WHOM I BLAME FOR NOT TEACHING ITS STUDENTS TO BECOME BILINGUAL AND LEARN THE LANGUAGE OF THE MAJORITY IN QUEBEC), and would have preferred a bilingual school system across Canada at that time. Alas that was not to be, and I'm frustrated that Trudeau couldn't achieve that, although to be fair it is constitutionally provincial jurisdiction. And let's not forget Trudeau to get his Charter cut a deal with Premier Davis to allow the RC school system to expand in Ontario. What was Trudeau thinking!

The NDP doesnt have to do anything to risk Francophone support by our 19th century electoral system. We can simply let the neoliberalizers drown in their own pile o' shit while scooping up  disaffected voters along the way. 22 percent in '011 is the high water mark.

Yes we can!

No need to yell, I would have loved learning more French as it seemed one of the easier subjects.

I'd love to hear more without parties being involved.  It's great to promote this idea but not at the expense of the NDP.  My tinfoil hat is buzzing.

Canadian Civil Liberties Association brief on the public funding of religious schools, September 21, 2007 [Executive Summary]:

• Public funding of religious schools could weaken the public school system and undermine its contributions to the vitality of our democracy.

• Having opened its doors to everyone, regardless of wealth, status, race, religion, and ethnicity, the public school system has performed an integrative and unifying function for Ontario society.

• Within living memory, this country jailed thousands of innocent Japanese Canadians, denied many aboriginal people the right to vote, restricted immigration from developing countries, and turned back Jewish refugees from Hitler's Germany. There is no reason to believe such behaviour could never again be possible.

• Our community must work to shore up our integrative institutions. One of the most important of these is the public schools.

• If the funding proposal goes ahead, public schools could lose significant numbers of students to the religious schools. If this were to happen, the public schools would no longer be able to perform their integrative role. In time, our community could become a much less tolerant place.

• In the event of such public funding, there may well be no legitimate or effective way to control any hateful or discriminatory messages espoused by particular religious schools. Although our democracy may defend the right of any group to hold and attempt to spread such views, it is repugnant for the public purse to subsidize the exercise.

• The impetus to inspect, monitor, and control religious programs in schools would raise thorny questions about government intervention in religious affairs.

• The sheer costs of funding many religious schools would likely reduce the quality of the entire educational system.

• Contrary to the arguments of some, the current public funding of Catholic schools cannot justify the critical risks associated with the proposal to fund more religious schools.

• A constitutional amendment should be enacted to end the anomaly of public financing for Catholic schools.

Accordingly, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association recommends as follows:

(1) At a minimum, there should be no new public funding of any religious schools and

(2) A constitutional amendment should be enacted to terminate the public funding of Catholic schools.

Source

I haven't read the previous thread but from what I see it's still a conundrum:

If we fund all religious schools, the only equitable choice, how do we decide what qualifies as a 'religion'? (gulp)

Christian Identity?

Church of the Universe? (lol li'l hammer joke)

The socialist case for one Ontario school system

It's good to see the citizen taking the right side on this issue  

It could happen? Have examples ready for where this would be the case.  This needs to be documented.  People in every community are going to need to know what this would look like for them.

These hypothetical are distractions and not really convincing IMO.  Whether we would invent such a system if it did not exist, that's not the issue.  Make the case.

Now i realize that's the Citizen reporting, not a press release from activists.  I'm just trying to explain what i mean by more details. 

71,000 Ontarians lost their jobs in February.  More job losses are being announced every day.  Please explain how this issue is even close to important to people when people are afraid of losing their homes, their incomes, their retirement savings and the stress it places on people.  Idiotic focusing on this issue and the divisiviness it would cause during a time of high unemployment doesn't even come close to strong enough.

Of course it's the issue! What better case can be made for changing a bad system than to say it's a product of a bygone era that no longer applies today? Once one considers the reasons why such a system would be a bad idea if it didn't already exist, one can can readily see why it should be changed.

Out of curiosity, how many more people do you think would have decided to "Get Orange" if Tory hadn't "hijacked" the election?   I doubt it would have been much higher, if at all.

Excellent! You're right! And therein lies the solution.

The NDP should put forward a progressive, dynamic, bold program aimed at protecting and expanding employment, retirement income, etc. - and I mean bold. (I know, I know, it's the ONDY, but hope springs eternal.)

At the same time, it should include a few democratic reforms, like abolishing separate schools, without any big fuss.

Any other party that dares to challenge the NDP on this and make a big deal out of it will be rejected by the voters, who only care about the economy, their jobs, and their livelihood!!

The timing is perfect. It's now or never.

One school system to save us from neoliberal disaster and medieval Catholic inquisition!! (not to be confused with modern day american inquisition and ownership of our old line party politicos)

And in the unlikely event the ONDP had the courage to call for such a democratic reform as one secular school system, would you still be insisting that such a move is "neoliberal" and anti-Catholic Orange Order-style bigotry?

I support the consolidation of 4 school systems into 2 systems to better meet the educational program needs of all students and thus promoting excellence in education. It's based on the social democratic principle of equity and fairness to all and promoting tolerance and belongingness. All kids going to school together, learning about what binds them together and learning to respect difference in a safe school environment, where curriculum would foster dialogue across diversity.

And its about consolidation and sharing of resources to meet all student needs.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

No, because at that point it would likely come down to a democratic decision made within the party itself.

But I think that demanding the NDP deal with this particular old line party legacy given the realities of our 19th century electoral system is a bit much considering all the other little problems that persist in this long-time bastion of political conservatism in Ontario.

It's clear which old line parties are responsible for faith-based school funding in Ontario and across Canada. And I continue to support the NDP because they understand which old line party policies need major overhaul first and foremost based on the most urgent needs of Ontarians, like dealing with child poverty, homelessness, soaring unemployment, and last but not least, an inequitable public school funding formula which remains so since the Liberal Party promised to deal with it in 2003 and have not. 

The better case would be to clearly demonstrate that the benefits of changing the system outweigh the costs of changing the system.

Another better case would be to clearly demonstrate that changing to the new system is the will of the majority.

The weakness of your case is that it completely neglects the costs of changing to the new system.  We're not deciding if we want to implement a new Catholic school system, we're deciding if we want to consolidate it into one public system.

So after years of underfunding by our two old line parties, the issue is separate school funding?

That's not my first gut reaction. Because that shouldve read:

 After years of underfunding – first by the Harris and Eves' governments and by the McGuinty Liberals - Ontario's public school system is in a mess and requires more equatible funding across the existing public system.

And the ONDP is the only party pledging to come good on the other two party's broken promises to fix the funding formula.

What does "cost" have to do with it? It might be cheaper to bar Protestants from public schools.

Maybe we should put income tax up for referendum too?

The way our political system works is that candidates and parties put forward integral platforms on which they pledge to govern.  Referenda are fine for changing the political system. But it is over-the-top to suggest that separate schools are important enough to have the people decide on this irrespective of their elected representatives.

Let the NDP satisfy itself that this is the will of the majority and then boldly put it forward as part of its platform.

Straw man much? 

Cost does not have to be about dollars.  Making a cost/benefit analysis does not have to be about dollars.  One cost of consolidating the systems would be some instability during the phase in period where people aren't really sure what's going to happen with some processes.  Another cost will be that some schools will be closing and that means for some kids their schools will be closing.

I didn't suggest putting anything up for referendum. The way our political system works is that parties put forth platforms that they feel will be popular with voters.  In cases that do not involve human rights, i think showing that a particular solution is favoured by the people makes a good case for it, assuming that the people have enough information about the choices.  The reason that it's important for an idea like this to have the support of the people is that it's the people who understand the costs of making the change (much better than politicians in Toronto).

Your response is not up to your par.  "Let the NDP satisfy itself"?  The point is the NDP is not satisfied that this is worth prioritizing.  Unless the NDP membership get sold on the idea, by school consolidation activists, the issue won't be part of the platform.  If consolidation activists want the NDP to do something here, they need to build a stronger case than they have done so far.

One could just as easily say let Harper satisfy himself that socialism is the way to go and boldly put a guaranteed minimum income forward as part of their next platform.  Let you satisfy yourself that i'm right here and boldly agree with what i'm saying.  Right.  That's a good way to change someone's mind.

Whatever that means. This is not rocket science. No new students in publicly-funded Catholic schools. All current students can finish if they wish. Gee, that was tough.

Really? Got it all worked out, have you? Nothing closes. No one has to leave anything. No disappointments. Everything stays the same. No new students, that's all. I know, it's really complicated, but we'll try to explain it to folks.

Like same-sex benefits? Do you recall the history of that fiasco in Ontario? Let me know if you require a reminder.

Try to maintain a thought through to conclusion. You spoke of satisfying ourselves that this change had majority support. I said the NDP should satisfy itself of that majority support (if it wishes) and then insert it in its platform. Now you're talking about satisfying itself that it should be a priority!!??? One thought per sentence, please.

It is about dollars. This is the most outstanding issue today with public school funding in Ontatrio, not which of the public schools are this label or that one. Parents across Ontario are at their wits end with writing cheques for basic school supplies, extracurricular activities, and things that used to be covered by the province. And now Ontarians are pestered at the door with children selling candy and raffle tickets to replace school funding chiselled away by our two dirty old line parties in government.

The kids are propping up these McGuilty Liberals who are shortchanging them in return.

The neoliberal business model for running public services into the ground efficiently and cost effectively isnt working well around the world, and it's not working here in Canada either. Those jokers in government may well be too timid and weak to tackle this old line party legacy issue for public school funding, but theyre also refusing to fund all public schools adequately and equitably regardless.

McGuinty's Liberals are cowering behind an issue that is secondary to his government's broken promise to fix the public school funding formula.

Fidel, your use of "public schools" and "public education" to include the separate school system - merely because it receives public funds - is dishonest rhetoric.

The public school system that is underfunded is the secular public school system. A large part of the reason it is is underfunded is that education money is diverted to maintaining a parallel religion-based separate school system. There is a good reason why it is called a separate school system - it is separate and apart from the secular public school system. That's the system that should be funded by our secular public government.

It is impossible to underfund a separate school system that should not be funded at all.

Well now you seem to be making a parallel case for the neoliberal business model of running public sector economy, and at the same time, deflecting blame from the Liberals(again) for continuing to break their election campaign promises to fix the school funding formula.

Separate school students are about a third of total in Ontario and recieving about a third of public school funding.

We also happen to be enjoying multibillion dollar infrastructure deficits in Ontario and across Canada - $130 billion dollars altogether. Are we going to blame separate school funding for this as well as a chronic lack of money for job training and retraining, and money pared back from other areas of social spending?

Or is it simply that the 30 year-old neoliberal ideology and social democracy in general are incompatible? 

We can't blame him for that.  The same is true of the NDP (and for that matter, the Liberals).

The NDP cant promise to fix ALL of the old line party legacy issues in one four year term. Look at McGuilty Liberals, they racked-up well up over 50 broken promises before their first term was up. Can't blame the NDP for being realistic about the shear size and breadth of the neoliberal-old line party mess that needs cleaning up and overhauling.

Fixing the Catholic school anachronism will take 5 seconds. No new students, let the existing ones finish.

Our Liberals would do it now except that theyre clinging to 100 percent of power with just 22% of the registered vote. Fear of not winning a phony majority and "strategic voting" is what rules party politics in Ontario. 

No new students. Next kids together. Yes, we can!

BA: 

"71,000 Ontarians lost their jobs in February.  More job losses are being announced every day.  Please explain how this issue is even close to important to people when people are afraid of losing their homes, their incomes, their retirement savings and the stress it places on people.  Idiotic focusing on this issue and the divisiviness it would cause during a time of high unemployment doesn't even come close to strong enough."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

They could not begin to explain their interest from any practical political position, BA. In Northern Ontario, raising it would guarantee defeat.

While the slogan is cute, BA and George Victor's comments are more accurate.

I'm having trouble following exactly what is being proposed. And that makes all the difference. The method can make the difference between opposition and support to the idea. 

I'd like to know if what we are proposing is reducing the FOUR systems to TWO or to ONE? The articles cited are either vague or seem to suggest a single bilingual system. This threatens self-determination for the francophone national minority in Ontario. And may even be unconstitutional, depending on what we mean by a bilingual system. Keeping the boards separate (linguistically) is important (i.e. The Francophone "community" should control its education directly - it took decades to get to the point it is now)

Secondly, are we talking about integrating the catholic schools into the public system by making them secular - or are we just removing funding? or some sort of half-way solution somewhere? While it is arguable that the "removing funding" may work on the English side where many communities have both systems. It is dangerous for the French system, and worse, is an assimiliationist policy. Most French school boards are in the catholic system. To remove funding from these is essentially removing funding from the French system. Besides, most communities unless large enough, have only either a Catholic French shcool or a Public French school. To simply do away with the French Catholic system without integrating its schools into the public system can lead to assimilation if the only public shcool in certain areas is an English public school.

You can see why the details of the plan to eliminate catholic school funding are more important than the question of whether to do it or not. In fact, the HOW is the question. One way is progressive and the other isn't.

Gee, we did it overnight in Québec. I guess we're just too simplistic here.

ETA: Sorry, David-Marc, I should clarify that all our discussion here is about eliminating religious public schools. I am certainly not opposed to separate linguistic schools.

The defenders of the reactionary system of public funding for certain religious-based schools challenged the leftists among us to present the case for one single public school system, divided only along language lines (English/French).

Posted above are the civil liberties case, the liberal-democratic case (Ottawa Citizen), and the socialist case.

So we have met the challenge. Nobody seems to have anything to say to refute those three cases, other than "it's too expensive", "it's too unpopular" or "it's not important enough".

In other words, no amount of rational persuasion is going to convince these supporters of an archaic, expensive, divisive, and discriminatory education system that anything should be done to change it.    

That is a valid concern. The link to the "socialist" case presented above includes a statement from www.oneschoolsystem.org which clearly says:

If you make a catholic school secular it's no longer a catholic school. It's a public school.

Nobody is suggesting that Catholics or Muslims or Seventh Day Adventists should not be allowed to have their own schools. They should be private, not "public" schools (in the sense of being publicly-funded).

This is actually a "Third" issue, and it is a valid one. I don't see why public funds should go to French Catholic schools but not to English Catholic schools. If there is demand for French public (secular) schools then we should provide funding to establish and support them.

French students should not be compelled by circumstance to attend Catholic schools in order to receive an education in their own language. But those who freely choose to do so should not be subsidized by the public.

"If you make a catholic school secular it's no longer a catholic school. It's a public school. "

Yes but, what I meant were the physical schools could become private Catholic schools. Which leads to your "third" issue since most French schools are in the catholic system (8 catholic boards vs 4 public) - the constitutional rights are threatened unless new schools are built to replace them.

"I don't see why public funds should go to French Catholic schools but not to English Catholic schools."

Nor do I. I was not suggesting that. I was in fact wondering if forced "secularisation" of the catholic schools is in any of the plans as was done in Quebec and would solve the problem of having to build new schools to replace them.

No, of course not, they belong to the people of Ontario. They will remain public schools, and in fact Catholic instruction should continue during a transitional period, but every "cohort" of new students should be streamed immediately into the secular system.

There is no need to build or destroy any building, at least, not because of this transition.

I don't believe in forced secularization. If the Catholic school buildings are publicly-owned, they could be sold or rented out at market rates to house private Catholic schools, or the private schools could be evicted and the buildings used as public schools. Where necessary, new schools should be built for the use of the public French school system, unless it is found to be practical to have English and French schools housed in the same buildings.

What the Catholics decide to do about continuing with their parochial schools is their business.

Ah, of course - public money built the schools. thanks, Unionist.

EDIT to add: M. Spector makes this a little complicated again. Although these options lead to similar ends, in most cases, as I believe the Catholic Church would probably just hand the schools over in most cases if facing rent or eviction.

Didn't it happen in Quebec because of a 'sea change' in public opinion, a reaction to church/government entanglement?? Duplessis?

I really don't see that happening in Ontario. It would not fly politically. If we want all kids in public schools, there will have to be accommodation for current religious schools and who knows what all will come under that label - That's the tricky part.

 I am in favour of having most kids in the public system, but to do thatI think we would have to accommodate many types of religious education as well as secular - ie, all of those in private schools now, and maybe more.

Well the elimination of relgious based school boards in Quebec happened about 40 years after Duplessis so I don't see what he has to do with it.

And everyone's school taxes were lowered(ya right), the lame and lepers were cured, and children were only jerked around a little with bussing and school changes while public school funding and everything else continued to suffer mysterious funding gaps. The NDP was martyred for trying - privatization eventually set in -  and they all lived happily ever after in neoliberal Ontario. fini

Correct. And saga, I didn't follow your point at all. No one is talking about eliminating private schools here. We're just talking about eliminating religious public schools. What accommodation would be needed?? I don't get it.

Yes we should keep the barn door wide open for private schools. Must abide by corporate-friendly neoliberal agreements GATS and NAFTA at all cost. Screw the Canadian constitution and 1.2 million Francophones and Catholic voters though. Now, how do we convince the NDP to promise to do this sordid deed and shoot themselves in the feet for doing it?

We'll make neoliberal voodoo work right here in Ontario for the first time ever. Yes we can!!

Fidel, the Catholic Church survived for millennia before you were born, and it will do fine without your able defence. Just please don't fabricate that ridding public schools of religion is an attack on Francophones. It does you no credit.

So youll let us know when the inquisition comes rolling into town, right? And remember, we're counting on you

We come by night;

Their hearts will feel

The fateful wheel,

Our massed might

Like copper burned

In summer's light

The craven flight

Our banner earned!

Fidel, and everyone else here who is interested for some facts. This is an important economic and principled issue. First the economics. Education funding in Ontario, as per our govt public accounts, is the second highest line, after health care, so to suggest that this isn't an economic issue or real concern, is far off. 

Fidel suggested that catholic schools are underfunded. The reality is that the funding formula actually provides a lot higher funding per catholic student in comparison to public school student. Public boards wish we got the same funding as Catholic boards. It isn't just the flawed funding formula but the twin problem of declining student enrolment that is effecting very school board in Ontario (both public and catholic), but nationally. Keeping half filled schools open is wasting resources that could be better spent in the classroom where the students are. It would eliminate chocolate bar sells!

Funding has actually increased dramatically under the Liberals but you are right, the formula is flawed, and you are right the liberals have been slow at correcting it. This past year there was a provincial panel setup to look at the funding formula which cannot be separate from declining student enrolment. 

If you have two half filled schools in a town (ignore the religious or secular designation for a moment), one would be of mind to consolidate to one school, thus saving on resource costs, and needless administrative overhead, and create one school. Each child should get the same funding allocated to them, regardless of race, sex and creed, thus creating equity and fairness. The money saved could go into extra programming, teaching staff, classroom resources, and extracurricular activities. If there is enough community interest,religious and non-religious groups alike could use the school facility (since it is owned by the public), and offer religious education in off school hours. This is putting all students and parents first. 

I can tell you as a parent I would be interested in sharing buildings and particularly if the money saved could be put into the classroom. We have a crazy system where we bus kids past schools that are publicly funded and closer to children's homes, due to whether they are public or catholic school attenders. 

This is not chump change we are talking about here. So I will post the whole powerpoint in a new comment.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

My point is ... 

Eliminating publicly funded Catholic schools in Ontario is a political non-starter. No matter how you try to dress it up, it just won't fly, imo.

What politician is going to alienate .3 to .5 of the population? It just isn't sellable, imo. You can't eliminate publicly funded Catholic education, imo.

Then ... we are left with the current inequity, where one religion has public education and others don't.

Do we try to resolve that?

I'm in favour of whatever puts more kids into public schools.

No I did not. I linked to the tvo.org article where Kitts' graphs show Catholic students are about a third of students and receive about a third of total funding depicted in the second graph. I realize it's not exactly 1-3-2/3, but it's close enough for me.

And the reality is that per pupil funding for secondary school students is significantly higher than for primary. Primary school teachers are teaching significantly more classroom hours than their highschool counterparts(see "close the gap" campaign http://www.etfo.ca/closethegap/pages/default.aspx)

The reality is that one of McGuinty's more than 50 broken election promises is that he failed to deal with the broken public school funding formula. Pass the hat school funding is what we have in Ontario today ... BESIDES over a million people without family doctors, appalling hospital conditions, a multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficit, "stubborn" rates of CHILD POVERTY, homelessness, and SOARING unemployment.

We cant run public sector economy according to a failed neoliberal business model. It doesnt work today as much as it didnt work last year and the ten years before that.

 CONSIDERATIONS

Combining Co-terminus boards can optimize financial resources, staff expertise, and student accommodation utilization.

Benefits are subject to population and geography of the co-terminus combination

Often co-terminus boards operate in existing consortiums relating to provision of administrative services and transportation Faith and Cultural programming can be protected at the school level rather than at a individual board level

Re-investments in student programming becomes the priority over investment in organizational structures

SOME SAMPLE SAVINGS

School Accommodation Co-Terminus Public/Catholic Board

                Board  Board Combined “A” “B”Total

Enrolment 19,000 3,500 22,500

Capacity  24,000  4,000 28,000

Combined Board Accommodation Savings:

Reduced Capacity 5,500 spaces

Annual Savings for reinvestment in Student program, capital repair or maintenance $3.3 Million.

BOARD ADMINISTRATION:

                                                            boards "A"  "B"    Total

-Supervisory Officer Staff/1,000 Students           .32  .85

-Supervisory Officers                                         6      3      9

-Supervisory Officers using Board “A” model                       7

Annual Savings Salary Benefits Overhead                          $350,000

Other Economic and Organizational Benefit

Optimization of School Size resulting in more resources for:

Diverse Program Offerings

School Administration

Student Supervision

Extra Curricular Activities

Larger Parent Base

Student Service Specialization

 IN CONCLUSION:

So about $3.6 million PER YEAR could be saved and reinvested ANNUALLY in student programming that would benefit all students equitably and provide excellence in education so that all students benefit EQUALLY in the use of our public dollars. Remember , the 2 school boards share the same geographical area and serve and compete for the same declining student population. These two boards are relatively small and serve a rural population. Image what we could do in education if we made our priority student programming rather than prioritizing organizational structures? Think about how many more teachers we could hire, resources such as ESL, and other special services if we put "kids first." ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

So Fidel, the Ministry of Education would actually have the money to close the gap between elementary and secondary teachers, and have lots left over to provide better education for all students. Looks like a win-win to me.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

So what? Something I read says the public system as a whole is short by somewhere over $1.2 billion dollars a year. The feds can continue downloading and with scorched earth until the only reasonable thing left to do is pawn everything off to big box privatization. In fact, I think that's the plan!

Neoliberal baloney doesnt work, Jan.

that is not a constructive response. I'm showing that the NDP could provide as one of its planks a consolidated school system that puts parents and students first, and meets the principles of economic and social justice that are the underpinnings of the party. ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

This issue is only growing, and is going to lose the NDP votes in Ontario in the next election. You can count on that.

Why not pledge to come good on McGuinty's broken promise to fix the funding formula?

How Ontario's education funding formula is shortchanging students  Hugh Mackenzie 2007

Fidel, I have read it and promoted that report. I actually approached Mackenzie to take a boo at the funding formula with an eye to wasted resources and duplicated administration. The funding formula could be easily fixed along with consolidation.

On its own - its boring, kind of like get orange.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Sure the NDP will lose votes. That's why in the last election, the last poll taken on support for one school system hit 78% for consolidation. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

47 per cent of Ontarians support the removal of public funding from Catholic schools; 45 per cent oppose it, and 8 per cent are undecided, according to this opinion poll.

The NDP (at ~20% currently) could win votes by supporting a secular public school system. 

Is that why McGuinty's Liberals won 22% of the registered vote?

I really dont think those voters will swing NDP for any reason. Central issue next election will likely be soaring unemployment and rising poverty.

Fidel, you have a lot of wisdom as I have seen it reflected here on many occasions. But maybe when a lot of people are so out out step with Johnny on a particular issue, it's time for Johnny to pause and seriously listen to what many others with similiar political goals as Johnny has, have to say. 

Ben Levin, former Ontario Deputy Education Minister, said to Daniel Kitts: 

No, it has nothing to do with the vote percentages in the last election, since all the parties were aligned with the 45% minority who supported public funding for separate schools.

The significance of the poll is that it demolishes the oft-repeated canard that opposing public funding for Catholic schools would be electoral suicide for any party that adopted it.

Levin is actually the current Deputy Minister, having returned to the job in December, 2008.

Nice to know you've got the Liberal government bureaucracy on your side, eh Fidel?

And I think you people are giving too much credit to the Liberals for having tried to fix school funding, health care, homelessness, the neoliberal economy in nosedive mode, and child poverty when they have not. When the federal Liberals were in power, McGuinty said equalization payments to Ontario were fair and equitable. He changed his tune a year later when Harper became the other 22% tin pot.

If you people dont mind neoliberal economics for skeletal funding of social programs and low taxation on profitable corporations and the rich, then make sure not to vote NDP in Ontario. Youll get more of the same. Before very long we'll have more than just private colleges in this Northern Puerto Rico.

Sure sounding Bush-like here Fidel: "you are either with us or against us." So if NDPer supporters and progressives which incidently, the vast majority I spoke to support consolidation and focussing on investment in education programming rather than investment in infrastructure, it means that they support neo-liberal policies. 

That's rhetoric and creates a black and white picture - so unbecoming of a social democrat. Thanks goodness the federal NDP is more enlightened and adopted a one school system policy. So the federal NDP must be neo-liberal lovers.

Anyway, running on the economy is a given. Just because the NDP adopts as party policy one school system does not mean that becomes what they promote during the next provincial election. There are lots of NDP policies that we have on the books but due to election timing does not get highlighted. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Exactly correct. Which is why I said this above:

Those who fearmonger that the NDP will lose votes are generally the same ones who oppose taking any bold position on any controversial issue at all. Try to imagine the birth of medicare with such worthies at the helm: "The doctors will oppose us, and people love their doctors!"

He's also working on a report to justify tuition increases for Gary Doer, so we know where he stands.

I think comparing Tommy Douglas' idea for medicare and changing the school bus schedule in Ontario is just a little over the top.

We could reduce myriad duplication with paring down ten provincial governments and two territorial. Canada has more government per capita than even the Yanks do. 

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually. Canada is 25th of 30 capitalist countries when it comes to social spending. GATS represents a threat to education across Canada in general, and I refuse to support the gutting of public sector economy as a prelude to even more private schools and private health care in this Northern Puerto Rico.

Soaring unemployment and rising poverty will be the central issue for McGuinty's 22 percenters next election not this nickle and dime funding issue for public schools warped into a Catholics versus the good people of Ontario one. APEC bigots in disguise.

I agree with that sentiment. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

And apparently it's time to be even bolder about medicare in Canada, because that's in danger of falling apart, too. I wonder why? It must be those darned Catholics. Well we'll show them!

Bull-fucking-shit. Those that play the I am more progressive than thou card because you don't agree with me are no different than the religious fundamentalists they claim to be so counter too.

Apparently McGuinty and his 22 percenters arent the only ones hiding behind the issue of faith-based school funding. I dont think we care to know who's behind this ignoble cause

http://mediumonline.ca/?p=1074

So common ground is based on common principles. What are the common principles that New Democrats share - equity fairness, equality, cooperation and interdependence. So how does our present system of education funding of boards and schools in this province not meet those principles and what system of providing education would do so?

But all of that isn't important. I actually am sick of hearing NDPers say the "answer is more money." Just maybe the answer is that money could be better spent. So if we actually focussed on student programming and not infrastructure we might get somewhere.  ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

The federal Liberals projected a surplus of $55 billion over five to six years by 2010. They spent $80 billion "paying down the mortgage" at the expense of everything else that matters and produced the worst overall performing economy of 30 industrialised countries in the 1990's. They accumulated surpluses and lied to Canadians that the money wasnt there for people programs. And the equalization forumula still needs fixing.

2010 is when North American union is expected to happen. It will be the end of Canada and of rule by ourselves and of ourselves. And I wont support the scaling back of any people programs whatsoever in preparation for a police state.

So Fidel is this the response you think Tabuns, Horwath and Bisson should give when asked "Do you support an end to funding separate schools?"

As an example, two-thirds of Canadians surveyed last year are supposed to be against this phony mission in Afghanistan. And yet the NDP didnt receive two-thirds of whatever the abysmal voter turnout was in October.

And I dont think promising to fire a bunch of people from their administrative jobs in downturn is such a good idea. Rae's NDP backed off public auto insurance partly because CUPE made a case against it due to the bad neoliberal economy even then, and partly due to concerns about a probable NAFTA challenge.

I think that with this flunky electoral system the way it is, the NDP should let it ride as a third rail issue same as before. I think that with this economy in tatters and overall discontent with pick an issue in general, there could be a repeat of 1990 in 2011.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

I am still stuck on the comment that bringing Ontario schools in line with the rest of the country and securalizing their public school system in 2009 is somehow considered "bold".  Ontario must be a strange place to live.

 Are these Catholic schools overtly religious or just called Catholic? Are there prayer times, etc.?

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact,

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact,

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre the

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

In fact, youre the guy who wants Doer to drop everything in Manitoba and restore billions of dollars in core funding to PSE that was robbed from provincial governments since 1995!

But when it comes to Catholic students in Ontario, mr generosity for himself isnt so generous anymore.

And you're a fucking idiot.

No soup or lower tuition fees to you. And if Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI and New Brunswick fund only one school system, then why isnt PSE more affordable in those provinces among all else that is lacking?

Well, that's bold alright. However, I'm concerned that it may be a career-limiting move.

Maybe I'm wrong ... maybe this is the time. However, a roughly split vote in Ontario, as I saw somewhere above,  is a vote of Catholics vs non-Catholics and I do see that as a problem.

See demographics here:

Not sure we want to go there ... but maybe as economic conditions worsen, sharing facilities may become feasible. Secularization won't, imo.

And you claim to know something about farming???

You appear to be conflating two important but generally separate (and private!) functions of livestock.

However, I'm ready to learn. Draw me a picture.

Did quite know where to post this but it just shows that separate schools problems are not restricted to Ontario.

Unionist is correct of course, and the ON NDP continue to pay the price of not adequately addressing the separate school issue.

Doesn't the NDP ever want to win an election again in Ontario? 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5835156.ece

Did not quite know where to post this but it shows that separate school problems are not restricted to Ontario.

Unionist is correct of course, and the ON NDP continue to pay the price of not adequately addressing the separate school issue.

Doesn't the NDP ever want to win an election again in Ontario? 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5835156.ece

As has been pointed out again and again and again, a majority of Ontarians support one system and only about 25% support the fund Catholics only status quo.  

Oh that's baloney. It's an old line party legacy issue in Ontariario, and neither Liberals nor Tories have dealt with it properly. It was not the cause for Mike Harris exiting stage right before an election. And it did not prevent Pinocchio and his Liberals from winning a phony majority. Breaking over 50 of his election promises of 2003 didnt prevent Pinocchio and his Bay Street hirelings part deux from winning a 22 percent majority.

According to the federation of elementary school teachers in Ontario, the real issue is a chronic funding gap between primary and secondary schools in this province, persistent since Harris-Eves' and their uncommon nonsense revolution

Listen to Fidel. He's got the formula for getting the NDP back to power: Ignore the issues, attack the Liberals and Conservatives.

Especially when one of the issues is Ontarians' desire to stop paying for Catholic indoctrination.

It may not be a very original strategy, but at least it's ... ummm ... not very original.

unionist, we have a $100 billion dollar infrastructure deficit in Ontario, and the second-hand economic ideology for giving the country to the Yanks real cheap isnt working very well at all. You might think this is an issue that's going to catapult the NDP into 22 percent phony-baloney majority territory, but then I'd have to say you have no idea what youre talking about. And this is why this old line party legacy issue is not taken seriously by the ONDP right now.

If Pinocchio McGuilty wants to be seen and heard doing something progressive instead of the usual banning cell phones and chewing gum and the like, then let him and his Bay Street hirelings shoulder all of the risk for what could be an executive decision for a change. But leave the NEW Democrats out of it. We dont need this stale air wafting over on to our party. McGuinty's going to have a lot more on his plate than pandering to the anti-Catholic bigots next election.

"Anti-Catholic bigots!"

Is that a major problem in Ontario these days?

A lot of the street and TTC shootings attributable to those roving anti-Papist gangs?

Vandalizing Catholic cemeteries and ripping crucifixes off walls, are they?

Hang on while I check my calendar... whoops, it's 2009!

But thanks for the memories, Fidel!

I think that this "issue" would be better sold as a progressive leftist policy and not the election breaker that someone described above. In all likelihood, the 22 percent who voted Liberal last election will not be swinging NDP if our party relies on this one to put us over the top. Personally, I dont think the ONDP will be able to appeal to very many of those relentless voters in the large minority.

The ONDP needs to appeal to younger voters not the grey hairs whove voted old line party all their lives. This is not a fresh new idea in Ontario and therefore, I dont believe it will speak to those 4 million or so Ontarians who didnt vote last election.

 Who said anything about running on "one school system"? That is a red herring Fidel. We have lots of policies on our books that do not see the light of day during the election - thus we pick in choose which ones we campaign on. It would be good to have a policy that the majority support but we don't have to give it top billing.

And you are right, young people don't care - hence the old "religious wars" are passe - they'd rather the "saved money in duplicate infrastructure" go to retrofitting school buildings and making them green friendly, and not having to do endless fundraising. 

And as for ETFO, well they are in bargaining and that is their "pitch." But is the main problem - no!

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Maybe if we "throw the priests and nuns out of our public schools", as unionist mentioned a while ago, and we pawn off the building of new schools with McGuinty's AFP's, money(and debt) will suddenly grow on private money trees for new infrastructure and public-private services. I dont want to be involved in this neoliberalized race to the bottom. We cant run public services according to a neoliberal business model, and I just think we shouldnt be helping rightwing ideologues in Pinocchio's Liberal government to do it either. This government already doesnt properly fund a slew of important public services.

Still obsessing over that image, eh?

Perhaps I was a bit hasty. Just turn off the money tap. They'll be gone of their own accord in no time flat.

We did have nuns in public schools when my dad and his brothers came to Northern Ontario from Montreal. But that was in the 1920s. I suppose they were still in schools for some time after that. My father liked telling the story about flipping a nun arse over tea kettle in the bowels of the school, all over an accusation and undeserved strapping. Three local boys ganged up on my dad, the new kid from Montreal, because he had nice clothes on. Appaerntly he beat hell out of them, too, and one of them retold the same story at dad's funeral. We couldnt believe it all those years.

Well according to the "No We Can't" wing of the ONDP even if it's a minor issue, the Liberals will jump on it and cost the NDP votes, thereby depriving people of hearing "the more pressing issues."   Supposedly the NDP is all set to deliver the most amazing, dynamic, progressive platform, etc. but they can't come into power and do all these wonderful things if there's as much as a sentence about separate schools.

I think it's a gift for the Liberals, and they should run with it next election. They'll prolly steal a bunch of votes from the Tories for it, too. Luck to them, and let them do battle for progressive old line party supporters who always vote rain or shine. And if the ONDP must represent a protest vote for wayward old line party supporters with kids and grandkids in separate schools by the NDP remaining sub-neutral on the issue, then it's a chance I think we should take. It's dirty, I know, but the last week of the last election was pretty nonsensical as far as I could tell.

I think it's a gift for the Liberals, and they should run with it next election. They'll prolly steal a bunch of votes from the Tories for it, too. Luck to them, and let them do battle for progressive old line party supporters who always vote rain, snow or shine. And if the ONDP must represent a protest vote for wayward old line party supporters with kids and grandkids in separate schools by the NDP remaining sub-neutral on the issue, then it's a chance I think we should take. It's dirty, I know, but the last week of the last election was pretty nonsensical as far as I could tell.