Not to stir the pot too much but lets hear some discussion on the topics at hand that the politicians are tossing around.
Remember the rules, we all have opinions, but must play nice.
What are your thoughts?
What are the issues that we in Ontario need our representatives to work towards on our behalf?
I wrote a note to the PC's early in the month and got a response today. Thought I'd share it as well as my original note. Hope you enjoy reading it...I'm still not comfortable with this approach and Opa! I like your analogy but doubt their tactics are that devious.
----- Original Message -----
From: The Ontario PC Party
Sent: September 24, 2007 12:04 AM
Subject: RE: Funding Education
Thank you for your note concerning faith based schools. I would have ducked and avoided a difficult issue but I have not done so for these principal reasons.
I am confident that the significant additional investment we have committed to public education in our platform plus other needed measures (flexibility on class caps, reform funding formula) will make a positive difference to today's public education system.
I want to bring the 53,000 students currently in faith based schools into the public education system subject to reasonable conditions. This will help integrate these students within public education. I am trying to build a more inclusive public education system, which includes all faiths and these 53,000 students in particular who are studying in schools today which are outside of publication education and accountability for the standards which we all embrace.
I think the 3 conditions attached to the funding (Ontario curriculum to be taught, teachers to be fully certified and schools to be inspected, students tested) are very reasonable and clear and will bring these students in to public education, ensure an education experience consistent with public education and permit the uniqueness of these families to be respected. No public money would be given to any school which did not agree to abide by these conditions.
We avoid a very divisive initiative to in some way diminish the Catholic school system which has existed since Confederation and which works well providing a quality public education while respecting unique Catholic traditions. Those quality schools would be maintained but we would expand public education to include other faiths so as to be fair.
I do support traditional efforts to encourage school boards to work more closely together to achieve greater value for taxpayers dollars but to try to diminish or dismantle Catholic education would be very divisive and likely resisted strongly by the families of 600,000+ students presently in that system which does a good job for its students.
Again, I am most anxious to bring students presently outside public education inside that system - that's what this policy is about. Ontario would become the seventh province in Canada to extend some public funding to these schools.
I am very anxious to see students and families presently being educated away from public education become a part of public education and get a stake in that system with our curriculum, fully certified teachers and accountable inspection and testing, while respecting their uniqueness and treating all faiths equally.
As you can see from the Fairness Implementation Commission proposal, I am trying to do this in a responsible way with extensive consultation to come. Your e-mail is much appreciated in that regard. We will take two years, with consultation and pilot projects to make sure we get a complex matter rights.
I hope this means of listening and addressing the issue will also give you comfort as to how I would lead and listen as a Premier. I just don't think a real leader can bury his head in the sand and pretend an issue like this doesn't exist.
I hope you find this explanation helpful, that you appreciate my effort to be honest about a difficult issue and that you will give me a fair chance to earn your support on the full range of issues when the election comes in October.
Thanks again for writing.
John Tory
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 9:57 PM
To: The Ontario PC Party
Cc: Elliott, Christine (MPP)
Subject: Funding Education
Dear Mr. Tory and members of the PC Party:
I've reviewed the preliminary comments regarding the funding of faith based schools and I'm wondering have you truly researched the overall cost to administer the enormous number of schools that could potentially evolve? I go back to the early 70's when Bill Davis made the decision of funding the Catholic schools and create a division that is prevalent in our communities today. It essentially grew into the creation of two district school boards with administrative budgets in the millions throughout the province. The cost to oversee the trustees, the staff, the purchasing departments, hr departments, the training that is separate, busing, etc. is worth billions. Add the buildings where the offices of these staff are located and instead of putting it into educating the children in this province we are paying the salaries of the staff who administer and duplicate the process in the other Board office just down the street. Catholic or Public it still adds up to millions of local school board bureaucrats and their staff vying for tax dollars to administer education to our kids.
I don't disagree that everyone's religious rights and freedoms should be heard and be understood but by segregating them will remove the opportunity of teaching tolerance and understanding. My children would never gain such a broad understanding of their muslim, jewish, islamic and catholic friends in an environment that secularizes and divides.
We lived in Ottawa for a number of years, and in our own neighbourhood their were four options of schools -Catholic French, Catholic English, Public French and Public English. On a street with 20 plus kids (all under the age of 14) only 4 attended the same school as my daughter. This street lost a sense of community and our neighbours didn't get to know one another because they didn't have this common reference point in their neighbourhood. I live today in a neighbourhood without a school because our Board can't afford to build one. Tell me is this fair to the over 400 kids bused across the 401 daily? No, but we our Boards can't/won't work together to build a community school so no one wins and the land sits waiting.
Neighbourhood schools are a meeting place and a point of reference for families. Slicing it up, and trying to appease all is difficult, but Canada was built on compromises and if we can't continue to encourage this we will become like many European nations that have been divided due to differences. Creating after school faith based programs may be a solution that could utilize the existing infrastructure and help to build understanding. I disagree with your present policy proposal and recommend a review of the Board of educations across the province with regards to overall budgets with regards to administrative costs and building. Our existing public schools are struggling to renovate and repair, while the Catholic board has built hundreds of new schools because of their lack of infrastructure. In the next 10 years they too will be faced with the renovation and upgrades the Public boards are dealing with today and the cycle continues.
Please understand the full costs of administering education to the schools across this province before promising monies that are needed in the existing schools now. Textbooks aren't available in many schools, windows don't close properly in buildings, roofs are leaking, physical education supplies are non-existent and fundraising monies are being used to supply basic supplies like paper, balls, and repair outdoor climbers in school yards, and computers aren't in many classrooms but are shared by classes on a rotating basis. Take a good look at what we have to deal with now and build on this verses trying to appease groups.
Voting PC will be extremely difficult for myself and my family if you are set on this policy and I don't think many Ontarians are too pleased. I believe in strong communities, strong neighbourhoods and your strategy seems to go completely in the opposite direction of my vision for Ontario.
Regards,
Thinking the same thing...must be thoughts of turkey and pumpkin pie holding us up.
Toronto Star today had an interesting article about the laying off of workers (Whitby residents)at the GM plant and the impact the dollar has/will have on the Ontario manufacturing sector. I'm perplexed, or is it confused, where is the debate on the manufacturing sector and spin off on communities like ours? The facility on the other side of Victoria is a supplier to GM...I wonder how they are going to be impacted? What are the parties saying with regards to taxation policy or R&D funding to create new business? I'm sure UOIT has some interesting research projects underway, but can anything come into the manufacturing side of the world where we see new products come onto the market. RIM was started in Waterloo but a graduate from their University at their Research Park, a provincially funded initiative which saw funding cut in the 80's but still successfully saw new innovation. Where do the politicians see this type of funding initiatives or are we to continually see the manufacturing sector be sent offshore? I'm sure the unionists have something to say, but with pay scales well over the minimum wage, are they willing to take wage cuts to keep their work here in Canada...hmmm an opportunity for discussion I think....
Actually, I think a quote from Richard Linklater (director of "Fast Food Nation") can sum it up best. "Withdrawl in disgust is not the same as apathy".
The problem is that Politicians today lack long term vision and/or the strength to carry through on that vision even when others disagree. It could also be that risk takers are not rewarded in this country, they're vilified. As a result politicians only look from one election to the next and will do whatever is necessary to get re-elected.
Short term results do not translate into long term direction. You have to look at both the short and long view. When you drive your car, you need to know where your going in order to figure out how to get there. Same applies to government. You want to test your local candidate? Ask them what their vision of Canada is 20 years from now and what they're going to do to get us there.
John A MacDonald had the grand vision of a National railroad system and saw it through, despite the opposition saying it was unrealistic and too expensive. His vision connected Canadians and is a source of pride for our nation, even 130 years later.
Tommy Douglas fought for his vision of universal Medicare despite fierce opposition from government and doctors. He also fought to implement his vision of a constitutional bill of rights (even before the UN did it globally). Despite the short sighted opposition of the day, both of these visions turned reality are sources of great pride for our nation today.
Even the hated Brian Mulroney fought for NAFTA. Despite the growing pains and short sighted fear mongering that Canadian goods couldn't compete on a world scale and needed this protection, our economy is significantly better off as a result. It laid the ground work for other free trade agreements, removed trade barriers and made Canadian goods more accessible to world markets. Time has proven that Canadians can not only compete on a world level, but also thrive.
What are our "leaders" of today offering us as their grand vision and are they willing to take the risk to accomplish this vision?
Well said. Leadership takes vision and not just popularity. Unfortunately the media has focused on issues, and because our lives are so fast paced and reactionary, the general public looks to politicians/leaders to react vs planning out the direction and work towards long range goals. In the 70's when there was the "Oil Crisis" there was a great deal of talk about energy efficiency and fuel saving strategies. Step into the 80's and 90's and gas guzzlers were still on the market and selling well. Fuel efficient vehicles were created but alternate energy sources were still not prevelant in the marketplace, yet were available. Cost was prohibitive for alternate energy sources and that equated to no direct government policies which encouraged new development.
I'd like to know what our local representative is moving towards, and how she sees her contribution will effect our lives. Regretably her party wasn't elected, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have a voice or can't have an impact. I understand health care and policing were high on her list, but what direction is this to take?
I look forward to the next 4 years and perhaps some visionaries making an impact like Tommy Douglas or Sir John. Strategizing and planning it out, then working towards the same goals is doable but not without working around various egos, economic barriers and historical roadblocks. Guess that's what good dialogue is all about - just hope everyones ears aren't plugged.