Preventing Discrimination Versus Encouraging Multiculturalism
August 29, 2007Ontario is Canada's most populous province and a beacon for newly arriving immigrants. In fact, well over half of new immigrants arriving in Canada settle in Ontario. On October 10, residents of the province will head to the polls to elect a new government. As the campaign picks up momentum, it is becoming clear that this fall's vote will have major implications for multiculturalism in Canada.
The driving issue that is catching voters' attention in Ontario is public funding for religious schools. As it stands now, Ontario residents have the option to send their children to public non-denominational schools or to public Catholic schools. The leader of the opposition Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, John Tory, has suggested that out of fairness, public funding should be extended to other faith-based schools, while the incumbent Premier Dalton McGuinty is in favour of keeping the status quo.
The issue of funding for faith-based schools is a contentious one. The public funding of Catholic schools goes back to Canada's first Constitution, the British North America Act. As part of these negotiations that helped Canada come together as a country, control over education was assigned to the provinces with the proviso that the denominational schools of Canada's founding protestant and Catholic communities were given constitutional protection.
On the surface, Tory's position seems to be a pretty straightforward case. To fund one religion's schools and not another's qualifies as discrimination. In addition to religious lines, the result is that wealthier families can send their children to private faith-based schools while less fortunate families don't have that option. Certainly this is not fair.
Premier McGuinty argues that extending funding of faith-based schools is a step in the wrong direction. Funding faith-based schools means less students and less funding for the general public system. More than that however, it means that children do not experience the benefit of being exposed to other faiths during their formative years. The same Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects against religious discrimination also calls in section 27 to be "interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians".
After 140 years of growth and immigration, Ontario looks very different than it did at the time of the British North America Act. Modern Canada is much more diverse than just Protestant and Catholic communities. Supporting this diversity is better served by sending our children to public non-denominational schools together, rather than segregating them by faith. This leaves us with a dilemma. Publicly funded Catholic schools have a constitutional protection that is unlikely to change given Canada's complex amendment process. Given that reality, this election issue is a choice between two conflicting aspects of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms-preventing discrimination versus encouraging multiculturalism.
Canadians value multiculturalism. If children are not exposed to the various cultures that surround them, then they cannot benefit from them. As it stands now, the public school system in Ontario offers people a non-denominational education that serves all communities. Yes, it is unfair to fund Catholic schools and not others, but respecting this historical compromise does not mean that we should move away from multicultural public schools to even the playing field. A move made in the name of fairness would be a mistake for multiculturalism.
8 Comments:
Interesting points. I've long thought that official multiculturalism essentializes culture, and I still do. It doesn't encourage a natural evolution of various cultural practices and worldviews into a wider community--integration, but assuredly not assimilation.
BUt, for whatever reason, McGuinty's on the right track. If only he'd bite the bullet, though, and abolish the separate school system, obsolete artefact that it is.
The constitution Act, 1982, provides an amendment mechanism through which provinces can rescind denominational school rights through a simple bilateral agreement with Ottawa alone. Quebec and Newfoundland each secured such an amendment in the 1990s, befoe moving to a single public school system for each official language. In Newfoundland's case, the amendment was proclaimed by the Governor-General barely four months after being requested. Manitoba eliminated denominational schools in 1890, despite a constitutional "obligation" to provide them, virtually identical to Ontario's.
Thus Ontario faces no significant obstacles in moving to a single pubic school system, save for the collective cowardice of Ontario politicians or their contempt for the fundamental equality rights of the governed.
Now the taxpayer piece -
If we spread our education dollars even more widely, we will compound the duplication penalty already borne by the taxpayer in funding four school systems serving overlapping jurisdictions. The per pupil cost of education rises as the density of the population served decreases. Any faith based schools added to the public system will inevitably have higher per pupil costs than any of our existing schools. If you look to Alberta, the system Tory is proposing is similar. It is also the most expensive in the country on both a per taxpayer and a per pupil basis.
Finally, segregated religious schools can't foster a common sense of community or citizenry to the same extent that an inclusive public school can.
I think that mulitculturalism should mean respectful and mutually enriching engagement, not isolation and physically separate development. That engagement just does not happen to the same extent in a culturally homogeneous school as in an inclusive public school.
You can see the effects of widespread religious school funding by looking to England. There, parliamentarians recently considered forcing religious schools to open 25% of their spaces to children from outside of their faith in an attempt to mitigate the negative effects of increasing cultural isolation.
We need to move to a single public school system for each official language. The discrimination in our school systems is untenable and needs to be addressed. The public system is also in a financial crisis exacerbated by the current level of duplication in educational jurisdictions. Communities are facing school closures, classroom supports are being cut, and maintenance backlogs total hundreds of millions of dollars in some boards. We cannot continue to waste money on "religious" school systems where most of the families using them are not demonstrably religious.
School fees associated with many courses and school programs are stretching families to the limit. They are sick of fundraising for essentials. As one parent recently said to me: "I am unsure why there is such a resistance to slaughtering this sacred cow. I am sick of fundraising for every little log and swing seat - let along an entire new piece of playground equipment!"
Let's share the same grass.
Thus the status quo - funding only public and Catholic schools - is inequitable, inefficient, and discriminatory. On the other hand, funding all religious schools - is principled, consistent and defensible, but divisive, isolating and economically unsustainable.
Whereas - a good public education policy - fund only one public school system in both official languages of Canada - is not only principled, consistent, defensible - but also the most economically and socially viable.
Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let’s have them learn together too!
Public School Trustee
Your constitutional arguement for keeping the status quo is unjustified.
The constitutional protection to the Catholic school board only applies to elementary schools. The constitutional argument cannot be used to justify discrimination by funding some faith based high schools and not others.
Changing the constitution would also not be such a major feet. Quebec and Newfoundland & Labradour have obtained the necessary constitutional amendments to move away way from faith based funding. Newfoundland switched to a single school board for everyone. Quebec still funds faith based schools. Funding is determined on language instead of religious requirements (French language schools get more funds).
No harm has come to the provinces that already fund faith based schools. No harm has come to Ontario for the students that are alumni of the Catholic School system. It is time that people stop hiding behind antiquated arguments for justifying discrimination. It is time to make a choice. All faith based schools should be funded or the Catholic School board should be weaned off the public purse.
In my opinion it is wrong to say that faith-based school funding is incompatible with multiculturalism. Just the opposite is true.
It is fine in theory to talk about how young children should be educated together so they will be able to share their different cultures with each other, but in reality a young child starting school does not have the cultural literacy yet established to have much to share. If we want to foster a sustainable multicultural society, it won't happen if we prevent minorities from getting the education they need to preserve their cultures while integrating in Ontario society as full citizens.
While effectively forcing everyone together in the same school may produce a kind of social harmony, it is not necessary to try to achieve social harmony at the cost of the cultural existence of distinctive religious minorities. One can still have social harmony without forcing everyone into the same schools, as shown by Ontario's long experience with Catholic separate schools.
Don't forget: 93% of Ontario's faith-based schools are ALREADY fully funded, and the sky is not falling. Providing fairness to the other 7% is not such a big deal, unless you name is Dalton McGuinty and you are looking for a tire to light on fire to distract voters from your record of broken promises and slush fund scandals.
In the united states public funds for religious schools would not happen. The people would go ape s**t over that due to seperation of church and state in our constitution. That's why catholic and private schools here in the states are not diverse as public schools.
The problem with the public school system is that is does separete church and state at all. Rather is furthers the religion of secular humanism in an environment that is not embracing religious beliefs. Children are reared on the values determined by a select few. Let's face the truth, there is no room in the public school system for any god other than the secular god and the values systm detemined by so-called intelligensia. No wonder parents of faith reject this moral teaching.
Canada is truly a diverse country with many cultures. IMO, this is a great thing that Canada should embrace and support. I think they are doing a good job dealing with this complex subject.
But to try and accomodate the many cultures, religions, and languages that come to Canada, would be way too expensive for the tax payers.
Take a look at this page: http://www.canadavisa.com/languages.html and you can see how this can get out of hand.
Hi. I am happy to see something in danish for a change.Wow. Canada want danish people to immigrate ? Sorry for being sarcastic, but i spend 3.5 years in Toronto.
The expression that i got from living there was, that its not popular to be danish. I cant remember how many times i was told-WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE-DENMARK IS A GOOD COUNTRY.WHEN ARE YOU LEAVING?
What i wonder about is-who is Canada for ?. Is my danish spirit not good enough for Canada ?. Even if i had the right education i doubt i would be welcome.
I had job offers, but not something fancy.But a job that i, as a person was wanted for in that company. What i am getting at here is, shouldn't it be the company that diside who they want working in their company. I have a suggestion, it starts with a work permit. getting to know the country,the Canadian way of living, how things are done and so forth. Finding out if Canada is where i or someone like to live. If i do or another person loves it, would we like to immigrate ?
The job is there already,the home is there already,paying taxes,having a life.Why kick people out ? Why send people packing,just so the company can start all over again,finding the right spirit for the job. Or is that not something immigration care about ?
Canada seem to be a very tolerant spiritet country with somethings,but the Government,immigration and some of its people need to look at things in a broader view, be more tolerant and flexible. And don't forget to hold on to the Canadian spirit.
Merry Christmas and happy new year.
Love from Lotus i Denmark
Post a Comment