As Ontario children prepare to head back to school next week, public education will be top of mind for parents, as well as for politicians seeking support in the Oct. 10 election. Voters who have watched many school boards struggle year after year to offer a decent education and balance their budgets rightly expect to hear concrete solutions to funding problems that continue to undermine the system.
The good news is that Liberal Leader Dalton McGuinty, Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory and NDP Leader Howard Hampton all agree the current formula on how schools are funded is flawed. But each must still set out a firm plan for how and when they would fix it.
McGuinty's plan starts with a $309 million top-up over the next two years to temporarily plug holes in the provincial funding formula, which has been criticized for not reflecting the real cost of education.
The new money all but ensures no messy school board budget battles will erupt during the provincial election campaign this fall. McGuinty, who ran last time around on fixing funding problems in the education system, clearly did not want that kind of publicity in a tight race.
As welcome as the new school funding is, McGuinty's plan still falls short in a crucial way. In it, he promises a long-overdue review of the province's education funding formula, which has left school boards contorting themselves to keep their books in the black.
But inexplicably, that review will happen only "by 2010," assuming voters return McGuinty to office. Why are the Liberals prepared to wait three more years before they take a comprehensive look at the funding formula and take steps to close that gap permanently?
McGuinty's opponents fare little better.
Tory has promised to increase funding for public education for the coming school year by $800 million. That would rise to an increase of $2.4 billion by 2011-12, including $400 million to implement his plan to extend funding to faith-based schools.
The extra money is badly needed. But Tory has not put a timetable on his promise to review the funding formula and give school boards more flexibility to meet local needs.
Hampton, too, says he would fix the education funding formula. But voters still do not know how or when he would do it.
Fuzzy promises on delayed or non-existent schedules simply are not good enough where the education of Ontario children is concerned.
True, McGuinty deserves credit for pulling the public education system out of a spiral since taking office in 2003. Former Conservative premier Mike Harris's confrontational style and controversial reforms in the late 1990s had sparked turmoil throughout the system. Over the past four years, the Liberals have pumped $3.7 billion into the sector, reduced primary class sizes and helped restore peace between school boards, unions and government.
Yet many school boards are still straining to pay the bills. Some have stayed afloat only by dipping heavily into reserve funds. And the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board remains under provincial supervision after failing to balance last year's budget.
School boards need to take a hard look at their spending. But the province's education funding formula obviously still needs work.
McGuinty, Tory and Hampton all appear to recognize that fact. Now, they should commit to conducting a full review of education funding as soon as possible after the election.
12 comments:
let's all remember mike the knife and education.
John Tory, cannot be trusted. If you think McGuinty is hard to trust, we'll be in for a nasty surprise.
Look at the federal tories, and their broken promises. Oh, all you need is 2 brain synapses, and an internet connection to find out what they were.
Do you qualify?
You are so predictable...can't seem to post with some snide remarks. And I keep telling you if you are going to do character assassination YOU are the ones who has to post the backup.
What proof do you have that John Tory cannot be trusted?
Second cheap shot was addressed in a previous posting where I asked what was the education budget when Harris came into power and what was it when McGinty took over? Substantial increases each year and if you visit the teacher's union website you will find that a good portion of the increases went to teacher's salaries and pension fund.
what province do you live in? Are you going to parrot the same nonsense about increased spending by Mike Harris? We all have heard the selective reasoning behind that. Spare us.
But, let's say for one minute, that you are correct. I'll humor you.
So humor me. Read this... http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/250277
No tell me. Why, if Mike Harris was the golden boy you say he was, and did in fact increase spending and didn't make cuts in regards to health and education, is John Tory distancing himself from Harris, not even uttering his name?
Why is that?
Don't humor me; just tell me what the budget figures for education were pre-Harris and what they were when he left.The article doesn't really tell you much except that the liberals (Sorabaro) and the unions (Smokey Thomas)are running scared.
Harris budget cuts impact on nursing..."If we compare the years from 1998 to 2002, we find that there are 3,536 more RNs (an increase of 4.5%).
Let's look at McGinty's record on health care...."While the Health Ministry says it has created 3,062 new full-time jobs for nurses,(THEY PROMISED 8000) 1,000 of those are in fact temporary, contract positions.
These FACTS are supplied by the ONA.
As far as Tory distancing himself from Harris this is understandable considering the nativity of some of the voters who are taken in by the propoganda (al a national socialism) of the liberal party.
Tory's "bristling is not right but it is politics.
propaganda?
Good god you can't be serious. Are all you conservative supporters -that- paranoid?
Oh my god the boogeyman liberals are filling everybody's minds with myths and heresay!!!
I'm sorry but if in fact the conservative record speaks for itself and the conservatives did in fact improve health and education as you say, far *beyond* some increases to keep up with a large increase in demand, then why not be proud and run on that??
That has to be the most ridiculous paranoia I have ever heard.
And that is my position.
and just to clarify, you are saying Mike Harris never made any kind of cuts to education or health, correct?
No job cuts or funding for the environment ministry?
p.s. oh and I noticed that your figures for Harris's nurses forgot to mention, he missed his target by like, a whole lot too... is that a, broken promise??? oops.
You call them cuts I call them a realignment of duties and services. This is normal with any change in management and the results will vary depending on your position.
What was the big issue in education? Fewer teachers? NO! It was teachers spending more time in the classroom and less on "prep" time. Reduce the cost of Administration? YES! Bloated salaries at school boards.
Environment? I believe that testing was shifted to private labs but there was no change in the testing protocol; ie: how often, standards, etc. so don't try to sneak in the incompotence of Walkerton officials.
If you have 5 nurses on the payroll today and 6 nurses on the payroll tomorrow I don't see how you can claim cuts were made. Goal not acheived...now that is another matter.
I think John Tory would be surprised if he shifted more to the Harris approach and quit listening to some of his advisors.
He won two majority governments based on his cost and tax cuts and if you honestly looked at the opposition to his platform they were the unions and social in-activists and I truly believe if Eves had continued the Harris platform the conservatives would have won a third majority.
There is no question that Walkerton, SARS, etc. wrongfully "hurt" the tories and the media did a real hatchet job on Harris.
THAT IS MY POSITION.....COMMENTS CLOSED.
ooooh no we sure don't want -any- discussion on the matter noooo. Gee I thought that's what blogs were for?
No I don't buy your 'shifting or realignment' of duties nonsense. And I think you will find that it was agreed that the cuts, yes I said CUTS to the environmental services contributed to the Walkerton tragedy. Conservatives are desperate to ward that one off I know. We know 700 jobs were slashed, and funding was cut, so how was this made up?
Some shit about private labs? I've some swamp land for ya...
There were cuts to education and health, and the 'increases', as you seem desperate to point out, never made up for them, and certainly didn't come close to keeping up with the population growth and the increased demand. Basically, under Harris' watch, he let education and health deteriorate. We've all seen the news reports about schools falling apart.
As for wages, one of my peers (actually I know 4 very well) I worked with is a high scool music teacher. And I don't think he's hiding any gold bars...
You are free to continue posting but I don't have the time or inclination to go over the same propoganda that you are trying to pass off as objective discussion. You might want to continue this in YOUR blog where I am sure you will get volumes of comments and discussion.
I don't believe I posted propaganda, and the fact you refuse to wade into this is a clear sign you can't face facts.
I won't disagree the liberals haven't lived up to the expectations, but that does not exempt the tories from criticism or automatically labels it as propaganda.
There is much to be concerned about this election, as far as the tories are concerned, as I pointed out they are clearly trying to distance themselves from Mike Harris's common sense revolution, which I find odd, and we are hearing the same tax cut mantra while promising to increase spending. We don't hear how much of that is simply to keep up with demand, and how much goes beyond to actually improve, nor how we are going to afford such huge increases in spending while giving tax cuts and balancing the books. The tories showed last time how good they are at cutting everything in site yet not being able to balance the books.
My blog hasn't a lot of traffic yet, but I haven't sent links to many of my friends yet and it's relatively new.
What I do hope to do that's different form here, is hopefully discuss all parties, and while bias is inevitable, hopefully that doesn't blind us from seeing the truth...
"He won two majority governments based on his cost and tax cuts and if you honestly looked at the opposition to his platform they were the unions and social in-activists and I truly believe if Eves had continued the Harris platform the conservatives would have won a third majority."
that's completely funny. Now I can really see the rose colored glasses on you.
The tories lost the election because people were tired of the common sense revolution. Yes Harris won 2 majorities, but hey Cretien won 3. Then Martin won a 4th election, albeit a minority. They saw what 2 terms did and voted against it. I dislike McGuinty and always have, and I believe firmly people didn't vote for McGuinty, they voted against the tories.
That's an important thing to note.
Post a Comment