The School Funding Thread- Merged

[the 48th regulator]

As a Catholic, I am proud to have my tax dollars go towards a Catholic education for my children.  Our religion requires and ongoing education for our children, this has been going on since 33 AD.

As for the Religion be schooled at home, yes we raise our children in the Catholic faith.  However, I am not trained to teach them the finer points of Baptism, Confession, first Communion, Confirmation, Marriage and Death.  I can teach them about Film and Television lamps, Kilts and Setting up a hooch, as that is my background.

We are the majority religion in Canada, and second to only the Protestants in Ontario.  Where has any Catholic schooling caused any segregation?  Why then would you believe the religious school to Guide those of other faiths be any different.

Wouldn't you all agree that abolishing all, and not allowing Religious schools really is not tolerant?  I find that to be even more segregational.  We must appease the few who do not understand my faith, to make the few feel good?  How is that democratic? 

dileas

tess

 

[TCBF]

So: election-wise, have the Ontario Conservatives snatched defeat from the jaws of victory with this initiative?  Did they hand their opponents a club to beat them with?  Have they alienated many of their key supporters and campaign workers?  Have I used too many cliche's?

 

[the 48th regulator]

So: election-wise, have the Ontario Conservatives snatched defeat from the jaws of victory with this initiative?  Did they hand their opponents a club to beat them with?  Have they alienated many of their key supporters and campaign workers?  Have I used too many cliche's?

Could it be that his opponent in this election is the current minister of education....

What a way to throw your opponent off, put the heat on her current work, to throw her off of her campaigning.

Brilliant chess move on John Tory's part, if I may say so.

dileas

tess

 

[DBA]

I realize that the law says you don't have to be Catholic to go to the Catholic school, but it seems like some schools send non-Catholics away, and wait for them to come back with the law in hand.  Just an impression based on the number of parents I've talked to that have been told no by a Catholic school.

The law does not grant an unrestrictred statutory right for non-Catholics to attend Catholic schools minus a religious component. Some relevant parts of the Education Act. Some circumstances where the right is granted including not having to participate in religious instruction and programs. When the conditions are not met if they are enrolled then they particpate in all the instruction and programs:

Exemption from religious studies

(11)  On written application, a Roman Catholic board shall exempt a person who is qualified to be a resident pupil in respect of a secondary school operated by a public board from programs and courses of study in religious education if,

(a) the person is enrolled in a program that is not otherwise available to the person in a secondary school operated by a public board within the area of jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic board; or

(b) it is impractical by reason of distance or terrain or by reason of physical handicap, mental handicap or multi-handicap for the person to attend a secondary school operated by a public board. 1997, c. 31, s. 20.

Same

(12)  A person who is qualified to be a resident pupil in respect of a secondary school operated by a public board who attends a secondary school operated by a Roman Catholic board for a reason other than the one mentioned in clause (11) (a) or (b) is considered to have enrolled in all of the school's programs and courses of study in religious education. 1997, c. 31, s. 20.

Participating in the religious component of a Catholic school involves the parents so those not willing to make a commitment will most likely not be admitted. This is also why some non-Catholics who send students to Catholic schools aren't completely happy with the arrangement.

 

[Blindspot]

What a way to throw your opponent off, put the heat on her current work, to throw her off of her campaigning.
Brilliant chess move on John Tory's part, if I may say so.

Unfortunately for Tory, his policy isn't flying in Ontario. Something like 70% against. Whether it becomes the major election issue remains to be seen. I think he is in tough in Don Valley West. If you go by lawn signs it's about 8-2 for Wynne.

 

[Nemo888]

Isn't this just a reframe of the previous Tory governments attempt to give vouchers for any school you wish to attend? This was an underhanded attempt to allow people who have their kids in expensive private schools the ability to recoup their school taxes and essentially gut the public school system.

No thanks. Stop kissing rich peoples asses. God there is really no one to vote for.

 

[a_majoor]

Frankly this is or should be a non issue; six provinces already do this without social unrest or a disintegration of the education system.

I suspect the biggest opponents are the teachers unions and school boards, who receive funding "per head", any initiative which increases parental choice (vouchers, charter schools, funding of religious schools) and allows parents to opt out of the "public" school system will be violently opposed. Since Premier Pinocchio is pretty deep in the pockets of the Union movement (and the NDP more so), it is easy to see why they are whipping up opposition to this initiative. It is also a good smoke screen to deflect attention to the Premier's record in office.

My own opinion is anything which increases parental choice is better, this is not the ideal means of doing so, but a step in the right direction.

 

[retiredgrunt45]

Isn't this just a reframe of the previous Tory governments attempt to give vouchers for any school you wish to attend? This was an underhanded attempt to allow people who have their kids in expensive private schools the ability to recoup their school taxes and essentially gut the public school system.

No thanks. Stop kissing rich peoples asses. God there is really no one to vote for.

Essentially yes. It was called the padded school system, by padded I mean it padded the rich pockets with our tax dollars. It allmost  destroyed the public school system.

Mike (the pompus *****) Harris had his head so far up rich peoples asses he got a permanent tan. I think McGinty crawled up there with him, he's looking kind of brown these days.

 

[DBA]

There isn't enough currently enrolled in private schools to make it a problem for public school finances and the rebate/voucher wasn't going to be worth enough to matter to anybody actually 'rich'. It's people of modest means who either can't afford or currently have to make major sacrifices to have children attend private schools that the program would have benefitted most. The teacher's unions hated the idea because it would also provide for the creation of low cost private schools, like charter schools in the US, which would be a major threat to them since they have a vested interest in maintaining the current size of the public system.

You could also take another angle for a rant: the idea was defeated by rich people who didn't like the idea of more plebes being able to afford sending their children to private schools.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

If John Tory's policy allowes us to dictate that whatever is funded in religious schools is dictated by Ontario policy, I'm all for it. They teach the same, act the same, and come under the same rules, let our inspectors in, or they don'r get the funding. What' s wrong with that? They don't follow the rules, they don't get the funding. I don't see the problem. Religious classes are funded outside the sytem, and are not part of the ciriculum. If the Catholics don't do that, which they do, they get cut off. I personally think It's about time we decide, and dictate what is taught in these religious schools. Want them to teach hate and destruction for the Infidel? Then let them do what they want.............in your own neighborhood.

If you vote liberal on this simple issue, vice all the broken promises, Caledonia, taxes, health care, gun control(which provinces have no legal contol over), 150000 high paying jobs lost against 300000 minimum wage jobs created, your head is in the sand.

The liberal gov't has cost you $900.00 a year in the new health tax ( that he PROMISED he would'nt impliment) and the other, well over twenty campain promises he broke. You've recieved nothing for your money. McGuinty is no better than the fedearl liberals when it comes to keeping a promise. THEY DON'T!!! They say what it takes to get elected then spend the rest of the time blaming previous government and lying about the doom and gloom if you don't re-elect them. THEY DO NOTHING, and HAVE DONE NOTHING!! All his promises so far will not be impemented until his third term, over four years from now. HE HAS NOI NTETION OF KEEPING THEM!!!!

State ONE thing that they have done, since being elected, that has advantaged YOU. Not ONE THING. Prove it to me here!!

They have been a legally spineless, promise breaking, overspending government since inception.

The one million dollars they gave to the Toronto Cricket Club, on top of the other vote buying 38 million they spent in the 905  area code was YOUR TAX DOLLARS. For the immigrant vote! They stole that money from you and spent it to buy votes! Wake the F*** up.

Now McGuinty want to install another 38 or so UNELECTED MPPs. How long before he gives THEM the same 40% raise he gave himself, while Ontario workers are pitched onto the street.

Anyone that votes on one issue deserves to be DICTATED by the assholes you elect.

You can put your head in the sand and watch your neighbors end up on the street, with you next, or you can vote for anything other than the liberals.

 

[warrickdll]

The separated school system is nothing but divisive segregation; and, much like school board and health board systems in general, is antiquated and meaningless in Canada today.

Once again our own constitution works against us; having the courts enforcing more religious subsidies, and aspiring to please the cries of the special interest groups.

Aside from a few local historical topics and language, education should be standard across the system, as most public services should be.

Also:
- Private schools (all religious schools are properly private schools) are businesses and must be completely unfunded by public money and free from tax breaks.
- Private schools must all be regulated by the government, and be responsible for all costs associated with monitoring and accrediting.

 

[Simon]

OK recceguy, hows the meds?

There would be no say beyond the 3 caveats, anything could be added onto the curriculum, no different from now without funding, so why fund?

The approach taken by John to shove this issue down the throats of his supporters without consensus smacks of the old Federal Tory arrogance, the primary reason Reform was born. He has already come out and refused to allow debate if elected.

I agree Daltons a jack ass, but Tory aint running Rogers Cable anymore, he better get it straight that he represents his party as its leader not its dictator. That was Ted's job.

Tacticly, its a trainwreck of an idea, its divisive, and is driven by a strategic boardroom decision not actual concern for some terrible social wrong.

The solution is easy, offer an open debate with a free vote, and get on with the election, this one wont let go, its bad for the party and bad for the prospects of power for the PC. This wasnt my idea to toss this stinker out, I aint swallowing it, its knocked the wind out of the campaign, and caused nothing but grief.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

OK recceguy, hows the meds?

Good enough to allow me to look at a number of issues, in order to form an opinion on who I'm going to vote for. Instead of getting wrapped around the axle on a single subject. Unlike most of the sheeple in this country.

 

[exgunnertdo]

... in order to form an opinion on who I'm going to vote for. Instead of getting wrapped around the axle on a single subject. Unlike most of the sheeple in this country.

Part of my problem is that I can't seem to get much info on anything past this issue.  I've only lived in Ontario a  little more than a year.  I don't have memory in my favour, so I'm relying on the media to help educate me.  Unfortunately, all I hear is "funding for faith based schools" and "Liberals lied."  I feel like I need a "none of the above" section on the ballot.  What are the Conservatives promising, other than the school issue?

 

[sneezy]

Part of my problem is that I can't seem to get much info on anything past this issue.  I've only lived in Ontario a  little more than a year.  I don't have memory in my favour, so I'm relying on the media to help educate me.  Unfortunately, all I hear is "funding for faith based schools" and "Liberals lied."  I feel like I need a "none of the above" section on the ballot.  What are the Conservatives promising, other than the school issue?

For one, putting the onus on the criminal, with less bail and longer sentencing. Instead of the McGuinty/Bryant 'Catch and Release' program.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Instead of the McGuinty/Bryant 'Catch and Release' program.

McGuinty's a putz but stop with the election BS....................."catch and release" has been the standard with EVERY Ontario Govt., including the self-proclaimed "tough on crime" Mike Harris.

 

[Shec]

While driving by on Sunday I noticed a sign in front of McGuinty's campaign office advertising "free insulin pumps for the parents of diabetic children". What's next weeks inducement I wonder?

This struck me as a pretty pathetic state of affairs, reduced to buying votes in your own riding Dalton?

 

[ex-Sup]

Maybe I shouldn’t respond to this, but I’ll wade in and add my two cents.

First, I’ll admit that I’m very biased. I’m a practicing Catholic, educated in the Catholic system and now a Catholic secondary teacher (incidentally at the same high school I attended). I know that there are a lot of strong opinions on either side of the argument, which I won’t get into. Rather, I’d like to respond to some of the comments made about Catholic schools and what occurs within them.

My opinion is that Catholic schools are anything but divisive. It may seem like that on the surface, but I’d like to think that what is taught in our schools tries to bind us together. Religion in Catholic schools is not all about learning the faith. There is a lot of time spent looking at ethics, morality and values. In the high school program, Gr.11 students learn about world religions, trying to teach understanding and respect for other faiths.

There are many non-Catholics in our system and we welcome them as we would any other students (I often only find out which of my students are non-Catholics when they ask me what the protocols for mass are). Yes, non-Catholics might have to go on waiting list to enter a Catholic school, but generally spots are found for them. Many non-Catholic parents chose the separate system because of the fact that through our religion program, we teach things like morality.

Some posts have mentioned that religious schools promote segregation and discrimination. I don’t think that I am in any way discriminatory, but as a Catholic student/teacher/coach I have experienced it. There are people out there who are vehemently anti-Catholic and let their opinions be known. I think that our kids need more moral guidance today, and if religious schools provide it, so be it.
Dave

 

[GAP]

I don't see what the fuss is all about

In Manitoba, all schools are eleigble for funding, period. They must abide by the provincial curriculum, and I gather there are some other rules, but it is a non issue.

Here's what I could find on it quickly
Article Link

MANITOBA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES
A REVIEW OF EDUCATION FINANCE IN MANITOBADuring the Period 1994/1995 to 1999/2 000

The “Schools of Choice” policy was implemented by the Province in
1997/98. Under this policy parents/students can choose to attend any school program
within their home division or in another division provided space is available. The sending
school division is responsible for payment of a transfer fee based on a portion of the tax
levy. The parent/student is responsible for transportation with some exceptions. As a result
of this policy the classification of Inter-fund Transfers, which includes payments of transfer
fees between school divisions, increased significantly from $1,586,819. or .1% of total
expenditures in 1996/97, to $10,358,313 or .9% of total expenditures in 1997/98. The level
of expenditure in 1999/00 is $10,244,286. or .8 % of total expenditures.

PRIVATE SCHOOL FUNDING
One of the ongoing issues related to education is the matter of Private
School Funding.
1994 Funding Agreement
In 1994, by mutual agreement, the Province and the Manitoba Federation of
Independent Schools entered into negotiations to develop a new funding arrangement
whereby operational grant funding for private schools would be based on 50% of the
weighted public school per pupil expenditure of the school division in which the private
school student resides. It was estimated that this method of funding would provide an
amount equivalent to 80% of the average public school per pupil funding. The
implementation of this formula began in 1995/96 and was paid in the following
percentages until full implementation in 1997/98:
1995/96 42.5%
1996/97 46.5%
1997/98 50.0%
In addition, independent schools receive grants for Level II and Level III pupils
as well as curricular grants. Shared service arrangements for certain types of services are
also in effect with public school divisions.
The 1994 formula is based on individual division expenditures, and the grant
will vary by a significant amount depending on the residency of the student.
For example, in an urban division where costs are higher and grants are
equalized because of a high assessment per pupil, the private school grant per pupil will
effectively take into consideration a portion of the taxes being paid by the parent in the
division in which they reside.
This system is very close to being a transfer of a portion of property taxes to
private schools as it takes into consideration the portion of expenditures raised by Special
Levy.
In 1998/99, there were 12,801 N - S4 students in the private school system,
with 11,610.9 eligible for grants. The total amount of grants paid was $33.7 million, or
$2901 for each eligible pupil compared to public school grants of $3,839. per pupil for the
same year.
In 1998/99, administration expenditures in the private school system were
$713 per pupil or 12.4% of expenditures, while for the same year in the public school
system administration expenditures were $336 per pupil or 3.6% of expenditures

 

[exgunnertdo]

Yes, non-Catholics might have to go on waiting list to enter a Catholic school, but generally spots are found for them.

My point being - our public school does not have a "waiting list."  If you live in the designated school boundary, the school must take your child.  How come the Catholic school can put kids (that live in the area, but are non-Catholic) on a waiting list until spots open up?  This is the segregation that I refer to.