Cynicism greets school reprieve

By Ian Palmer

The Ontario government’s decision to revisit its controversial school funding formula has been met with cynicism from all sides. With 1.9 million square feet of excess space, the Ottawa Carleton District School Board had predicted about 15 to 20 school closures — a decision it would have made next month. But the one-year provincial reprieve means the board may opt for only four or five imminent closures.

While the new December 1999 deadline provides a glimmer of hope for some of these facilities, many wonder why Premier Mike Harris made his announcement just over a month before the original deadline was to have expired.

“We were being brought to the scaffold and all of a sudden a messenger from the government said, ‘Stop. It’s a stay of execution’,” says Ottawa Centre NDP nomination candidate John Crump, spokesperson for the Coalition for Public Education.

“It’s been greeted with temporary relief and great cynicism. This government waits until the last minute and acts only when lots of pressure is brought to bear.”

Doug Carter, president of the Public School Teachers Federation, is also skeptical.

“The ministry was taking great delight in antagonizing the Toronto school board,” says Carter. “Harris and his advisors finally sat down and realized this was going to cost them votes.”

While agreeing that the concession was politically motivated, Centretown trustee Albert Chambers says communities can now use this to their advantage.

“One could hardly not welcome it. There are now a number of things the government is willing to reconsider,” says Chambers. “It’s a sign they’re willing to listen. My hope is that boards across the province will continue to work with the government.”

However, the government’s strategy of blaming the “fear-mongerers” for its “about face” suggests its intention may be to put the issue on the back burner until after the next election, suggests Ottawa Centre MPP Richard Patten.

“I expect an election in April, May or June,” says Patten. “He postponed it so it won’t be a problem during the election. I don’t think he understands how weak his formula is.”

The formula was criticized in the Area 3 Community Working Group report, which includes Centretown. The group says that it will not alter its recommendations until the board agrees to conduct a study involving representatives of those being affected by this in the community.

“We are giving our report just as we wrote it, as if this didn’t happen,” says Bill Filleter, a member of the working group. “We’re asking for an extension of the mandate so a study can be done on the inner-city schools.

“The study would look at all the schools and develop criteria for evaluating schools to determine space and programs.”

Wendy Bennett, also a member of the working group, says she and her peers are “willing to work at it” over the next year.

“My first reaction was relief,” says Bennett. “There’s more time for rational work to be done. It was very clever to see how Harris made it look like he was a hero.”

Prior to the announcement, community working groups complained about the short period of time they were allotted to make their decisions and the inaccurate data provided by the board. Though some working groups did make recommendations for closure, the Area 3 group refused to make suggestions for closure due to these reasons.

“What’s needed is better data and more context,” says Crump. “This is a political process. Here in Ottawa-Carleton, we’re in a unique position. We’re the only school board in Ontario willing to close schools. The board is being irresponsible. It’s democratically challenged.”

Carter says the teachers federation isn’t going to get involved in the school closure debate.

“We aren’t involved in identifying schools,” says Carter. “We want all the information put before the trustees. We want parents to get involved. From the union’s point of view, my role is to say we’re still going to have the same number of students and teachers and to make sure proper transfer procedures are followed.

“We don’t want to run education facilities in our city. The education system belongs to the parents and their children. Parents have to take ownership.”