Ontario’s PC Premier Doug Ford (elected June 7, 2018) can be described as a stout figure, undeniably bold, and ready to get down to business. It should perhaps come as no surprise that he is clearly priming the province of Ontario to take the same stance.
This has become more apparent in recent months as he has worked vigilantly (may also be read: vehemently) to find and effectively eliminate “inefficiencies” within provincial infrastructure. The stated purpose behind these actions have remained the same: to rid of unnecessary spending in order to save money and reduce the approximate $12–15 billion in provincial deficit.
So where can the government look to find and implement savings, you ask? Well, the same place that all governments have traditionally looked, at two of the most important pillars of any society itself: education and healthcare.
Special Cuts for Specialized Programming
In December 2018, 6 months into assuming his role in office, the Ford government announced that it would be cutting $25 million from public education funding that falls within the “Educational Programs — Other (EPO)” fund.
This funding was previously aimed towards funding school programs that provide students in the province of Ontario with extra skills and support. This is the same pool of funding that provided schools with funding that allowed for extracurricular activities for students such as clubs, activities, excursions and field trips, and physical activities (including equipment and transit).
In addition, this funding also allowed for tutoring and leadership programming and many of these programs were aimed at at-risk teens in low-income areas, according to CBC News. All of these are now left up to school boards to figure out on their own.
This kind of funding will affect all students across the province in different capacities, and especially those who depend on support programs designed to aid students with special needs in addition to at-risk youth.
School boards across Ontario were notified on a Friday evening in December before Christmas after most administrators had left for the day, as reported by the Ottawa Citizen.
Maria Rizzo, chair of the Toronto Catholic District School Board was quoted to have felt “blindsided” by the cuts, and stated that it “[came] a week before Christmas — which is a little Scrooge-y” (Ottawa Citizen).
Additionally, Diane Dewing, president of the Ontario Teachers’ Federation expressed that she is “disturbed” by the cuts, stating: “If we don’t invest in an education that is meaningful for Ontario’s diverse population now, we will pay the price in the future. The students in our classroom today are our future.”
A Wasteful Task
The reason for these sudden cuts that have clearly taken so many educators and education administrators by surprise have been stated to be due to inefficiencies in spending of the fund as it was being offered to school boards across Ontario. It should be noted, however, that not all school boards had programs funded by the EPO, which means that many were funding these kinds of programs on their own.
CBC News has quoted an email from Kayla Iafelice, press secretary for Education Minister Lisa Thompson, stating: “Despite only accounting for less than one per cent of school board funding, this fund has a long track record of wasteful spending, overspending and millions of dollars of unfunded commitments.”
With that being said, it has not been specified as to “how the programs were wasteful or what overspending was detected” (CBC News).
What Dewing said hits home, that we are essentially not caring for our future by not providing the necessary care and support required to nurture the future minds of tomorrow.
It is perhaps fantastical to think that doctors, engineers, lawyers, police officers, and bureaucrats are just born naturally. In fact, fantastical is not even quite the word for it. There are some among us who are born with special gifts and intellect that can amount to anything, but those miracles are few and far between, and even then, need the proper nurturing and guidance to truly apply their talents.
By allowing these cuts, we are neglecting student needs. Ironically, this is something that is preached heavily in teacher education, to be mindful of individual learning needs and to find ways to accommodate to those needs. It is a teacher’s responsibility to do so. However, how much can educators really do if their ability to accommodate their students have been so extremely limited?
The Ontario government has not pinpointed exactly how these funds are mismanaged, but will continue to cut funds under this guise regardless of the greater future implications they hold. However, cuts to specialized programming will impact racial communities in the form of neglecting at risk youth and taking away the support that was put in place to help them succeed and remove them from violence.
And it does not just end there.
The Fear of Birds and Bees
Ford’s predecessor, former Liberal Premier Kathleen Wynne, had introduced a new and revamped sexual education curriculum in February 2015, which was debatably a much-needed update to a curriculum last updated in 1998.
Do you remember 1998? In retrospect, the late 90s and early 2000s were particularly notable for eccentric hairstyles and fashion choices, and an era filled with a plethora of pop bands and artists all competing to get their top hits stuck inside your head. It was the best of times, and, really, that is all. It was the best of times, and arguably, every time since then has spun out uncontrollably into a black abyss.
The year 1998 was a time before the Internet was so easily accessible in the palms of our hands; a time before the widespread LGBTQ+ awareness and acceptance movements; a time before exorbitantly expensive smartphones being in the hands of children was actually commonplace; before social media such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook, and iMessage became our natural forms of communication; a time before cyberbullying, cyberstalking, and the fear of sexual predators luring children over the Internet; and well before the phenomena known to us all as being peer pressured into hyperrealistic forms of cyber-sexuality, such as “sexting” and “sending nudes.”
20+ Years Later
In an age where all these are commonplace, it was refreshing to be reminded that we should not be desensitized to them. Raising awareness and prevention of sexual harm among young people was a focus that Wynne’s updated sexual education curriculum ultimately aimed to accomplish.
In essence, awareness and education of all these facets of the rapidly changing landscape of sexuality in society aimed to help prevent sexual harassment by preaching consent for sexual activity, and awareness of the signs of toxic relationships.
A brief summary outlining Wynne’s updated sex-ed curriculum from Global News shows a map of contents and subject matter that the curriculum would encompass at each grade level, including learning about same-sex relationships, emotional well-being, personal identity, gender identity, and dangers of sexting.
Grade 1: the proper names for body parts (carried over from the old curriculum); exploitative behaviours and feelings
Grade 2: the body changes that accompany physical development
Grade 3: same-sex relationships
Grade 4: the physical and emotional changes that come with puberty; bullying and abuse; and safe use of technology and the internet
Grade 5: reproductive system; menstruation and sperm production; stresses in puberty; emotional well-being
Grade 6: masturbation; stereotypes and assumptions; personal identity (including gender identity and body image)
Grades 7 and 8: anal and oral sex; contraception; prevention of sexually transmitted diseases; sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression; dangers of sexting; sources of sexual health supports | (Global News)
Of course, we, as a collective society, cannot fathom the effects of a good thing when it is presented to us without beating it into oblivion. The updated sex-ed curriculum was met with strong protests and opposition from across the province from parents, politicians, advocate groups, and even some educators.
Most of the opposition cited that the sex-ed curriculum was not appropriate and many parents expressed that they were upset that they were not consulted. Admittedly, some educators, too, expressed discomfort in covering much of the content and stated that they had not received enough training or preparation to delivery such material.
In his natural deconstructionist style, Doug Ford had vowed to scrap Wynne’s sex-ed curriculum if he won, stating that the Liberals “have introduced the sex curriculum based on ideology — a curriculum that teaches sensitive topics starting at an early age” and that his government would restore the old sex-ed curriculum until a more “age-appropriate” one can be implemented (Global news).
A large majority of those who opposed Wynne’s sex-ed curriculum can be summed up as religiously conservative folks who view the very idea of knowledge or conversation regarding sex as grave an impropriety as the act of premarital sex itself. However seemingly backwards this may be in 2019, these are strong views and sentiments that large swaths of communities hold and refuse to sway from.
Whether Ford ever personally disagreed with Wynne’s sex-ed curriculum or not, he likely capitalized on the heat the Liberals received because of the revamped curriculum, and further curried public favour in being vocal about restoring the 1998 curriculum if elected (which he did).
Kathleen Wynne was in no ways a saint, but Doug Ford undoubtedly has a particular way of making her shine. Wynne made mistakes, but revamping the sexual education curriculum cannot and should not be included as one of them. The former Ontario Premier was truly onto something with its introduction, and had it been allowed to remain, a new era of sexual awareness among the leaders of tomorrow may have planted the seeds for widespread societal change. Just what kind of a future that could have been, we shall now never know thanks to Ford.
Parental Guidance Should Be Advised
An important question must be posed to those parents who strongly opposed the new curriculum: the majority of you stated that you were uncomfortable with your children learning the material covered in the new curriculum, but how comfortable or prepared are you to have those conversations with your children?
Will you teach your sons about consent? Will you teach your daughters about not giving into sexual peer pressure from boys? Will you speak to your children about gender identity, body image, and masturbation?
Can you say, with complete confidence, that you will instill the values in your sons to not sexually harass or assault females they encounter throughout their life?
It is a shame that the young people of today — the future of tomorrow — must endure such turmoil in regards to their own education and publicly entrusted upbringing. If they were fully aware and had their own say in the matter, one must wonder what they would have to say about who we, as adults, are as people in their eyes.
OSAP: The Opposite of Wynne
Continuing the obsession with undoing Liberal policies put in place by his predecessor, Ford wasted no time to further his attack on another level of education in the province.
The Wynne government announced new changes to the funding model of the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) in 2016 which would take effect beginning in the 2017 school year. The government touted “free” tuition for students of families with less than $50,000 in annual income. This would be made possible through increased amounts issued in non-payable grants, which would result in significantly decreased loan amounts.
Wynne believed this new model of funding would provide more students access to post-secondary education and make education more affordable to a greater number of people. In truth, free (or reduced costs for post-secondary education) has been a subject that student groups have advocated for and rallied behind for years.
As it turned out, however, there were concerns about the cost of this initiative as Ontario’s Auditor General found the scheme to be “more expensive than promised” at approximately “50% higher than previous estimates” (Toronto Star). This discovery was said to reveal some of the wasteful spending and mismanagement of the Wynne government.
Grace is Gone
Doug Ford rallied on being more responsible and establishing “a new culture of fiscal rigour and transparency in the province’s finances” (Toronto Star). So, as promised, the Ford government effectively eliminated free tuition for low income students in January 2019, and instead introduced a 10% drop in post-secondary tuition province wide. If that was not enough, it was also announced that the 6 month grace period before students were required to start paying back their student loans would also be eliminated.
This three-part decision, while it may seem simple enough, has wide-spread consequences that the province and its students could never have been ready for.
For beginnings, it affects students negatively, especially those that must balance work and school at the same time. For some students who have been interviewed by media, this either forces them to postpone their plans for graduation, or destroys those dreams entirely. Eliminating accessible tuition works to create a barrier and divisions within society that Wynne was trying, at best, to dissolve.
The elimination of loan repayment grace period can be seen as a cruel and mean move to many, because how are students expected to start paying back their tuition when they have not even had the opportunity to secure a job for which they attended university and accrued student debt for anyway? Especially in a market where all jobs, even at entry level, require some kind of prior experience. The running joke is that all jobs want experience but none want to be the first one to provide it.
Complicated Consequences
The third part is more complicated. In announcing 10% tuition cuts across the province, Ford has put undue pressure on universities and colleges to find ways to make up for the difference. The province has not announced any offers to universities or colleges to cover the differences, which could amount to shortfalls of $80 million from the college system and over $300 million from the university system.
This comes as a “significant” blow, as explained by The Globe and Mail, as “Ontario universities [and colleges] have among the lowest levels of per-student funding in the country, and revenue from tuition and operating grants combined have been flat since 2010, according to the Council of Ontario Universities (COU).” The average amount of savings that the 10% tuition cut would translate to for 2019–2020 is about $340 for college students, and $660 for university students
It should be pointed out however, that this poses other risks across the post-secondary education system, and certain groups of students could be at greater risk. The Globe and Mail explains that “in recent years, universities and colleges have turned to foreign students to boost revenues as government funding has stagnated, but it’s unlikely they could make up the shortfall caused by the cut to domestic student fees.”
Tuition for international students would not go down, in fact, they might increase:
International student fees will not be subject to the cut and would remain unregulated at universities, meaning they could be increased. At colleges, fee increases for international students are capped at 20 per cent a year. | (The Globe and Mail)
In additional to this, there are other consequences that have begun to spring up as a ripple effect of the tuition cuts. In addition to 10% tuition cuts, Ford government also announced that student fees at universities and colleges will also no longer be mandatory.
This poses a risk on multiple fronts to post-secondary education and the overall student experience in Ontario. Here is a point-form list of some of the ways the new Student Choice Initiative affects students and beyond.
- students will now have the option of opting out of ancillary fees
- most fees for student / campus related related services become optional (including campus newspapers, student unions, clubs, etc.)
- question of how opting out will affect transit plan initiatives (some student fees pay for municipal bus passes, such as University of Toronto-Mississauga)
- defunding campus newspapers infringes on freedom of speech, which goes against Ford’s core values of democracy and free speech
- question of discrepancies in student health and dental coverage
- possible ostracizing of students as members vs. non-members
- creating divide among post-secondary student communities
- risk of costs of deregulated programs increasing
- potential for universities and colleges to offset 10% tuition cut by accepting more international students to help cover funding shortfalls (risk of treating international students as cash cows)
- limited seats in universities and colleges for domestic students due to possible increase in international student acceptance rates
- damage to economy by potential influx of international students, who may be unwilling or otherwise unable to invest in economy
- increase to local housing and rent as international students may be willing to pay more for living accommodations
- brunt of monetary shortfalls and stresses on economy to be borne by local students and residents.
Irony: Where is the Money Going?
Perhaps the most ironic piece of news that came out at the same time (literally on the same day: January 17, 2019) as the news of the OSAP cuts, was about an increase to government housing allowance. Yes. This actually happened.
The same day the Ford government’s announcements caused frenzies in the news and in households across the province, Huffington Post reported about MPPs quietly raising their own housing allowance by 20% because cost of living in Toronto had gone up.
Ontario legislators found this was necessary because “they [have] been been paying out of their own pockets to subsidize housing in Toronto’s hot real estate market” (Huffington Post).
Ontario MPPs find it hard having to pay for living accommodations out of their own pockets, you know, like regular people do. After all, they are not regular people. They are may look like regular people, but they are protected by the privileges of power and government, and are relieved from the burden of having to pay for housing like regular folk.
The rental allowance for Ontario MPPs has gone up from $1910 to $2300. Cabinet ministers and opposition leaders saw slightly higher figures. Surely, Ford does not find this to be an inefficiency for salaried legislators to also have their housing covered and would sooner look elsewhere, such as education and healthcare, for cost-saving efforts.
Duly noted.
An Enemy Named Autism
If you thought Doug Ford was going to stop at all those cuts, that is perhaps wishful thinking at best. For Ford, the next enemy was autism funding — an incredibly bold move against a very sensitive and crucial service.
In February 2019, the Ford government announced that they would be overhauling autism services in the province and would be providing cash directly to families for them to seek out the care themselves rather than have to wait.
To put things into perspective, there is reportedly a waitlist of 23,000 children, mostly under the age of 6 (Toronto Star). Support and care for children with autism can be expensive and is not covered by OHIP, neither are there any plans for them to be included under OHIP coverage any time soon. Therapy can range from $50,000 to $80,000 per year, but under the overhaul, parents of autistic children would receive only $5000 anually.
Additionally, the Ford government wants to transition these children into regular, full-time schools and integrate them into a school system that is not yet equipped to handle the amount of care these children require.
In addition to not having sufficient resources to support students with disabilities, integrating these children into full-time classrooms will prove to be detrimental to those children and cause further strain to schools and school boards.
Many of the children receiving intensive therapy under the current system are on a modified school schedule, where they might attend half days or only a couple of times a week. The cut in funding could leave parents with little choice but to put their children in school more frequently, or even full-time. | The Globe and Mail
Many school boards, as reported by The Globe and Mail, have written to Education Minister Lisa Thompson, voicing their concerns.
Children with autism require individualized care, support, and attention. As such, these are already areas in which the Ford government has looked to cut funding as well, so there is a legitimate concern as to how integrating these children into full-time classrooms should be made possible.
Ontario Minister Lisa MacLeod has gone as far as to tell parents via an interview with CTV to use the $5000 in funding to purchase iPads for their autistic children (Huffington Post). Because, of course, that alone will help, right?
The announcement of the overhaul has been met with furious backlash from parents, advocate groups, and school boards alike. The Ford government has since backtracked and launched consultations on the matter before going ahead with the announced changes.
One has to wonder, however, that if this elected Progressive Conservative government is so ready and willing to go after the province’s most vulnerable, then what else are they capable of?
Testing Teachers
In an effort to improve math scores across the province, the Ford government proposed that all new teachers must prove their proficiency in math skills in order to receive their licence to teach.
Soon after, in April 2019 it was announced that the province is considering an annual math test for all teachers, regardless of whether or not they teach math.
CBC News explains:
Teachers would be required to pass the test in order to continue teaching. It would apply to teachers of both primary and secondary school, even if they do not primarily teach mathematics, senior government sources told The Canadian Press. | CBC News
This latest idea apparently arose in a question period, during which Doug Ford is noted to have said: “I have an idea: Why don’t we test all the teachers, rather than just new ones, on learning how to deliver math?”
It is indeed an interesting concept, and perhaps there should be more like it in place in our society. For example, testing the wit, prowess, and political acumen of elected officials yearly to ensure that they know what they are actually doing.
This action jeopardizes the jobs of teachers across the province, even those who are great at their jobs and are passionate about teaching. Harvey Bischof, the president of the union representing secondary school teachers in Ontario, called the idea “nonsensical” and stated in a phone interview with CBC News: “High school teachers in Ontario are subject specialists. If you’re not qualified to teach math, essentially, you don’t. And if you are qualified, you don’t need a test.”
Bischof aslo added: “Imagine taking an effective art, history or geography teacher, and finding out they can’t solve a quadratic equation, and preventing them from teaching the subjects that they’re highly qualified to teach” (CBC News).
In the same article from CBC News, it is explained that only 49% of grade 6 students met the provincial math standard, as evaluated by the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO), ansis down from 54% in 2013–14. Scores for students in grade 9 are similarly lower than expectations, being deemed “unacceptable” by Education Minister Lisa Thompson (CBC News).
Increasing Class Sizes to Balance the Budget
If that was not enough, the Ford government’s first official budget outlined that they would be increasing class sizes across the province. It was mostly assured that frontline teaching jobs would not be affected, but that statement has been proven to be false in the wake of school boards issuing surplus notices to teachers in the recent weeks following the budget announcement.
The move to increase class sizes across the province is seeing some boards such as those in the North Bay, Nipissing, and Parry Sound areas, issue surplus notices to almost half the teachers on their boards. There are also growing concerns that some courses may no longer be offered any longer, which may impact students’ options for post-secondary learning as well.
Larger boards, such as Peel District School Board in Mississauga, Brampton, and Caledon, have also predicted layoffs for the coming school year. In many cases, teachers who had just landed full-time teaching positions are now seeing themselves without a job entirely.
It has been further forecasted that over the next few years, as much as 10,000 teaching jobs may be eliminated from Ontario altogether. If the province proceeds with math testing for teachers, that number can be expected to rise anually.
Students, teachers, parents, and others have rallied in protest of these changes at queens park on April 6, 2019, for the government to reverse their decisions concerning public education. No such reversal has been made by the Ford government as yet.
A Place to Grow (?)
This is not just a summary of the actions of Ford and his government, but rather a reminder of the responsibility that we have as people and as voters. Doug Ford is just one person. He is the Premier, but we are The People, and ultimately, he is in our service, and not the other way around.
Premier Ford is passionate about many things. He is passionate about buck-a-beer, about horse racing (the Ford government has pledged to fund the horse racing industry at $10 million every year for the next 7 years), about legalizing tailgate parties, and spending $89,000 on redesigning the Ontario trillium logo because it looks like three men in a hot tub. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with the implied image of three men enjoying each other’s company in a hot tub, but it just does not scream that Ontario is a “Place to Grow” as Ford’s new slogan on Ontario licence plates does.
Note: it is unsure, with all these changes taking place, who exactly will be doing the growing in Ontario going forward.
Ford’s Legacy
Doug Ford is noted by Toronto Star to view education as his primary enemy. The Premier himself has a high school education, and is noted by some sources to have attended Humber College for a month or two but never having finished any formal education beyond high school.
It is a wonder, then, how much confidence (if any) can be instilled in someone like Doug Ford to make decisions on education when he does not understand nor value education himself.
Doug Ford has taken it upon himself to highlight inefficiencies in the education system, both at the public and post-secondary level. A lot of the changes will have long-lasting impact for years to come, and they have taken most residents of Ontario completely by surprise.
Ford’s actions are swift and questionable, and sour news is often followed by other bits to encourage people to forget. Take, for example, the elimination of free tuition but the swift announcement of the 10% tuition reduction. Ford makes an attempt to appear balanced, at least in the eyes of the public.
When it comes to the bit about horse racing and buck-a-beer, and legalizing tailgate, it is a little less balanced. It is especially so on the heels of even more cuts to health care, in which the Ford government is squeezing funds and consolidating health agencies, again in an effort to restore financial and systematic efficiencies. In relation to healthcare, the Ford government has also defunded safe injection sites across Toronto, leaving them to run on public donations going forward.
For those who are keen to seek out knowledge on their own, there is also bad news on that front, as the Ford government has cut Ontario Library Services budgets in half.
The Good, The Bad, The Wicked
So what exactly will become of Ford’s Legacy? The is still some time to go before the next Ontario election in 2022, so there is still time for things to turn around or get worse with Ford.
Ford has battled with appointing his family friend as commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police as well as appointing failed PC candidate as the first ever full time EQAO chair, a job specially created for the individual with a $140,000 salary. These are not unusual things for a politician to do, but they do highlight some of the Premier’s own hypocrisies.
There is questionable spending in the way Ford allows his MPPs to raise their own housing allowance, in spending for a pointless logo redesign, in funding horse racing over autism and education, in defunding healthcare, and in creating a seemingly unnecessary job with such a high salary as the chair of the EQAO. One might ask what Ford’s priorities really are, and they would be correct in doing so.
Report Card
Premier Doug Ford is just getting comfortable in office, and a slew of changes are underway in Ontario. Education is at its lowest and will arguably continue to decline, because none of the changes announced really protect the quality of education in the province.
The Ford government is unable (read: incapable) of acknowledging the damage that is being done to the quality of education in this province. It is removing the support, resources, and the funding to make education accessible and sought after. Instead, the Ford government is putting in place changes that will make it harder to access quality education and is further creating divide.
This government does not care about education. It does not care about the quality of education or even the quality of life of its constituents. This government is interested in looking at where more cuts can be made, and like other governments before it, it has made cuts in education and healthcare.
And libraries, of all places.
The Ford government does not care about ensuring a healthy and secure future for the province by investing in future leaders and professionals. In fact, there is no regard for professionals at all, and that can be seen in the way educators and health specialists are being let go across the province just in an effort to save money.
In his obsession to undo everything the liberals have done, Doug Ford has effectively altered the very identity of the Progressive Conservative party. The Progressive Conservatives at a glance, appear less their own political party with their own ideals and principles and more so one that is fixated on simply being anti-Liberal.
In a democracy, we choose the officials we wish to represent us and entrust upon them the power required to do so. When those individuals take that power and abuse it in ways that harm the pillars of society which we rely and depend on, it is an attack on the people — the voters.
Utilitarianism constitutes of making choices that will do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It should always be in a politician’s best interest to preserve the greatest good for the greatest number, and this is where this government receives a failing grade.
Doug Ford has destroyed education, and for the most part, we, the people, continue to allow it.
Naveed Khan is a writer and educator. Follow Naveed Khan on Instagram and Twitter — his work can also be found at www.naveedk.com.
