Skip to main content

Replacing school boards with Community School Councils will likely mean the students who need the most help will get the least help

 On Wednesday  April 7, I raised, in Question  Period, my concerns with the  government's  plan to  eliminate school boards and put in place Community School Councils (essentially Parent Councils under a slightly different  name).   A considerable problem  with the  Pallister Conservative government's approach is that the schools where the most help  is needed will likely have the least help.  My question and the Premier's response are below.  While the Premier may say he wants to help children who are less well off, his plan is likely to achieve the opposite.  

Schools in Low-Income Areas - Parental Engagement Concerns

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, the government wants to eliminate school boards. The government wants to use school boards as the scapegoat for their own failures in education. To improve school performance, the government needs to provide most help to students who are struggling the most to improve.

      A major problem with the government's proposal is that the very schools which are located in low-income areas where children are struggling the most are the very schools where engagement of parents and effective community school councils will be the least likely.

      Why is the government going to implement in Bill 64 a system in which those children who need the most help will receive the least help?

Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Unlike the members opposite, Madam Speaker–and this member just personified it with his comments–ill-advised comments at best–we won't give up on the parents of this province, nor will we give up on children who live in poverty.

      Madam Speaker, these reforms are designed to assist and uplift what is the greatest opportunity for equality in our society: the public school system, which the Leader of the Opposition has never been part of and refuses to support now with his own decisions.

      So, Madam Speaker, we will not give up on the public school system. We will not give up on the teachers in it. And we will most certainly not give up on the parents who live in poverty in this province.

      Our reforms are designed to assist most of all this group of children and these people.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dougald Lamont speaks at Meth Forum last night to present positive ideas to address the epidemic, while exposing the lack of action by the Pallister Conservatives

Last night at the Notre Dame Recreation Centre in St. Boniface, at an Election Forum on the Meth Crisis in Manitoba, Dougald Lamont spoke eloquently about the severity of the meth epidemic and described the Liberal plan to address it.  The Liberal Plan will make sure that there is a single province-wide phone number for people, or friends of people, who need help dealing with meth to call (as there is in Alberta) and that there will be rapid access to a seamless series of steps - stabilization, detoxification, treatment, extended supportive housing etc so that people with meth addiction can be helped well and effectively and so that they can rebuild their lives.  The Liberal meth plan will be helped by our approach to mental health (putting psychological therapies under medicare), and to poverty (providing better support).  It will also be helped by our vigorous efforts to help young people understand the problems with meth in our education system and to provide alternative positive

Manitoba Liberal accomplishments

  Examples of Manitoba Liberal accomplishments in the last three years Ensured that 2,000 Manitoba fishers were able to earn a living in 2020   (To see the full story click on this link ). Introduced a bill that includes retired teachers on the Pension Investment Board which governs their pension investments. Introduced amendments to ensure school aged children are included in childcare and early childhood education plans moving forward. Called for improvements in the management of the COVID pandemic: ·          We called for attention to personal care homes even before there was a single case in a personal care home. ·            We called for a rapid response team to address outbreaks in personal care homes months before the PCs acted.  ·          We called for a science-based approach to preparing schools to   improve ventilation and humidity long before the PCs acted. Helped hundreds of individuals with issues during the pandemic including those on social assistance

Comparison between Manitoba and South Dakota shows dramatic impact of Physical Distancing

Manitoba implemented physical distancing measures in mid-March.  South Dakota has still not made physical distancing mandatory.   The result is a dramatic difference in the incidence of covid-19 viral infections between the two jurisdictions.   This graph shows the number of people with Covid-19 infections from March 27 to April 14.  Manitoba ( red line )  started leveling off about April 4 and has seen only a small increase in Covid-19 infections since then.   South Dakota ( blue line )   has seen a dramatic increase in Covid-19 infections since April 4.  Those who are skeptical of the impact of physical distancing in Manitoba should look at this graph! Data are from the Johns Hopkins daily tabulations