Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Brussels Post, 1978-09-27, Page 2ton Brussels Post wpiNgsDAy,. SEPTEMBER 27, 1978 Serving Brussels aridthe surrounding community. Published each Wednesday afternoon at Brussels, Ontario . by McLean Bros.Fublishers Limited, velyn Kennedy - Editor Member Canadian Community Newspaper Association and Ontario Weekly Newspaper Association Subscriptions (in advance) Canada $9.00 a Year. • - .. • Others $17.00-a Year. Single Copies 20 cents each. Behind the Scenes by Keith Roulston GINA. Mart IS ONTARSO CO APPLES) Declining enr•olmen It's becoming increasingly obvious; that declining.schboi enrolMents are the story of the tutiire, The baby boom of the 1950's and 60'S is now behind ut;.iend kir a variety. of reasons; smaller families are, naiv,the- order ot: the day. In 1976, there were 1,a60085 elementary4tkoot pupils enrolled in . schools across. Ontario. This'Iall, that' figure has dropped' ,294,640 students and by 1986, experts predict the figure:wilt have dropPed to 1,192,366 students.• In Huron County alone, the schooLenrolment has dropped 2.8 -per cent from last year. • — • , „ What does declining enrolment in our schools, mean? For some schools, particularly the older heighbourhocid schools in urban centree, ,the declining enrolment means closure. The city of London has 'already been forced to clOse a- number of' •its neighbourhood schools, despite the protests of parents and teachers and community organizations. The death of a neighbourhood school is a move which often speeds the.disintegration of community feeling in a city neighbourhood but as pupil numbers decline, school. boards can no longer afford to keep, the smaller schools open. Although rural schools aren't as likely to be closed as those in the city, the day may come when classrooms will be boarded up or some parts of the school simply, won't be used. The dwindling number of student is also having drastic effects on the tob prospects of the teachers employed in our schools. Last year, there were 2,969 elementary school teachers who graduated from Ontario's colleges and universities - and 1,677 of these graduates ended up without classroom teaching jobs. Even graduates prepared to take jobs in the Far North may soon find these positions at a premium. The story is the same for secondary school teachers - last year 57 per cent of these graduates ended up without 'schools. Today school_ teachers have joined the ranks of other university - educated professiOnals who are collecting unemployment insurance or taking .jobs out Of their field. But declinl,ing enrolment isn't juSt affecting new teachers - it's also having an effect on 'teachers already in the classrobm. The mobility which was once associated with the teaching profession is over., Today, if a teacher is fortunate enough to have a job, then , there's far-less chance that teacher pan transfer' to another board or 'another area of the province. A teacher who is frustrated teaching Where he or she ig now, is likely to have to remain in the same school longer or else consider leaving the teaching profession -altogether Right now t the future for our schools cloeSn't look promising. The optimists among us still hope that as the number of students decreases, the quality of education Will rise. A srnaller pupil - teacher ratio should, mean more time for the individual student. Unfortuantely, with the proVincial government reducing its payments to local school boards, and with the ordinary taxpayer footing more of the bill. for Our rising education costs, it seems likely that its will be some years before students reap any benefit's from the declining enrollments, If there's anything Canadians are united on it's the belief that government spending is out ofhand. Where the unity breaks down, however, is in who's to blame. . An example of this was pointed out by a letter in a Toronto newspaper last week. Earlier an artist had written to the I paper decrying the government's cutback ingrants to the arts. Her letter was replied to by an accountant who more or less told her that she was a welfare bum. He said that grants to the arts was taking money from those who could hack it and giving to. those who ;can't. A good many of. us take 'this kind 'of attitude:• that we're. completely guiltless of adding to goyernmetn spending and that it's alWaYs'Sbmeone else who's to blame., The accountant' no doubt really believes that he's 'supporting assorted lower types like artists andpeople on unemployment insurance and getting very little Out of the system in return. All heeamseeis‘ his high inceonrie tax bill and he can't see .the' benefits. He, conveniently forgets,. however that government spending has folayed'a large part in his sueeSs in life.' For one thing, he probably wouldn't, be an accountant if he :hadn't f been , subsidized , much in the same way that artist was being subsidized; It tat es4good deal of isehooting to' get to ,be an ' accountant (or a school teacherbr a lawyer or a doctor or a 'n,urse or any other profession). Education 'is almost Rtally paid for through tax money. Even at he university level where there is a tui Lion 'ee, the overwhelming burden of the cost of xlucation falls on the taxpayer. and often on A taxpayer who will never get a chance 'to rake advantage of the system himself so that he can move upward to the high-paying professions. Nearly all . professionals have leen subsidized by •farmers and factory ,vorkers to get to the position they hold today. Even once they're comfortably settled :n their pogition people such as accountants Ire benefiting from government every day. If not for government requirements for records for;come tax, for instance, would accountant be so much in demand and n earning stitch good salaries? Or lawyers: if not for the increasing read 'tape brought in by governments (made up mostly of lawyers) who wbuld need a lawyer? We're all dependent on government for a living no matter how much we protest that we're free enterprisers !all the way and the otherguy's the one who's to blame for government over spending. Say you're a Mick company Owner, then you're able to stay in business because' you're being subsidized by a lot of ordinary people who help pay the expense of our road system. If it Wasn't for that free road system would truck comaptiies have taken over so much business from the railways? And if you're that most independent of today's folk heros, a truck 'driver, you're equally a product of that government road system, I remember dealing with a newspaper ,man once who was a dedicated free enterpriser right down to his bOots. He was always beefing about government Spending and talking about how governtnetn should get out of this or that and turn it over to the private business. Yet if' he saw that a government advertisement had been placed in another paper and not in his, he nearly had, a heart attack tryitig to get hold of somebody to make sure he too would get that ad, or that someone would pay dearly for his not getting it. Many dedicated free enterprisers exist these days becat,su their companies produce for the government, from parts for military alecraft to printing for all that government paper work. • Rig companies like Ford even demand a.' subsidy or they ll locate elsewhere. then there's the old argitment about farm subsidies and who they benefit. The consumers say the subsidies are to help consumers and arc part of a cheap, food policy. However you slice it, we'i=e 'getting cheaper food than we would without government intervention. I haven't yet heard a free neterpriser complain about that. Farmers, of course are apt to 'Yell about govern manias much as anybody, yet they're also apt to turn to government -when there's tmuble. When cutbacks, in the .federal governmetn's agricultural budget were: announced, a wail of iirofest Went up frisnithe farm community. „ , And that is the sad truth abotit our present situation: everybody thinks, the, government should cut back, bin. it, should always be the other guy whO, gets cutback.,cmvernment , wasteis everywhere, 'except in our• favourite irtigram. If we're forhealth.. and welfare a • then we le it ,should be exempt and cuts should be in all those other 'wasteful ilrogrants'.. If we support the arts, then that area shouldn't be touched.' If we think the armed Threes are our salvation then we should be increasing.' not decreasing spending. The -point is that nearly all government spending was instituted because somebody demanded it. Thus if the government is going to cut back on services, the same people who demanded the service are going to scream foul. We all can gripe about the over blown bureacracy but that too is a simplification. It's easy to think the other guy isn't doing anything when you're not doing his job. Change places, however and you' might be surprised how much work he has to do. I'm as much a critic of government • as anyone else. To megovernment has grown too big, too unweildfr and too expensive. I think there's a lot of waste in-money and in time in those huge government! complexes whether they be in Toronto or Ottawa. But I also would hate to do without some of the services the governlmentt provides. I'd hate to have to -stop at toll gates every few miles down the road to 'pay the cost of the highway. I'd hate to do without the C.B,C., for all its faults and be stuck watching American trash like' ThredsiCompany. I'd hate to have to pay over $100 a day for a stay in hospital. There are lots of government services I could gladly do without, but then you'd probably hate to have those go. So let's at least belhoughtful and honest about this whole bushiess of government spending cuts. Like it or riot we're hooked OP this business of government intervention its society. Government spending may hurt, butt the withdrawal pains of the government suddenly pulling out of all its programs would hint More. We can't have all the good things and low taxes too. If we really Want the goVett'rrientitO cut back, We've got to be ready to do With less •ourselves not expect the other glis,'pay the price while we remain urisdathed,