HomeMy WebLinkAboutTimes Advocate, 1996-10-23, Page 4Page 4
Times -Advocate, October 23, 1996
Publisher & Editor: Jim Beckett
Business Manager: Don Smith
Production Manager: Deb Lord
ACvertisjr g; Barb Consitt, Chad Eedy
News; Heather Mir, Chris Skalkos,
Ross Haugh, Brenda Burke
Production; Alma Ballantyne, Mary McMurray, Barb Robertson
Brenda Hem, Joyce Weber, Laurel Miner
Transportation: AI Flynn, AI Hodgert
Front Office & Accounting; Elaine Pinder, Sue Rollings,
Ruthanne Negriin, Anita McDonald, Cassie Dalrymple
The Exeter Times -Advocate !s a member of a family of community newspapers
• ok '"OM* providing news, advertising and information leadership
•
inion
11)11.01Z1 kl.ti
No more protests, please
elp! We're being held hostage.
The labor movement has been protesting On-
tario government policies by shutting down
city after city, and threatening a general strike
every so often. Public service workers left
roads covered with snow and shut down small
meat processing plants last winter in protest.
Medical specialists have been refusing to take
on new patients to protest government poli-
cies. Now Ontario family physicians are
threatening to do the same thing come Nov. 1.
While sympathies frequently lie with the
;groups Conducting the protests, Mtlatiy of us are
growing weary - and angry - at being held hos-
tage.
To all extents and purposes, battles are being
waged against the Ontario government, and
the chosen field of battle is Joe Q. Average.
Joe is the guy who manages to pay most of
his bills most of the time. He doesn't live in
luxury, but he earns enough to pay the rent and
buy groceries. To say he's a bit worried about
his job is an understatement - words like
"downsizing" are enough to make him grind
his teeth.
Joe doesn't believe for one moment that gov-
ernment leaders and captains of industry are
suffering much. He is well aware that money is
being made. He hears every day about the
"jobless economic recovery" and he knows ex-
actly what it means - the rich guys get the divi-
dends, but he doesn't get a raise.
And then he hears about another protest.
Government leaders and captains of industry
may be the ultimate targets, but Joe knows
where the battle will take place - right orf his
head.
The idea seems to be that if the little guys are
made to suffer enough, they will deliver the
message to government leaders that something
has to change.
On one level, we understand the anger felt by
each group. The government is trying to deal
with an overwhelming debt load. Captains of in-
dustry must make profits for the shareholders or
investments will go elsewhere. Public service
employees were facing the prospect of seeing
most of their jobs go out the window. Physi-
cians are subjected to government "claw backs",
cut backs and ceilings, as well as the prospect
of paying their own malpractice insurance.
On another level, there is a growing bomb
shelter mentality, meaning that every time one
group or another has a disagreement with the
government, we want to hit the deck and get out
the flak jackets, because we know how, and
where the battle will be fought.
Someone will grab poor Joe by the throat,
give a good shake, and say, "Tell that to Mike
Hams."
Joe Q. Average is feeling victimized by all
these people sending messages to the govern-
ment. What he wants is to go about his business
in relative peace and quiet. What he doesn't
want is to be held hostage again and again.
No matter how wonderful the cause, no matter
how justified the complaint, no matter how
good and decent the group making the com-
plaint, all Joe understands is he's being used and
abused, and he's crying, "Unfair!"
Remember how it felt in Grade 2, when the
teacher couldn't figure out which child was talk-
ing, so she made the whole class stay in? The
theory was the children would get angry at the
one who was talking. What actually happened
was they got angry at the teacher.
Holding Joe Q. Average hostage may work a
time or two, but sooner or later it is going to
backfire.
Saugeen City News
A View From Queen's Park,
TORONTO -- Reform Party leader Preston
Manning has been in Ontario looking for help
in the coming federal election, and he already
has some from Premier Mike Harris.
Manning, on a four-day speaking tour, fo-
' cussed on urging Ontarians whose views are
right of centre not to waste their votes by divid-
ing them between his party and the federal Pro-
gressive Conservatives who, he said, are no dif-
ferent from the federal Liberals.
Those who voted for Harris's Conservatives
in 1995 should find this no barrier to support-
ing the federal Reformers, Manning said, be-
cause both have much the same aims.
Winning in Ontario is crucial to Manning, be-
cause it contains one-third of the federal rid-
ings, and while Reform won only one seat here
in 1993, it came second in 56 others when the
tight -of -centre vote was split.
Manning can make a statistical argument that
small -c conservatives should rally behind his
party, because it won 52 seats nationally while
the Tories won only two, and none in Ontario,
By Eric Dowd
but he is handicapped by Reform's dismal per-
formance since then, so it is now (behind even
the federal Tories in polls).
Ontario Tories also have a long history of
supporting their federal party in elections, al-
though they restrained their enthusiasm in John
Diefenbaker's later years as prime minister and
when Joe Clark supported higher oil prices.
In 1993, when Kim Campbell was briefly
Tory prime minister and flying in polls, Harris
was merely an unknown leader of a third party
and the federal Tories did not feel he was worth
calling on for help.
Hams told news media at the time that he
would not endorse any federal party, but would
support specific policies which appealed to
him, but few cared.
Hams is closer philosophically to Manning
than to the federal Tories or any Tories of re-
cent decades, Ontario or federal. Harris and
Manning share the same fervor for reducing
government, balancing the budget, cutting tax-
es and getting tougher with criminals.
ccw
Publications Mail Registration Number 0386
Ons yew at. for Ontario subscribers - $35.00 + OST
Two year rate for Ontario subscribers - $63.00 + OST
Ono year subscription - $63.00 + TAT
Two year subscdptton - $119.00 + a$T
OTHER RATES
Outside Canada - $99.00 + 6tt►T
Mashed Mob Wednesday Manting .t 424 Mein St.,
Exp. Oatans, NOM Sitio by J.W. Eedy Publications Ltd.
Telephone 1.I11b23111231 • Fax: 519-23110704
ovoid Minim IkessalvessiNeely.cast G.S.T. Nr105210e35
Your Views
Letters to the editor
Education boards discriminating
Why is it in Huron County such in-
justice is allowed to continue?
Dear Editor:
Again I feel compelled to remind our neighbors
and friends, the many citizens of Huron County,
that there are a great number of families in this
county against whom the policies of the Huron
County Board of Education (HCBE) and the provin-
cial Ministry of Education are discriminating. These
families (over 100 of them) from all walks of life
have, for religious reasons, chosen to send their
children to the Clinton and District Christian School
(CDC) and its corresponding secondary school, The
London and District Christian Secondary School.
The annual budget for running CDCS alone, is
over $750,000. CDCS is not a church sponsored
school. It is entirely independent and inter-
demoninational. The cost is carried solely by fami-
lies who have children enrolled and by friends who
support these families in this cause. Why do they do
this? They are definitely not fringe fanatics. They
are people like yourselves, but they are unique in
that they are convinced of the necessity of making
any sacrifice that might be necessary in order to
continue their objection to the Ontario governments
unjust monopoly on the province's educational sys-
tem. They are protesting the Ontario government
unjustified attempt to grab the hearts and minds of
the children of all of the families in this province.
Let me explain.
These Christian parents are convinced that the
Christian perspectives (including lifestyle and val-
ues) of our churches and homes cannot, and may
not, be divorced from the learning that happens in
our children's schools. They do not agree with the
"humanistic philosophy (religion) promoted by the
public school system, therefore they believe that
Christian schools are not a choice but a necessity
for them. They object to the inequity of a govern-
ment which promotes one philosophy (religion) in a
public school system at the expense of other philos-
ophies (religions) by making those, who object to
the provincial choice, pay their own way.
As such these families feel compelled by con-
science to voice their objection to the monopoly of
the Ontario government and to the teachings of the
public schools system by sending their children, at
any cost, to an alternative (Christian) school.
The provincial government has allowed them to
do so. But at what a terrible price.
Not only do these parents receive no municipal or
provincial tax dollars for sending their children to a
Christian school, but, because they have made this
choice, they are compelled to pay, through their
property taxes and through provincial government
taxes, their full share of the cost of the public school
system, including the cost of the Huron County
school bussing system. To add insult to injury,
Christian school students are denied much of the
health care that is provided to students in the public
school.
For the past 34 years, often in the face of personal
economic hardship, these Christian parents have
believed so strongly in the need for Christian
schools, that they have willingly paid for the main-
taining and the running of the Clinton and District
Christian School without any help from the Ontario
government. These Christians have steadily resisted
and will continue to resist the attempted encroach-
ment of the provincial government on their religious
freedom.
Why is it that, in Huron County such injustice is
allowed to continue?
Why do the Ontario government and the Huron
County Board of Education condone this double tax-
ation?
Why should these solid Christian citizens of Hu-
ron County have to pay for the county public
schools, which they, in good conscience, cannot
use? Why should they have to pay twice for trans-
portation, once through their taxes for the right to
ride the bus to the closest public schools, and then
again, in payment to the Huron County Board of Ed-
ucation, to use these same buses as they run their
children to, or right by, those schools? Transporta-
tion alone costs these families about $600 per child
yearly above what they are already paying the
HCBE for these buses in their taxes. Is this a justifi-
able penalty for taking seriously the parents' obliga-
tion to bring up their children in their own faith?
Believe it or not, these parents are not asking for
Christianity to be put back into the public schools.
They have strong feelings about that. They believe
that everyone has both the right to not be subjected
to someone else's religion in a school, and the right
to teach their own faith to their children in their
homes, churches and schools. They believe strongly
that there is a valid place for a public school in our
society. Today the public school may well be the
ideal place for parents who wish to teach their chil-
dren to tenets of humanism.
The parents at CDCS simply ask for the right to
be treated equally. They suggest that the province
ought to prohibit the imposition of double taxation
by the local boards of education for those (minori-
ties like themselves) who find the public school sys-
tem an unacceptable option for their children. They
recommend that the government allow the educa-
tional portion of municipal taxes to follow the child
to the school chosen by the child's parents. They
ask for equal treatment in health care.
They are convinced that students graducating
from Christian schools are well prepared for citizen-
ship, are spiritually healthy followers of Christ and
are well qualified to continue their education.
They believe that the very existence of Christian
and other alternative schools adds a healthy dose of
competition to the school system which can only
help to encourage growth across the spectrum of
Ontario schools.
At the same time they are convinced that indepen-
dent Christian schools are run very efficiently. The
average cost of Christian School in the Ontario Alli-
ance of Christian Schools is $3,900 per child. That
is still roughly half of the cost of the public school.
The argument put forward that Huron County can-
not afford to offer justice to Christian School par-
ents during times of restraint is a pitiful one. This
country is based upon the premise of justice for all.
It is my belief that this is not an issue of dollars as
much as one of control. In fact, a good argument
can be made for the partial funding of Christian and
other alternative schools which would actually save
the Ontario government and the county substantial
tax dollars.
Dear editor, I would plead with you and your
readers, the citizens of Huron County, to remember
that there are many people in Huron County that arc
waiting for equity in taxation, as it relates to inde-
pendent schools, so that Christian and other alterna-
tive schools might become accessible to all who
wish to use them. Let's not let them down.
Sincerely,
Clarence Bos, Principal of CDCS
Manning on tour
They also like the same processes, such as
settling issues by referenda supposedly to re-
flect more accurately the public view.
The federal Tories under Jean Charest have
now recognized the success of Harris and other
right-wingers and the threat posed by Reform
by promising to cut taxes, allow children as
young as 10 to be prosecuted, make parents fi-
nancially liable for crimes by children and pri-
vatize part of the Canadian Broadcasting Cor-
poration, but still are not as far to the right as
Manning.
Harris also owes a large debt to Manning and
Reform because they did not split the right -of -
centre vote in the 1995 Ontario election by run-
ning candidates against him .
Some of Harris's MPPs are convinced that
they would have lost if Reform had competed.
Some also have been supporters of Reform
federally.
On a visit to Ottawa in the summer, Hams
held talks with both Charest and Manning,
which suggests he thinks of them as some sort
of equals rather than as Charest being from his
own party and his brother -at -arms, at just
nominally, and Reform its opponent: "
Although Charest claimed that Harris assured
him that almost all who voted for him favour
the Tories federally, the premier denied saying.
Manning explained his understanding was
that Harris will not try to persuade voters to
support either Reform or the Tories and that
Reform will stick to the federal scene and Har-
ris to the provincial.
Hams said that his MPPs "can support
whoever they want" and he will support those
who espouse policies that are good for Ontario
and a spokesman for the premier has since reit-
erated he will endorse policies, not parties.
Harris may feel that by not declaring support
for either the federal Tories or Reform he is
being neutral.
But a premier normally is expected to support
his federal party. When he avoids doing so he
is rebuking it andsuggesting it is not worth
helping.
1
•