From: "julian samuel" <jjsamuel-AT-vif.com>
Subject: Quebec bill tightening access to English schools is not in the best interest of children and their families
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 13:19:42 -0700


Dear List:

    More on French-Canadian intolerance (is there a similarity between Le
Pen and the PQ/BQ?)

Hello Jen D: Hope this gets you to respond (keep in mind that I have posted
many **pro-Palestinian** articles to this list).

Julian Samuel



Wednesday » May 15 » 2002

Mean-spirited measures
Quebec bill tightening access to English schools is not in the best interest
of children and their families

MARCUS TABACHNICK
Montreal Gazette


Wednesday, May 15, 2002

The Quebec government has introduced amendments to its language law, Bill
101, to "close certain loopholes" that have allowed some children access to
English schooling. The Lester B. Pearson School Board finds these
amendments - Bill 104 - to be mean-spirited and not in the best interest of
children or their families.

For starters, these provisions are not loopholes. They are legitimate
clauses within Bill 101 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and have been
confirmed legal by the Supreme Court of Canada.

The law now allows access to English schools for students who have had the
majority of their education in English in an unsubsidized private school.
Bill 104 would eliminate this provision. This goes against the government's
financial and pedagogical support of Quebec's private-schools network. There
are no restrictions - other than financial - on parents seeking
private-school access for their children. In fact, many members of the
National Assembly, including cabinet ministers, choose private education for
their children.

The number of children who attain access to English schools through this
avenue is very small and virtually meaningless in the ratio of students in
the French and English systems.

Bill 104 targets a very small group of students and their families. It is
not the role of government to adopt laws that negatively target small groups
or individuals. Governments should adopt laws and policies that enhance and
improve the quality of life for all citizens.The argument that the amendment
prevents people from getting through the back door what is not available
through the front, doesn't wash as long as the government continues to
support private schools. By their nature, private schools are only
accessible to those with enough money.

The second and even more mean-spirited proposal deals with siblings of
"special-needs students." Bill 101 now allows a child who is two years
behind his classmates to switch to English schooling if it would help. In
the best interests of the family, the child's siblings are also allowed to
attend the same school.

Bill 104 would prohibit the extension of English-school rights to the
siblings of these students. When a student has special needs, the support of
the family is crucial in helping him or her succeed. It is not easy to bring
up children under any circumstances, but it is especially hard when there
are psychological or physiological problems. The government's proposal would
exacerbate this burden. Under this proposed amendment, families with
children with special needs would have to split their children into two
different school systems with different policies and practices, different
calendars, different schedules and different languages of communication.
These families need society's support, not additional burdens.

There will be limited, invitation-only hearings on this bill. It appears
that many of the groups invited have a political agenda and do not represent
the best interests of children or families.

The Quebec English School Boards Association unanimously denounced Bill 104
in a resolution at its annual general meeting in Quebec City on Saturday. It
should be noted that this is not about English school boards worrying about
numbers. As I noted, the numbers are insignificant. This is about what is
good for children, respecting the Charter of Rights and respecting families
and their choices.

We should never fight political battles at the expense of children. It is
even more reprehensible that political battles would be fought at the
expense of children with difficulties. The government is setting on a course
that will inevitably lead to court cases and associated costs - costs that
will be born by the taxpayers and the school system. How can that be shown
as bettering Quebec society? Bill 104 must be withdrawn immediately.

- Marcus Tabachnick is chairman of the Lester B. Pearson School Board.

© Copyright 2002 Montreal Gazette








Copyright © 2002 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest Global
Communications Corp. All rights reserved.
Optimized for browser versions 4.0 and higher.






     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---