logo
Explainer: What provincial investigation of the ODSCB means

Explainer: What provincial investigation of the ODSCB means

Ottawa Citizen14-05-2025

Article content
That possibility hasn't disappeared. In 2018, Nova Scotia dissolved elected school boards. School governance is managed by advisory councils appointed by the provincial government instead of school boards.
Article content
Why was the OCDSB under supervision before?
Under Mike Harris' Conservative government, the province and cash-strapped school boards were battling over who had control of education.
In 1998, the province took away school boards' taxation powers. Ottawa always had a strong tax base. That led to the expectation that education extras could always be provided for by raising taxes. The school board spent its last $20 million in reserves in 2001-2002. The following year, it faced trimming $26 million and submitted a deficit budget.
The province sent forensic auditor Al Rosen to Ottawa to check the books. Rosen's report blamed trustees for the shortfall, saying they had 'self-inflicted' their own financial pain, and recommended the province appoint a supervisor.
In August 2002 Merv Beckstead, the pragmatic and plain-spoken former chief administrative officer for the former Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton and the City of Nepean, was appointed to supervise the OCDSB. He became a lightning rod for parents and opponents of the Harris government. Junior kindergarten, transportation and special education were on the chopping block, but the most emotional discussions were about closing schools.
Failing to close schools had resulted in the school board losing millions in grants, Beckstead reflected in a 2003 op-ed he wrote for the Ottawa Citizen.
'Many trustees apparently refuse to acknowledge the instability and uncertainty they have created by failing to make organization changes, in areas for which they have control, to maximize quality operational effectiveness and efficiency, and to maximize funding eligibility,' Beckstead wrote.
There were major cuts to other Ontario school boards under supervision. The supervisor of the Toronto District School Board recommended $90 million in savings in a budget that included no money for teacher salary increases.
There were reasons to freak out in Ottawa. One consultant's report recommended that the OCDSB close 58 schools over 15 years. That didn't happen.
There were court cases, including one in Ottawa, where education activists tried to get Beckstead's appointment overturned, claiming that appointing a supervisor was unfair, unlawful, discriminatory, arbitrary and 'offends to values of democracy inherent in the Canadian Constitution.'
They lost.
Did anything good come of it for schools?
The process forced the province to acknowledge that underfunding of education was an issue. Beckstead had to borrow $13.9 million.
A 2002 report by Mordechai Rozanski, president of the University of Guelph, recommended a $1.8 billion cash infusion over the next three years.
The province responded with $250 million for special education over two years. Two days after Rozanski's report landed, another $340 million was announced to settle teachers' contracts. Three days later, there was $20 million more for transportation.
The OCDSB received $20 million out of the total cash infusion.
Are schools currently underfunded?
The Ontario government says it has invested more than $29 billion in total education funding for the 2024-25 school year.
However, according to analysis by the Ontario Public School Boards Association released earlier in May, there's a funding gap of more than $1 billion.
Actual per-pupil funding from the province is increasing a small amount from $13,584 to $13,834, an increase of $250 or 1.8 per cent compared to last year. In 2018, per pupil funding was $12,282.44.
Funding increases do no take inflation into account, the analysis said.
'Funding, when adjusted for inflation, now sits at $11,506.03, a gap of $776.41 per student. This is the lowest level of per pupil funding in more than 10 years.'
Article content
Article content
That's not the stated objective, but it will probably help. However, even if the review produces savings, they would be a drop in the bucket compared to what's needed. The cost-cutting is not over yet.
Article content
OCDSB director of education Pino Buffone told trustees earlier in May that the education ministry had spoken to school board representatives for years about structural issues, including running multiple tracks at the elementary level being 'an impossible reality.'
Article content
The board is spreading itself too thin and needs to streamline to two program offerings, English and French immersion, Buffone said.
Article content
'We need to get smarter with our resources, mobilize them ore effectively,' he told trustees. 'We're not taking any money from this review and putting it in our back pocket. We are remobilizing what we have to serve students better than when we load schools in multiple tracks.'
The school board has been 'distracted by a series of other things,' Buffone said. 'We are an organization that has taken away from our core business, and we have strayed.'
Article content
Article content
Article content
Minister of Education Paul Calandra has not minced words, saying the province will be 'relentless' in holding school boards accountable.
'We have been clear: Transparency and accountability from Ontario school boards is mandatory,' he said. 'Further actions will be taken if the situation at these school boards does not improve. As the new Minister of Education, I will be looking at every avenue to bring more transparency, consistency and accountability to all school boards across the province.'
Article content
What does history have to say about the situation?
The investigator's report may not lead to supervision and could lead to vindication of the argument that the board is underfunded, said Rob Campbell, who was chair of the Ottawa Carleton Assembly of School Councils when the OCDSB was last under supervision. He was later a two-term trustee.
It may depend on the investigator and how the government responds, Campbell said.
'Do they play tough with the school boards? There are a lot of political questions here,' he said. 'The investigator will report, but it's up to the province to decide what next steps to take.'
School closures are not on the table this time. In fact, the opposite is true, and there's a moratorium on closing schools.
The report may show that inflation and other new expenses have overwhelmed provincial funding, Campbell said.
'Best-case scenario, the report may recommend more money.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

SIMS: CBC set to get more money and power
SIMS: CBC set to get more money and power

Toronto Sun

time6 hours ago

  • Toronto Sun

SIMS: CBC set to get more money and power

The CBC building at Front and John Street in Toronto, Sept. 6, 2011. Photo by Alex Urosevic / Toronto Sun file photo Canada's government news organization is set to get fatter and more powerful. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account In the middle of the election campaign, Prime Minister Mark Carney vowed to pay the CBC more money, waving around about $150 million in fresh taxpayer cash. CBC covered that big scoop with a headline calling the CBC 'underfunded.' Think about that scene. Imagine being a CBC employee asking questions at a news conference during the election, with Carney saying that, if he won, the CBC would get more money, while Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said he would defund the CBC. The CBC covered this funding story in the middle of the election. That's a conflict of interest so big it would dwarf Godzilla. Journalists should not be paid by the government and that scene in the election is a perfect illustration of why. In the speech from the throne, the Carney government announced: 'The government is determined to protect the institutions that bring these cultures and this identity to the world, like CBC/Radio-Canada.' Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. To get an idea of what that protection could look like, consider the federal government report delivered on Feb. 20, before the election. Former heritage minister Pascale St-Onge said the government should nearly double the amount of money the CBC gets from taxpayers every year. 'The average funding for public broadcasters in G7 countries is $62 per person, per year,' St-Onge said. 'We need to aim closer to the middle ground, which is $62 per year per person.' If the government funded the CBC that way, the CBC would cost taxpayers about $2.5 billion per year. That amount would cover the annual grocery bill for about 152,854 Canadian families. St-Onge also pushed for the CBC mandate to be expanded to 'fight against disinformation.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'I propose to anchor in CBC-Radio Canada's mandate its role in helping the Canadian population fight against disinformation and understand fact-based information,' St-Onge said. Carney's Liberal party platform pledged to 'fully equip them ( CBC) to combat disinformation, so that Canadians have a news source they know they can trust.' What does this mean? Will the CBC play a role as an official 'fact-checker' in Canada, or is this just clunky language urging the CBC to be more fact-based? What is clear is that the federal government is planning to hand the CBC more money and enshrine its funding into law, taking it out of the annual budget vote and clouding transparency. CBC hasn't improved its accountability after years of scrutiny from Canadians. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Former CEO Catherine Tait was being paid about half a million dollars per year. New CEO Marie‑Philippe Bouchard has started her new role where Tait left off, as she is also set to be paid between $478,300 and $562,700. After years of criticism over executive bonuses, the government media company finally said it would get rid of the bonuses but hike the salaries of the executives instead. With so many Canadians struggling to pay for the basics, the CBC needed to read the room and end the bonuses and knock the CEO down a few levels in pay. Taxpayers are forced to spend a lot of money on the CBC, but only a tiny fraction of them choose to watch it. For CBC News Network's flagship English language prime-time news program, the audience is 1.8% of available viewers, according to its latest quarterly report. That means more than 98% of TV-viewing Canadians chose to watch something else. The CBC is a waste of taxpayers' money. Nearly nobody is watching it and it is a severe conflict of interest for journalists to be paid by the government. The CBC doesn't need more money from taxpayers; it needs to be defunded and raise money based on its work. Kris Sims is Alberta director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and former longtime member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery. Olympics NHL Toronto & GTA Editorial Cartoons Ontario

SNOBELEN: Reflecting on the Common Sense Revolution three decades later
SNOBELEN: Reflecting on the Common Sense Revolution three decades later

Toronto Sun

time6 hours ago

  • Toronto Sun

SNOBELEN: Reflecting on the Common Sense Revolution three decades later

Former Ontario Premier Mike Harris waves to Tim Hudak as he was acknowledged by Ontario PC leader Tim Hudak speaking to the Canadian Club at the Sheraton Centre in downtown Toronto on Friday May 30, 2014. Photo by Michael Peake / Michael Peake/Toronto Sun/QMI Ag On June 8, a gaggle of old warriors will mark a rare collision of common sense and courage. It will be a quiet event, but 30 years ago, this unlikely team set the world (or at least Ontario) on fire. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account It was election day on June 8, 1995, in Ontario. I spent the day watching my sister Kathie run an amazing get-out-the-vote effort that capped six weeks of campaigning with friends and neighbours. It felt good to know that, regardless of the outcome, we had collectively worked our butts off. There was nothing left in the tank. But the outcome was not certain. At the start of that election, Lyn McLeod and the Liberals had a comfortable, double-digit lead in the polls. The taste of a 1990 defeat for the PC Party (and this rookie candidate) lingered as the hours dripped away. Some campaigns are riskier than others. In 1995, Mike Harris and a young campaign team broke all the rules with a bold, detailed election platform called the Common Sense Revolution, released a full year before election day. On election day, voters would determine if that strategy was incredibly brave or simply naive. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Turns out it was brave. But the courage didn't end on June 8. A few weeks later, Premier Mike Harris presented his caucus with a stark appraisal of the economic conditions facing Ontario. The facts were simple — in the year since the Common Sense Revolution platform was released, the economy of Ontario had declined, eroding the foundation of the plan. I remember a sinking feeling that this was the moment when all the hard work over five years would begin to crumble. No plan survives first contact, and predictably, the Harris government would soften bold intentions in the face of reality. What happened next set the tone for the Harris government. Having laid out the harsh realities, Harris told his caucus that the plan would have to adapt. We would need to be bolder and move faster. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Harris was unreasonable. Which is why, 30 years later, he remains my benchmark for courageous leadership. Much has been written about the Harris government. A good bit of it is nonsense that became an urban myth. But, by any account, Harris impacted Ontario in meaningful ways and altered the future of the province. One of the young revolutionaries, Alister Campbell, recently edited a collection of well-researched opinions on the long-term impact of the Harris government's policies and initiatives. The book, The Harris Legacy: Reflections On A Transformational Premier, should be required reading for anyone wishing to do the impossible. I don't spend much time looking back. Life doesn't move in that direction. But anniversaries have a way of prompting a backward glance. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Thirty years on, it is remarkable how many of the issues left hanging at the end of the Harris government remain not only unresolved, but also unaddressed. These are recurring problems that governments either ignore or disguise. School boards continue to be quaint relics of the single schoolroom past, forever impeding the evolution of education. Conservation authorities, a watershed management structure invented 70 years ago, continue to impede, not inform, wise land management. Red tape grows exponentially every time it is cut. Three decades later, several things seem obvious. First, the job is never done. Second, the intersection of courage and common sense is both extremely rare and amazingly powerful. And, finally, 30 years is too long to wait for another revolution. Olympics NHL Toronto & GTA Editorial Cartoons Ontario

Mark Carney is proving to be very popular — with conservatives
Mark Carney is proving to be very popular — with conservatives

Toronto Star

time12 hours ago

  • Toronto Star

Mark Carney is proving to be very popular — with conservatives

It's still early days, but so far I'm pretty impressed with what I see from Canada's new conservative government. Voters clearly wanted a big change after a decade of Justin Trudeau's Liberal approach, and boy are they getting it. There was the throne speech, delivered by no less a personage than the King himself. That alone was a great homage to our enduring traditions and storied institutions. No more of those tiresome apologies for the flaws in our collective story. Time to celebrate being Canadian! True conservatives had to love it. And the speech itself was all 'build, baby, build,' in the words of our new PM, Mark Carney. Let's get those resources out of the ground and on their way to foreign markets. Plus a tax cut! No wonder what remains of the left — the NDP rump in Parliament, the unions and environmentalists — was left seething on the sidelines. Clearly, their day is over. Then this week, the capper: the government's first big piece of legislation is called the 'Strong Borders Act' and it's all about giving new powers to police and security agencies and tightening up the asylum system that spun out of control while the Trudeau Liberals ruled the roost. It's a sprawling bill and despite the name it's about a lot more than the border. It would give Canada Post greater authority to open your mail. It would let police and others demand that digital service providers hand over personal data about their users, without having to get a warrant in many cases. All in the name of fighting crime. The usual suspects — the NDP again, civil libertarians, refugee advocates — are up in arms. But it's all being done in the name of security and managing our relationship with Donald Trump. The government seems to be using the Trump crisis as cover to give law enforcement agencies powers they've been seeking for years. Given the PM's record so far, it's no surprise that people in parts of the country that lean heavily Conservative are getting behind him. A new poll of Albertans, out this week, shows they're just as impressed with Carney as they are with Pierre Poilievre. I have just one big question about this: what do the Liberals make of it all? What do they think about the new government's tilt to the right? ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW OK, OK, enough along those lines. Yes indeed, our new conservative government is a Liberal government, though a Liberal government of a very different stripe. Others have noticed this paradox, if that's what it is. Jonathan Pedneault, late of the Green Party, said during the recent election campaign that Carney was 'starting to look like a Progressive Conservative.' And writing in the Winnipeg Free Press, David McLaughlin, once chief of staff to former prime minister Brian Mulroney, says 'Canada elected its first progressive conservative prime minister in over 30 years' in the person of Mark Carney. McLaughlin goes on: 'From cancelling the consumer carbon tax, to pledging to build pipelines and offering a middle-class tax cut, Carney is actively placing conservative alongside progressive in his party's governing policies … Welcome to the new Canada, where PC doesn't stand for 'politically correct' but 'progressive conservative.' ' I prefer to think of Carney as a conservative progressive, but let's not quibble over labels. The important thing is the Liberals have pulled off a rather astonishing reinvention. If nothing else, it's proof of their fabled ideological flexibility or, if you prefer, their shameless opportunism. Whatever works, they'll do it. Whatever's needed to meet the moment, they'll pull it out of their tool bag. It's all the more remarkable since many of the same people are involved. The minister who presided over the immigration file in 2021-2023 while the system plunged into crisis, Sean Fraser, is now Carney's justice minister. What does he make of the tough measures to crack down on asylum shopping? Just curious. Perhaps only the Liberals could do all this, and perhaps they could do it only at a moment of crisis. An actual Conservative Party government in 'normal' times would run into a wall of resistance if it championed 'build, baby, build,' slashed taxes, ripped up the asylum system and trampled on privacy rights in the name of fighting crime. Instead, we'll see if the 'conservative' government we've ended up with can manage the trick. So far, they're off to a good start.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store