Dear Editor,
Re: “BC Liberals on a collision course with teachers, trustees,” Opinion, April 3.
I am writing in response to Keith Baldrey’s column which appeared in last Friday’s issue. Baldrey’s article attempts to present itself as an unbiased view of controversial Bill 11, but his piece seems more like Liberal apologetics in disguise.
Firstly, Mr. Baldrey describes teacher professional development days as “mysterious untended weeds,” as though teachers are engaged in some clandestine activity of Illuminati-style proportions.
Our professional days can be viewed by anyone who cares to watch — they, too, can learn about special needs students, ESL learners, improved assessment, school-wide literacy initiatives, new software etc. Perhaps such individuals would develop a greater appreciation for what teachers are dealing with in the classroom.
Secondly, he describes the idea that the Liberals are out to privatize the education system as the work of “conspiracy theorists.” Labeling any idea as a conspiracy is a way of undermining its credibility — the idea of privatization as far-fetched obscures the fact that the Liberal government has a privatization agenda, and is moving towards that goal in all areas of public life, whether it is health care, public transportation, the energy sector, or education.
Mr. Baldrey also dismisses school boards as public bodies elected by “a small portion of the electorate.” Given the low turnout in the last provincial election and vote splitting on the left, doesn’t that description more aptly describe the Liberal government itself?
To put it to parents in a nutshell: Bill 11 would give the education minister sweeping powers to install puppet school boards that dance to his tune. Any board members who actually does their job and advocates for better funding for schools will be fired and replaced. Once again, this government uses the legislative hammer to thwart the democratic process. It is an abuse of power.
The Liberals are masters at creating initiatives for which they have no intention of providing funding. If the education minister intends to overhaul my professional development, does he intend to pay for it like most corporations do? I strongly doubt it, given that he has been pleading poverty whenever it comes time to give money to education.
Ultimately, Bill 11 is a distraction — a smoke-screen. The government continues to provoke teachers with these so-called improvement initiatives, not because it cares about education or teacher competence, but because it wishes to undermine and belittle teachers in public.
The government wants parents to question whether teachers are really doing their jobs, rather than questioning whether the Liberals are living up to their responsibilities as a government and funding education adequately.
Michael Mikulin
Richmond music teacher
