B.C.'s education minister, Peter Fassbender, is not known for his skill as a wordsmith. Nevertheless, even he ought to be aware of the doublespeak in his claim to uphold "the best interests of students, their families and British Columbians who already invest nearly $5 billion into the K-12 education (system)." Fassbender made this statement to justify his government's decision to appeal a court ruling that favoured students, families and taxpayers.
After 12 years of legal wrangling, the B.C. Teachers' Federation was on the winning side of a decision that upheld workers' right to collective bargaining, and - by extension - upheld smaller class sizes for students, and the right of all British Columbians to expect that when we sign a contract with government, it actually means something. Knowing this, we are prompted to ask how Fassbender could interpret it to mean exactly the opposite.
He could only be right if we assume a belief that government does not exist primarily to provide public services, taxes are inherently bad, and immediate dollar savings must trump all other considerations.
I raise this not as a caricature: there are people who actually believe such things, and they make up the hard-core base for our federal Conservative and provincial Liberal parties. To others - including me - such beliefs seem foolish.
As a parent, I cannot understand how anyone with children could be disappointed by a court ruling that upholds a higher quality of education - even if it costs me a bit more as a taxpayer. That's because I know that by paying for public services collectively, through taxes, we end up paying far less than we would by purchasing these services as individuals.
It's the same principle behind a group insurance plan: the higher the number of people who pay into it, the lower the cost for everyone. It's just common sense.
If you're a parent and you don't support paying taxes for public education, you're either rich (you can afford private tuition), or you like throwing money away.
As a disclaimer, I'm a teacher, so I have a personal interest in the court ruling. But I want to emphasize the ruling is not connected to teacher wages, nor is a wage increase at the top of my personal list of concerns. (Even though my family lives very modestly on my salary.)
My real interest is in teachers being able to give the best service possible to their students. More specifically, I want my son - and all children in British Columbia - to have access to a tuition-free, public education in a school that is safe and in which teachers have adequate time and resources to help students find the joy of learning.
If our provincial government shared my concerns, they wouldn't appeal the above-mentioned ruling.
Nor would they appeal even if all they cared about was the financial bottom line.
Court cases cost money, after all, and the Liberals haven't been shy about wasting taxpayers' money on fighting the law.
If you want to know the real reason this government is appealing, it's because they don't believe in public services.
It's purely ideological.
Patrick Parkes is first vice-president of the Burnaby Teachers' Association.
