In a memorable interview given to Duty Last May, the Minister of Education, Bernard Drainville, declared that the “three-speed school” was simply a “conceptual bias”.
According to him, it was an elitist “intellectual shortcut” to see any inequality in the fact that 60% of students from private schools pursue university studies, compared to 51% of those who are enrolled in a program with selection of the public system and only 15% of those who follow the “regular” program. The transition from secondary school to CEGEP varies from one to two depending on whether students leave a private establishment or “regular” public school.
Of course, one can be as happy in a skilled trade as in an academic career, but the question is where a child can find the environment in which they have the best chance of realizing their ambitions, whatever they be.
Without sinking into the conspiratorial paranoia that makes some believe that the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) is secretly working to undermine the credibility of public services, we can postulate that private schools could not dream of better publicity than a strike which deprives public sector students of lessons for weeks. With all the risks this brings for children with learning difficulties, the fear of being insufficiently prepared for ministry exams and the headache inflicted on parents.
As if that were not enough, the contradictory statements of the different protagonists alternately sow hope and desolation. Many of those who were hesitant about the cost of private education or a question of principle could come to the conclusion that the public system is beyond repair and decide to move into third gear.
Beyond the salary issue, the determination of unions and the government to impose their solutions, whether good or bad, sends a clear message: the public network is in a catastrophic state, not to say desperate.
Unions have the reputation, often well-founded, of defending the interests of their members above those of the public, but when teachers without strike benefits are prepared to stay on the streets for so long as Christmas approaches, it is because they have the deep conviction of being right.
For its part, the Legault government knows very well that its chances of re-election depend largely on the improvements it will be able to make to the education and health networks. And he is just as sincere as the unions when he says that greater “flexibility” in collective agreements is essential.
A year ago, the population could have lined up behind him. She probably does not maintain her support for the unions because of the strength of their arguments, but because she has lost confidence in a government that has deceived her too often.
Even assuming that the two sides manage to find common ground in the coming days, everyone knows that it will take a long time to repair such a battered network. Despite all their good will, Bernard Drainville’s classroom aides will not replace the teachers and specialists who are sorely lacking.
All this is not likely to reassure parents whose child will soon enter secondary school, where the problems are most glaring. How can we blame them for wanting to shift into third gear, rather than risk compromising its future? Besides, who says that the same tragedy won’t happen again in four or five years?
The report of the Parent commission (1966), set up by the Lesage government, recommended not subsidizing private schools. We could read this premonitory sentence: “To act otherwise would be equivalent to the State competing with itself with its own funds and devaluing public education. » The authors of the report perhaps did not suspect to what extent the future would prove them right.
Québec solidaire (QS) is the only party that still proposes the abolition of subsidies to private schools. Of course, this was never discussed in the Quebec Liberal Party or the CAQ.
The Parti Québécois (PQ), which has long advocated the gradual disengagement of the State, has given up on setting a timetable, which gave rise to a fairly lively debate at the last National Council, where some denounced the “pious wishes which do not commit to anything.”
Both QS and the PQ recommend the creation of a “Parent 2.0 commission”, which would pick up the reflection where it had left off almost seventy years ago. Needless to say, this would require a change of government.
PS This column will resume in January. Merry Christmas to everyone.