Friday, December 09, 2005

Good intentions always makes for bad law

Dalton McGuinty, the current premier of Ontario, has announced what the Toronto Star called the carrot part of his "stay in school" legislation which is expected to be officially unveiled next week.
In a bid to cut dropout rates in half within five years, high school students will soon get more hands-on learning through new co-op programs and diplomas that let them specialize, Premier Dalton McGuinty says. The changes are part of a carrot-and-stick plan. The stick comes next Tuesday with long-promised legislation requiring students to stay in school until age 18, up from 16 now.

It’s a given that my taxes are going to soar beyond the known horizon with the carrot part of this initiative for the 45,000 students who actively choose to tune and drop out annually but I admit it's the stick part of the legislation that concerns me more as a citizen and a mother of many.

Our children don’t learn in a one-size-fits-all way nor does education end past the fence of the schoolyard. Sometimes young people need a break from school and a year or two of asking, “Do you want fries with that?” for a living. Life experience is probably the most effective motivational strategy of all time for putting your head to the grindstone and nose back into the books.

I am also concerned that with the past liberal record for shortsightedness that they will neglect to introduce exceptions into their legislation to allow students who finish the secondary school curriculum well before their 18th birthday. With the Liberals running the show I can hear the "oops" already. Imagine graduating with honours and still be required to attend high school for an additional 20 months till you reach your majority. There are students like that. I live with one.

I use to tell my children that the first two years at High School could be rough but wait it out and all those who don’t want to be there will be gone. Teenagers who do not want to be in school create a terribly poisoned environment for learning for those who do but why should Liberals care about them? They don’t meet the litmus test for victimhood - at least not yet.

In my day, the the thug element usually managed to leave at the earliest possible moment which gave all of us greater breathing room. Here’s to walking on eggshells for another 2 years and dodging bullets. When you can’t count on the thug element dropping out just how do you plan to protect the rest? I can’t wait to hear how McGirlieman intends to do that – perhaps there will be a Liberal ban on all things criminal and thuggery? That ought to kick ass.

From where I am sitting on the east side of downtown Toronto; Alberta has never looked so good.

2 comments:

Canadianna said...

I hear you. Some people should leave school at the earliest opportunity for the safety of all involved.
And for some kids, school just isn't their thing.
How is this going to be enforced? Will it be a case of drag the parents to court and fine them?
This is another 'feel good' policy meant to appear as though government loves our children, without having to put too much thought into it.

Candace said...

Okay, so McGuinty probably agrees with the Liberal stand that 14 yr olds are mature enough to make a decision about whether or not to have sex, and whether it's okay that the person they choose to have sex with is 20 or 30 years older than them, but they are not mature enough at 16, 2 years later, to decide that school is not for them?

How stupid is that?