Stifling Dissent Through Blocking?

Should politicians block citizens they don’t happen to agree with, or who are clearly partisan, from following them on social media such as Twitter and Facebook?

That’s a question being asked in Canada and the United States. The answer is simple: No.

Globe and MailPoliticians are wrong to block people on social media

Today the Globe and Mail came out with a great editorial on the ethics of blocking. This has become an issue of some concern as legitimate dissent has been stifled on politician’s social media feeds when people have been blocked on Twitter or Facebook.

The comments were really interesting too. One reader commented that they had actually been blocked by Elizabeth May when they were a Green Party supporter. The reader subsequently left the party and never voted for May again.

I was blocked by Elizabeth May some years ago when I actually held a Green Party membership.

I did not renew and did not vote for the Green party in the subsequent election.

Globe and Mail, August 7, 2017 Comment

Good for that reader -there are consequences for stifling dissent.

As a principal of a Catholic School in Ottawa, I did block people on Twitter – it was the wrong decision.

I blocked someone on the Catholic Right who was very critical of the Catholic School System. I had had enough of right-wing commentators so I blocked them from my Twitter account. I did this out of frustration and anger and while they were effectively silenced from my feed, my action showed my lack of tolerance for an opinion that was different from my own. It was certainly a weak decision.

Once I retired, I began to write a series of articles that were critical of my former employers. The Catholic Board in Ottawa is a public entity, supported entirely by the tax payers of Ontario. I have come to believe that we no longer need separate schools in our province and that we could do a better job for students if we had a single, strong system that caters to all students in the province.

This opinion was not popular with many of my former colleagues, and to their credit, many voiced their opinion on Facebook. I did not block them – they have the right to express their dissent.

To my surprise, a senior member of the school board blocked me on Twitter. This action was no doubt due to the series of articles that I had written.

How is this right? A superintendent is a public official, their salaries are paid out of the public purse. As public officials do they have the right to stifle legitimate dissent by blocking people on social media?

I would extend what the Globe has written to all public officials,

No MP, or even a cabinet minister, will be criticized for blocking anyone who posts hateful messages or engages in harassment.

But barring that, it’s wrong for elected officials to choose which Canadians can see what they think, and which ones can’t.

In an age where public comment is seen by the highest authorities as ‘fake news’, we need to have even greater respect for public opinion, not just those who happen to agree with a particular mindset.

What are the Key Arguments that keep Ontario Catholic Schools Going?

Are religion and politics really topics that lead to discord and bad blogging? That is hard to say, but it is interesting to read what people say about public schools in Ontario. These are not new arguments, but are these the key points in the debate? Can we take this to a higher level? I have been monitoring a healthy debate on my Facebook page and some key points are coming out. I won’t copy all the comments here, but some of what has been written illustrate some key points in the debate.
I will comment on most of these points, but I don’t profess to have any definitive answers. The debate is sure to continue.

The only way it could save money is to close one system and not educate the kids who are in that system. Funding is on a per pupil basis so the funding would remain the same. It would cost millions extra to do all the administrative changes. So spend millions to save nothing?

 I don’t think this should exclusively be a debate about dollars, but I believe there is a case for rationalizing systems. Here in Ottawa, we have already amalgamated our transportation system and we share resources when it comes to serving some of our neediest students along with the Children’s Hospital of Ontario and the public board. However, we operate parallel systems when it comes to upper management and trustees.
It’s not always about money. There is a message being sent that we are a society divided on religious differences. That message needs to end.
We have to see the truth in this statement. This is a secular society. We are trying to become a more inclusive society in a world that seems to be growing in intolerance for the other. How then can we justify funding a system that keeps us separate as a society?
And it can be about the money… let’s take Stratford as an example. There are 2 public high schools and one Catholic high school. The student population dictates the need for 2 schools. The public board cannot accommodate all its students in one school. If there was only 1 school board, money could be saved by closing one school.
Back to economics. Some schools could be closed if there was one public board. There are many examples now, especially in rural areas of the province where it is no longer feasible to fund schools for more than one system. In my neighbourhood, there are two schools both at 30% capacity – how can we justify this expense?
Parents want choice. Amalgamating boards panders to the lowest common denominator. In Ottawa the public school board has been mismanaged, schools are being closed, kids bused long distances to other schools… Poor management on the part of the public board.
This is the worst type of argument for Catholic schools, but I have heard this for years. There is an underlying bias within the Catholic school system that these schools are simply ‘better’. Somehow, the Catholic system was better managed. I don’t see this. I have been an administrator in the Catholic system and have seen many examples of very poor management. Both systems have their faults. To say that one is inherently better managed than the other shows an embarrassing bias and should not be part of this debate.
Catholic education is protected by the Constitution. We have fought for 150 years for the right to have our schools. We built our own schools, funded them, paid our own teachers, paid to have our students attend, and on top of that, paid public school taxes too. We are not better, just smarter, perhaps because Catholic education was just so important to us. 
The Constitution argument will also not hold water. You can go back to 1791 to find protections for Catholic minorities. Things change a great deal over 200 years. Policies enacted centuries ago do not necessarily have any bearing on what goes on in our society today. Special provisions protecting a Catholic system were designed to sustain minorities in pre-Confederation societies. If we follow along with this logic, we would need to protect a whole host of minorities that did not exist in 1791 or 1867.
Such an important issue to learn and talk about. It is time to look away from the past – what was owed/what used to happen – and look at our schools right now. There is no longer a need for any type of publicly-funded, denominational school. Catholics, formally named, are in decline; active, practicing Catholics even fewer. Our money and our energy should be directed at giving the best, equitable education to all children.
I think this comment speaks for itself.
The conversation is coming to an election soon….. as soon as a party sees it as a winning strategy, they will buy in. I teach in the Catholic system and it has been a positive part of my life for many years – but I have always feared that the end of the system would come from within and not from the outside. Building walls and presenting a message that is not inclusive and welcoming could spell the end….
This is an important point. Every year we witness another story where Catholic schools fail to be inclusive. The most recent example is happening right now in Niagara where Catholic schools are canceling a play designed for elementary students because it explores issues surrounding gender identity. (Niagara Catholic schools nixed play on gender for being ‘not age-appropriate’)

The Silent Topic: Time to Merge School Boards in Ontario?

I listened to a great noon-time discussion on CBC Radio Ottawa on the merger of school boards in Ontario.

Currently, in Ottawa we have four different, publically funded school boards. Two are Catholic, two are public. The origins of this system goes back to 1759 and 1867. The question was brought up during the program why we need to have a system that allows for a faith-based school system?

Originally in Ontario, all education was based on faith. There were Protestant and Catholic school systems. Over time, the Protestant system became public and non-denominational.  I would argue that the same process is happening in the Catholic system that is gradually losing its Catholic character.

Catholic schools now admit students of all faiths – something that I have seen as a very positive step. However, Catholic schools are still allowed to discriminate against teachers who must be Catholic to get a permanent job in this system.

David King, a former Alberta minister of education was the guest during the afternoon show. He made the strong argument that Catholic schools were no longer necessary as the Catholic minority is no longer in a position where their identity is threatened. As I have mentioned in earlier posts, decisions made in 1791, 1846 or 1967 should not guide policy in the 21st Century.

It was interesting to listen to some of the callers during the program. The argument was made by some that Catholics have a right to be taught in a Catholic atmosphere. I am not sure anymore why one group has a special right to an education based on their particular faith. In a secular society, we need to consider how we can combine the strengths of all systems to develop a unified strong public system that caters equally to all families.

In the last school I worked at as a principal, very few students were Catholic. We prided ourselves in being inclusive to all cultures and faiths. We worked hard to support families new to the country. At the same time, another school, also excellent in our neighbourhood supports the same population. Both schools are at approximately at 30% capacity. Why not bring the resources of both schools together to better serve the community?

I hope we in Ontario will have the courage to take on this debate. Public education dollars are scarce, and we have a responsibility to offer our children the best education possible. How are we doing this when so many services in education – especially at the management level are redundant?

Why does this remain – apart from the CBC – the silent topic in Ontario?