The following letter was sent to the Roundtable reps and raises several critical issues regarding the crisis in education that has existed long before October 7th, 2005.

Dear Education Roundtable representatives,

In 1999, the province commissioned an independent Review of Special Education in reaction to widespread concerns that special education was in crisis at that time. That review received numerous submissions, including one from BCCPAC that highlighted provincial underfunding of special ed and the threat this posed to inclusive education, with local school boards and their staff ill-equipped and failing to live up to provincial special education policies. In 2001, the report of this Review was almost entirely ignored by the incoming government, which instituted far reaching changes, including funding policies that forced deep cuts at the local level, greatly aggravating the existing challenges in special education. As the BC Association for Community Living (BCACL) memo copied below illustrates, those changes have taken things from bad to worse, threatening inclusion and posing a very real crisis for children with developmental disabilities and other special needs.

Successive NPA and COPE School Boards in Vancouver have repeatedly documented how this funding gap forces them to divert millions intended for general education, thus hurting all students. The BCTF has consistently highlighted this concern, making it a focal point of the recent job action. And while BCCPAC has been less vocal in recent years, its members have continued to pass numerous resolutions expressing concern about underfunding of special education and other special learning needs. In 2004, even MLAs representing the current government urged their leaders to restore funding for special education in the report of their budget review committee. That the crisis identified by special education advocates in the late 1990s has deepened, becoming chronic and systemic and ever more daunting does not make it any less a crisis!

Regrettably, the Minister has seen fit to selectively represent the provincial parent voice at the new roundtable, and to exclude any voices that can speak purely for students with special learning needs at a table where this is clearly a central issue. This places an added responsibility on those appointed to the roundtable to represent all students in our education system, regardless of your organizational goals and policies or member priorities. You have been given an opportunity to stop the appalling betrayal of our most vulnerable students by acknowledging and addressing the central and undeniable role of consistent provincial underfunding in the crisis that faces so many of our students with special learning needs, including ESL and Aboriginal students and other children with unique needs today. As the parent of a child with special needs and advocate who has accompanied many other parents through their own children’s individual school crises, I urge that you seek outside support and input if necessary to accomplish this, so that we can address this crisis promptly and restore the promise of inclusive education once and for all.

Dawn Steele

Parent of a child with special needs, David Livingstone Elementary (a non-BCCPAC member), Vancouver.

CC: Vancouver DPAC; SOS; BCSPE; BCACL; Opposition Education Critic John Horgan;

UBC faculty from UBC-Vancouver and UBC-Okanagan, meeting via video link passed overwhelmingly passed a motion to contribute $5000.00 to the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators Feed the Teachers Fund. Moved by Stephen Petrina and seconded by Charles Menzies the motion recognized the important work that BC teachers have been doing in standing up to an intransigent government.

A member from UBC-O, speaking in favour of the motion, reminded us that in Kelowna they understand what it is like to be on strike and “this motion is the least that we can do.” Others speaking in favour of the motion made reference to the important human rights issues involved.

One member who spoke against the motion raised the issue of ‘fiscal responsibility’ and questioned whether this was a wise investment of faculty association dollars. The other speaker opposed to the motion read excerpts from the purpose of the association as stated in the bylaws and constitution of the faculty association and rhetorically asked where the words political could be found in our mandate suggesting that the motion was a political act and our purpose was simply to look after the interests of our membership.

However, the overwhelming vote of support (by a margin of two to one, clearly demonstrates the associations’ recognition of the significance of the action taken by the teachers and the inappropriate behaviour of the government in this struggle.