Friday, September 21, 2007

London Fog interview with Paul McKeever:
Public education

Updated below…

This third instalment of the London Fog's exclusive interview with Paul McKeever, leader of the Freedom Party of Ontario and candidate for London West, follows what has been the hot topic of the provincial election over the past weeks — public education.

In this segment of the interview recorded in August, McKeever offers what he sees as the prospects for John Tory's proposal to extend government funding to religious schools — "the biggest violation of religious freedom ever experienced in this province" — and also discusses his party's platform for primary and secondary education — "our position is that someone whose children are not attending school should not be paying for education."

"Education is a cost of living and we can't fool ourselves that just because we pay it through taxes we're not paying it."
Run-time: 5:23. Videos edited by Mike. Each instalment of the London Fog interview with Paul McKeever can be seen here.

See also: Paul McKeever's message to the constituents of London West.

Update, September 21: Kim Campbell was once famously said to have remarked that "an election is no time to discuss serious issues." From Sun Media's Campaign Notebook:
COMPLICATING THE COMPLEX

The PC faith-based school funding pledge is confusing already, but one lesser-known party leader is adding another layer of detail. Paul McKeever, head of the Freedom party, says the "Charter implications have so far gone unnoticed." The proposal, he says, would "deprive religious schools of Charter protections" . . . zzzzz

. . .oh, sorry, we blacked out there for a minute.
What attraction Campbell's observation has for the media should not go unnoticed either.

2 comments:

Leslie said...

It's an interesting concept to think about on many levels.

Any estimates on what the cost would be per student?

MapMaster said...

Both higher and lower that it is now. In many schools, by virtue of competition, it would certainly be lower than the current price per student. Other schools would likely establish higher quality and higher prices as a result than at present… but the benefits of acquiring an education at those institutions would be compensatorily much higher as well.