EDUCATION Various public statements has maintained ment” but has insisted that the cuts have been made necessary by orld-wide recession” and the | accompanying reduction in government | revenues. Universities Minister Pat McGeer | has gone even further, arguing in an Oct. _ 17, 1984 interview with the Vancouver Sun that education has done well compared to | not been asked to do what the government has done...” he said. “Education has eceived a very preferential treament,” he | | against the facts? | @ If education “has a high priority, the | Share of provincial budgets devoted to _ education should compare well with other | provinces which have also suffered from | the “world-wide recession.” In fact, using | 1983 figures, British Columbia’s educa- | tion spending was only 15.5 percent of the | provincial budget — the lowest level of _| any province in Canada, Newfoundland | included. The Canadian average was 21. 2 | per cent. @ In the three years since the restraint _| program was announced by the govern- | ment, there have been a dozen new taxes _ introduced by the Social Credit govern- _ ment. According to Sun columnist Mar- ' jorie Nichols, they have generated - $1,200,000 in revenue. Yet during that | Same period, education spending declined, | _an indication of the priority it has on the _ government's list. _ But what about Heinrich’s claim that _ the money isn’t available because of de- clining revenues? ‘Education: Minister Jack Hench in” cation “has a high priority in his - | other areas. “The education system... .has_ ‘How do those statements stack up . @ Actually the government is overlook- ing millions in school taxes that could be made available. According to the brief on taxation submitted to Finance Minister Hugh Curtis Oct. 31, 1984 by the Union of B.C. Municipalities, “approximately $26 billion of actual value escapes property taxation... .in relation to the 1984 school assessment roll.” The school tax portion of the total property tax on that property would bring in $150 million in revenue. @ The same UBCM brief noted that recent changes in the Assessment Act raised the exemption from value on machinery to $50,000 and increased the exemption from value of improvements on industrial and business categories to $10,000 — compared to the previous total exemption of only $1,500. In addition, the brief asked, pointedly: “Is the government aware that while the © homeowner grants only apply to one resi- dence per owner, these new assessment exemptions apply to each “‘parcel” (of land) and thus a company may. . .manipu- late the number of parcels owned as each qualifies for a separate $10,000 or $50,000 exemption?” Undoubtedly, the government was aware of that discriminatory practice but allowed it to give a tax break to corpora- tions. The revenue lost to the government as a result of that tax break amounted to $42 million. @ In its February, 1984 budget, the provincial government took $470 million in general revenue and, in a move widely criticized even in the business world, set up -a sinking fund to provide for the retire- ment of the B.C. Rail debt. The usual annual debt Payee would have been $70 million. - If the goverament had taken the $400 — million over and above the regular pay- ment on debt retirement and kept it in general revenue, it could have kept educa- tion funding at the previous year’s level ’ plus inflation — and reduce the budget deficit at the same time. The $470 million payment went to B.C. Rail creditors and bondholders, at the expense of B.C. tax- paves @ Decisions on spending made by the government also throw into question both the priority of education and the claims of a funding squeeze. Expo will cost $802 ~ million — and, as the Crown corporation has now admitted, it will lose $311 million. The Coquihalla highway, a project of questionable economic value, will cost $350 million; and the government’s study, “Let’s Talk about Schools” which has been rejected throughout the education community, will cost taxpayers $8 million and accomplish nothing. The total lack of any economic justifica- tion for the education cuts — and the calamitous consequences of those cuts in the long term — has prompted even con- servative spokesmen to question them. @ Jim Matkin, president of the Business Council of B.C., and a frequent advocate of the government's restraint program, stated Oct. 14, 1984: “Public es Analysis in education i is one expenditure that can- | not be restrained. Educational restanl is a mistake.” -_ @The Association of B.C. Scho Superintendents, in the “Statement of Concern for Public Education in B.C.”, March, 1984, wrote**Even if humanitarian considerations are put to one side and fiscal restraint is considered purely in cost- benefit terms, continued cuts of the cur- rent severity can only be detrimental tothe | province’s economy. Investment in today’s pupils is an investment in tomorrow's workforce; in a real sense, public educa- tion is the province’s foremost resource industry.” Robert Walker, an a acaion finance _ researcher at Simon Fraser University, has _ noted that the “real tragedy” of education cutbacks are already beginning to show. B.C. already has the lowest university par- ticipation rate for those age 18-24 of any province in Canada — 9.1 per cent com- pared to a national average of 13.4 per cent. B.C. is the only province where uni- — versity enrolment is down, the result of deliberate’ government restraint policies. Walker stated Oct. 15, 1984: “If the provincial government wants to mortgage _ the future of B.C.’s people and make the province an educational backwater, it is going about it in the right way.” How much money is involved in the — campaign to restore school board budgets? Just $50 million. Fifty million dollars would bring 1985-86 funding up to the 1984 level with an additional three per cent for inflation. Fifty million dollars — or one-fifth of the money that the govern- ment will be giving in Lotto 649 money to Expo to make up its deficit. ‘Island conference echoes funding demand Continued from page 1 Some 50 students’ representatives met all day Saturday at the Vancouver School Board offices and emerged at 4 p.m. witha plan fora sit-in protest Wednesday, Jan. 30, Called a “Black Day”. Point Grey student leader Tom Quin told Teporters that students would be encour- aged to come to school wearing black clo- thing or a black armband and to remain on School premises after final dismissal until the schools’ doors are locked, some time before 6 p.m. During that time, students could write - letters to the government’ or whatever,” Quin said. _ Several schools, including King George in Vancouver’s West End will be holding public rallies at that time. _ Another initiative sparked by the meet- ing Saturday calls for petitions to be circu- lated throughout the province to broaden the demand for more education funding to Students outside the Lower Mainland. Underlying all the students’ plans was the Concern that the government demands for - _ budget cuts would cripple educational ser- | Vices and programs. | __ Quin told a press conference the previous day, when asked about students’ reactions _ to Bennett and Heinrich “students don’t like them. “Bennett said he hoped people would Support education and not more money for . teachers’ raises,” Quin said. “But I’ve not _ heard a thing about teachers’ raises. I don’t know where he gets that from.” -Last week also saw the formation of a Student activists’ group, organized to sup- Port the demand for more funding for the VSB. Called the Student Alliance for Van- Couver Education (SAVE), it held its found- ing conference Sunday, bringing together Tepresentatives of students from nine Van- Couver secondary schools including repre- ~ Sentatives of Save Our Schools which was Set up by the students’ councils. In a statement the group also came out TOM QUIN (1), CHUCK GOSBEE.. protest government budget cuts. against students walkouts, voicing concern that further such action would put blame on both board trutees and teachers (although VSB communications director Chuck Gos- bee wrongly attributed the call by a student “splinter group” for more walkouts to SAVE). SAVE spokesman Tim Pelzer told the Tribune Monday that the group was formed as an independent student movement in an effort to focus the protest against the pro- vincial government. ~ He said the group would fully support the “Black Day” protest Wednesday as well as the petition campaign. Pelzer said that a demonstration against school cuts has been called for Feb. 9, tenta- tively set for the Queen Elizabeth Plaza in downtown Vancouver. SAVE is demanding the restoration of the Vancouver School Board’s 1985 budget to 1984 levels, adjusted for inflation. “We demand that education be recog- nized as a key investment in the social and .seeking constructive way to enable euideats to economic future of the city and the pro- © vince, not as an expendable frill or a politi- cal football,” the group declared in a statement Sunday. That same point was hammered home by a conference Saturday of some 100 people, representing parents, trustees, teachers and support staff unions from 11 Vancouver Island school districts who met in Nanaimo and demanded that the provincial govern- ment end its education restraint program, restore local. board autonomy and restore . education budgets. The telegram, sent to . Heinrich, demanded a reply by Feb. 7. Similar meetings are set to take place in the interior as well as the Kootenays i in the coming days. All of the meetings so far have demon- strated the powerful momentum that has built up in the province over the issue that will ultimately force the Bennett govern- ment to adjust its financial priorities —or confront virtually the entire educational community. The meetings have given support to a substantial number of boards who are ria and are putting added pressure on those boards which so far have been prepared to - acquiesce before government cuts. The meetings have also contributed to the growing isolation both of the provincial government and of Education Minister Jack Heinrich who has lashed out at stu- dents, boards and teachers alike. Henrich has repeatedly charged that the Vancouver School Board was the instigator of the student walkouts, a charge that has been repudiated by both the B.C. School Trustees Association and the B.C. Teachers’ Federation. The education minister has hinted that boards submitting needs budgets are step- ping outside legal boundaries in doing so and may be subject to government action, including the imposition of trusteeship. But according to legal opinion prepared by Campney and Murphy, counsel for the B.C. School Trustees Association, in Janu- ary, 1983, and confirmed last January by the B.C. Teachers’ Federation counsel, “there is no legal barrier” to boards submit- ting budgets that reflect their actual needs rather than limits imposed by the provincial government. The campaign is expected to mount between now and Feb. 15 when the six- months budget from January to June, 1985 and again until March 15 when the 1985-86 budget must be submitted to Victoria. Various meetings are scheduled in Van- couver over the next few weeks. On Jan. 31, a meeting of parents from across Van- couver is set for 7:30 p.m. at Mount Plea- sant School, to be followed by a presentation of briefs to the VSB at Charles Tupper, 7:30 p.m. on Feb. 4. The B.C. School Trustees Association is also expected to hold an emergency meeting this week. Some action, possibly a mass rally, is also expected in Victoria on the day of the open- ing of the legislature Feb. 11. — SEAN GRIFFIN TRIBUNE PHOTO PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JANUARY 30, 1985 e 3 intent on sending “needs” budgets to Victo- .