Dear Minister Ma,
Over the years I’ve watched the outcomes of your decisions about all manner of things from choosing an electric bike for transporting yourself around your North Vancouver riding to deftly dealing with the fallout of the atmospheric river as the Minister of Emergency Management and Climate Readiness. A friend of mine who lives in your riding has often boasted about how proud she is that you demonstrate what public service actually looks like. But lately we are both beginning to wonder about your responses to what you have called “unprecedented growth” in the Surrey school district.
In fact, growth in Surrey has not been “unprecedented” since 1956 when, in response to the post-war baby boom, portable classrooms began to be used. For the past 70 years, Surrey has continued to grow exponentially except for a slight slowdown during the pandemic. You know this. The civil engineer in you knows this.
Which is why it’s so disappointing to read your response to overcrowding Surrey schools and the fuss made about your announcement of 700 new seats in Surrey. Given the long list of needs in Surrey, the provision of those seats is clearly a drop in the bucket despite your government’s claim of “record investments”.
I’m dismayed to read that you have begun to parrot the lines that all BC Ministers of Education, regardless of political party, have uttered for several decades now: “We have provided the highest funding ever to the Surrey school district”.
That response is meaningless.
BC households are currently spending more than they ever have on groceries.
Everyone is spending more than they ever have for all manner of items, from milk to mortgages. That’s how inflation works.
I have confidence that you are by nature a rational and logical person so I know you know that the biggest school district in the province needs the biggest budget in the same way that a child who has the biggest feet needs shoes that fit their feet. What’s happening now with funding is that Surrey is like a child with size 11 feet being asked to make do with size 9 shoes.
Why is it that the percentage of the GDP given to school district operating grants has decreased over the past 25 years?
Parents and advocates for a fully-funded public education system see this injustice clearly but when they raise awareness about it, they are ping ponged between school boards and the government thus:
Advocates to School Board: We need more resources and more classrooms for our children.
School Board to Advocates: We know. The government doesn’t give us enough funding. Go speak to the government.
Advocates to Government: We need more classrooms and more resources to support students’ learning.
Government to Advocates: We provide enough funding to your school board. Go speak to them about what your school needs.
And around and around it has gone for decades while the tiny public education window that’s open for a few years to help a child learn slowly closes until they leave through the cracks and enter other publicly funded systems where the cost of responding to learning disabilities and/or their mental health needs skyrockets.
One way or another, the cost of underfunding public education will be paid.
The logical and rational economic response would be to provide the funding when it’s least expensive to do so.
Like repairing the cracks in a bridge before it collapses. Or building dykes and strengthening infrastructure before the next atmospheric river dumps enough rain to cut off road access to the rest of Canada.
Like responding to a child’s needs while they’re still in a public school, before they become an adult acting out publicly on unmet needs.
Today’s announcement of 700 news seats coupled with the district’s attempt to mitigate the massive need for more space through hybrid learning is like providing a bucket of water to fight a fire engulfing a building.
Your government can do better, Minister Ma.
We know you can.
Sincerely,
Lizanne
Moving Paradigms 