I conducted a wee search to reveal interesting information. A study published sometime in the early 1990s, that BC private schools receiving government funding were able to improved their education programs.
http://www.csse-scee.ca/CJE/Articles/FullText/CJE18-1/CJE18-1-03VanBrummelen.pdf

Which reminded me, does the K to 12 object to the giving of public monies to private colleges or charities?  Apparently not. In the Tyee, the argument is the public system’s funding from 2005, 16.9 % versus private school funding of 45.6 %.. However, they do not object to the giving of public monies to specialized private schools such as an Autism school. http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2014/03/15/BC-Private-School-Boom/

In The Province, the argument is that private schools can pick and choose their students. “Froese argues that the $300 million taxpayers spend on private schools each year is actually a good deal, because it would cost more to educate those kids in the public system.” http://www.theprovince.com/life/Michael+Smyth+Public+private+schools+philosophical+difference/9937640/story.html

No matter what the arguments are, there is no way of overcoming the one true fact - “.... that private schools reduce overall educational costs for government, which is one reason the government will keep funding them.”

Another interesting take is that the teachers’ unions are themselves undermining public confidence toward the public education system.  “Cameron adds union leaders are undermining confidence in the public system by making it sound like it’s in trouble when graduation rates have significantly improved over the last decade.”
http://www.cknw.com/2014/02/25/27357/

Could it be that every time the teachers’ union goes on about public monies being paid to private schools or class composition or not enough resources, the teachers’ unions is undermining public confidence?

Ontario had an election with this as the central issue. It lost. Now no party will touch it.

Don’t say never Doug. Ontario, like other provinces are avoiding to their best ability, the looming lawsuits of students having the right to access education services. Sooner than you think Doug, the collective band of lawyers will take the K to 12 to court. The Moore case marks the beginning…........in a country where its lawyers have never been known for their education law expertise in battling the forces of the K to 12 for parents.

The Moore case has nothing to do with private school funding and it would make little difference if it did.

The majority in BC does not approve private school funding.

I would agree with Nancy on the impending high probability of class action lawsuits on the “access to education services” topic.  Like all things, the probability is not just buoyed by the volume of folks becoming aware of their “rights” but also by the large volume of lawyers who are becoming less required. Thus, one is seeing higher risk activities such as major contingency fee law suits, rather than fee driven engagements, emerging as a growth area.

May be time to for the public serving unions to realize that positive proactivity in this area could be a solid plank for the government. Current rump reactionary behaviour establishes stronger grounds for the plaintiffs.

The result of the Moore case is that school boards will be told you need to increase services to some students.

They will do that either by cutting services to other students or raising taxes at the provincial level.

Doug, the Supreme Court of Canada give out a ruling that discrimination took place. In the Globe, “What it makes clear: When a province promises equal education for all students, school boards must deliver – not just an equality of opportunity but a real striving for equally positive outcomes for all, at least within each person’s limits.” http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/what-does-equal-education-look-like-after-the-landmark-court-ruling/article5864255/?page=all

The court also made it very clear that budget constraints is no longer an excuse. The school boards across Canada, are a ticking bomb because not one school board is respecting the ruling - “the legal rights of students with learning disabilities to receive an education that gives them an opportunity to develop their full potential.” http://www.ldao.ca/educational-implications-of-recent-supreme-court-ruling/

The lawsuits will be lead by the dyslexic students and in partnership with the autism students, Both groups have the same problem in the inclusive classroom. They are not given the skills in the 3 Rs to access the educational opportunities of the classroom.

At least in the private schools arena, there is schools for LD and Autism students. If the public K to 12 don’t want to teach the LD and Autism students to reach their full academic potential, let the private schools do it using public monies.

Why do you think the federations intervened in Moore Case. They are just as happy as you are. They know it means more money for public education.

The federation intervened to protect the teachers evolved with the Moore boy, in the off chance that both sides would fling mud towards the teachers. If Doug had studied the Moore case, the BC teacher federation chose legal considerations over the Moore boy. Judging from their actions after the Moore case, they are pretty silent over the needs of LD and dyslexic students. More like icy silence when it comes to the reading instruction. In BC, systematic phonics to Orton-Gillingham methods are swear words and just like the other provinces.

No it does not mean more money for the SE students. All the SE funding in the last 20 years has benefitted the K to 12 in staff salaries. To pay for inclusive classrooms where the LD kid is tossed a laptop and told to learn on their own to read, write and do arithmetic. Not much as change, it still take 3 years or more for an assessment, and even then fewer kids are identified as having LD. Why? For some strange reason having low phonemic awareness does not qualified the student for having a reading deficit.

Private LD schools do an excellent job on the students who are considered unteachable in the public K to 12, and turn the students into academic students in a few short years.

Nonsense. The Federation supported the Moore Case flat out.

Anyone who doubts that just google BCTF and Moore Case and check.

https://www.bctf.ca/NewsReleases.aspx?id=15350

The BCTF supported the Moore case to attack the school board and education of ministry. The Moore boy became a handy tool for privatization prior and after the Supreme Court ruling. The BCTF had intervenor status -
http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/info/parties-eng.aspx?cas=34041

The BCTF factum is nowhere to be found. However the BCTF intervenor status did no harm for the Moore boy but it did cause damage for the school board and education ministry.

An example for 2013 how the BCTF uses the Moore case - http://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/TeacherNewsmag/archive/2012-2013/2013-03/March2013.pdf

I shall repeat, the BCTF is very quiet on the reading, writing and numeracy instruction for SE children, and more so with the LD and Dyslexic students.  As Frank had stated, “. Current rump reactionary behaviour establishes stronger grounds for the plaintiffs.”  If the teachers’ unions really wanted to be proactive, they can start with the pedagogy and instructional practices that keeps students poor readers and writers. Otherwise, face the lawsuits from parents demanding placement in private schools, without having to sell their homes to pay for the tuition.