Trashy's World Rotating Header Image

Perhaps a step toward…

…one school system in Ontario?

One can only hope. It will likely fail, but will expose the farcical inequities in our education system to those Ontarians who are, at present, blissfully unaware.

But you can bet that I and the many others who want to see the end of faith-based education funding in Ontario will be watching this case with interest.

The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled that Sect. 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which guarantees Catholic school funding in Ontario, is immune from Charter challenges. (The Charter specifically exempts from review all rights guaranteed in the constitution.)

But Landau (the Plaintiff) contends that the obvious inequality that results must, by law, be narrowly defined.

To that end, she contends that Catholic school funding should be based today on the 1867 model, one that strictly limited government support.

In her application, filed in the Superior Court of Justice, Landau asks for an order that eliminates all government aid for Catholic schools from Grades 9 to 12.

She also seeks an order that limits the funding of Grades 1 to 8 to “only that aid available in 1867, that is, only property taxes from Catholics who declare themselves to be separate school supporters and who live within three miles of a separate school, and property taxes from wholly Catholic-owned businesses.”

She argues the current funding system unjustly forces her, through the tax system, to support Catholic schools.

“It means I’m being forced to fund a system that has sectarian views of which I do not approve,” she said. “I’m therefore being discriminated against because a Catholic is not being forced to fund a system of which they do not approve.”

You go, girl! And if you happen to come across this blog, let me know if I can help.


Be Sociable, Share!


  1. CL says:

    Hello again. I’ve given this some more thought and actually, I think it would be best if she wins her case.

    Defund Catholic Schools

  2. CL says

    “There is nothing brave going on here; just another cowardly attack on our Lord and Saviour.”

    You talk big, but you don’t mention why your “Lord and Saviour” doesn’t arrive to confront his attacker. Don’t say “our”; I’m not part of your group.

    1. trashee says:

      Approve and agree.
      Thanks for visiting.

  3. CL says:

    In Canada there is no presumption of separation of church and state. That is a American concept but is not a US law either, which most people do not know. There is nothing brave going on here; just another cowardly attack on our Lord and Saviour.

    1. trashee says:

      Hmmm… after reading your blog, I can see why you would post something like that.
      You are dead wrong about the separation of church and State. Our legal system is mostly (except for Quebec) based on British Common Law and the prsumption of this separation goes back to Henry VII. You may have heard of him.
      In any case, you can worship at feet of whatever lord and saviour you see fit. But do not align me with this – your faith is not something I have ever shared not ever will.
      But I respect your right to speak about it; else I would simply moved your comment to the spam folder.
      Arguing about this back and forth won’t change the minds of either of us. Just consign me to your image of hell and be done with it.
      Yours in humanism!

      1. CL says:

        Henry VII had a son, Henry VIII, who separated the churches in England from the universal Catholic Church. Upon doing this he established himself as the Supreme Head of the Church of England.

        The separation of church and state was not adhered to in British Common Law and to this day the reigning monarch is also the titular head of the Church of England.

  4. Shio says:

    Times have changed. At last, here is an intelligent woman bravely articulating what many Ontarians feel and have been muttering amongst themselves. She has my support. Religions should be treated equally, and we should also bolster the separation between “church and state” (religion and government, or at least, religion and the law).

  5. cathy brede says:

    This is fantastic news! I hope the media really pick this up, and raise the awareness of how unjust this situation is, and has been for years! It is SUCH A WASTE OF TAXPAYERS’ MONEY to be running two separate school systems,especially when times are tight.

    1. cathy brede says:

      Here’s an example in today’s Citizen (Matthew Pearson’s article) of unnecessary duplication of services/facilities:

      1. trashee says:

        Just one example of how the funds saved by consolidating the separate and public systems could be put to better use! I’ve been beating on this drum for years, however… and do not seem to be gaining any ground.

    2. trashee says:

      Waste of money and facilities especially considering the overcrowding of most of our public schools. Plus, it is discriminatory.. and has been labelled by the UN as such!

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: