Is It That They Don’t Care About Us?
A Tale of Two Reviews
The review into anti-Black racism at the Peel District School Board (PDSBR) is riddled with confusion, an absence of anti-Black racism expertise and a poor approach to stakeholder engagement. It lacks independence from the provincial government that would allow the process to freely explore the issues without political interference. It begs the question: Is the government truly committed to addressing anti-Black racism and creating inclusive schools for Black students?
Minister Lecce’s stubborn refusal to acquiesce to a simple request to appoint an individual with expertise in anti-Black racism leaves us asking “Why?” In the interest of creating the necessary environment to gather and appropriately contextualise information, it is critical to have a reviewer the Black community can identify with and relate to.
In 2016, the provincial Liberal government asked the Honourable Michael H. Tulloch, the first Black judge appointed to the Court of Appeal for Ontario, to conduct a review of the regulation governing street checks¹, a policing practice that disproportionately targeted the Black community, especially Black youth aged 14–25².
Consider the following in how the Independent Street Checks Review (ISCR) compares to the PDSBR:
Reviewer Appointment
- ISCR: An order in council was released announcing Justice Tulloch’s appointment as the Independent Reviewer with autonomy to direct the Review’s work.
- PDSBR: Neither the press release³ nor the order in council⁴ named Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) Patrick Case as a reviewer. Following denunciation from the Black community, Minister Lecce said ADM Case has been deputised to lead the process.⁵
ADM Case is a senior bureaucrat subject to the will and direction of political staff, which means he lacks the autonomy necessary to participate objectively. Independence would be preferred.
Representation
- ISCR: The counsel and administrative teams comprised Black, Indigenous, South Asian and White experts, and a former police chief.⁶
- PDSBR: The two reviewers are White and South Asian.
While they are experts in their fields, they are not experts in anti-Black racism. This is concerning because the reviewers will lead an exercise that must accurately contextualise and report the lived experiences of the Black community, and create an environment that allows for uninhibited sharing of the discriminatory ways in which the education system interacts with Black students and parents. A qualified Black reviewer is needed.
Stakeholder Engagement
- ISCR: A comprehensive strategy was implemented. The Review prioritised openness through multiple avenues for participation, including a website which provided information about the Review’s progress, active social media presence, an online survey, a schedule of public consultations and a team dedicated to stakeholder and community outreach.
- PDSBR: Minimal access points. Willing participants must send an email requesting an interview which is not guaranteed.
Why is the review outside the public view? How does it determine whose contributions are valuable and should be prioritised? Reviewers should have the responsibility of actively identifying students and parents who have experienced anti-Black racism and not wait for interested participants to present themselves.
Timing
- ISCR: The terms of reference (TOR) required a report by November 30, 2018⁷; almost 2 years after the review was publicly announced.⁸
- PDSBR: Minister Lecce wants an interim report by the end of 2019 and a full report by Winter 2020 — a mere 4 months after being established.⁹
While immediacy is welcomed, one must ask, “Why must the Black community be rushed to articulate how the education system oppresses them?” Rather than act of his own volition and moral and professional obligation, the situation at PDSB only became urgent when two White trustees — then Chair, Stan Cameron, and Vice Chair, Sue Lawton — requested intervention.¹⁰ A longer time is needed for discussion to get to the root of the issues.
Internal Expertise
- ISCR: The TOR required input from the Minister Responsible for Anti-racism and the Independent Police Review Director.
- PDSBR: The government has mentioned no collaboration with the Anti-Racism Directorate (ARD), created to address anti-Black racism and its associated problems in the education sector.
Why do they seem uncomfortable using readily available anti-Black racism expertise at the ARD given that the ARD had created an anti-Black racism strategy, a component of which focused on education?
The above comparison reveals a worrying contempt that the government has for the Black community. It is in no uncertain terms a gross disrespect and an affront to their dignity.
Both representation and the process in this review are lacking, and seem to represent as Michael Jackson said, “They don’t really care about us.”¹¹
______________________
¹https://www.ontario.ca/orders-in-council/oc-10582017?_ga=2.268033294.1499226709.1507223127-549745450.1507223127
²https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/static_images/advancedfindings2010.pdf
³https://news.ontario.ca/edu/en/2019/11/review-of-the-peel-district-school-board.html
⁴https://www.ontario.ca/orders-in-council/oc-16712019
⁵https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/house-documents/parliament-42/session-1/2019-12-03/hansard
⁶https://streetchecksreview.ca/our-team.html
⁷https://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/Policing/StreetChecks/StreetChecksIndependentReviewTaskForceTermsReference.html
⁸https://news.ontario.ca/mcscs/en/2017/06/ontario-appoints-independent-street-checks-reviewer.html
⁹https://news.ontario.ca/edu/en/2019/11/review-of-peel-district-school-board-to-commence.html
¹⁰http://peelschools.org/media/newsreleases/Pages/Article.aspx?art-id=2656
¹¹https://youtu.be/QNJL6nfu__Q
