Ontario’s Education Minister Questions Need for Elected Trustees

Ontario’s Education Minister Paul Calandra has ignited a significant debate regarding the role of elected school board trustees, questioning the relevance of this governance model in modern education. During a recent municipal conference, Calandra characterized the current structure as outdated and suggested the possibility of eliminating trustees entirely. This statement has prompted discussions about the effectiveness of school boards and their impact on student achievement.

The fundamental purpose of trustees is to represent parents and hold school boards accountable. In practice, however, many boards seem more focused on political disputes with the provincial government, unions, and each other rather than prioritizing student outcomes. Each school board often includes layers of administration, including senior managers, communication staff, and consultants, all funded by taxpayers. Calandra’s inquiry raises a crucial point: is this governance model genuinely benefiting students, or is it merely upholding an antiquated system?

In Winnipeg, there are currently six separate school boards: Winnipeg, St. James-Assiniboia, Pembina Trails, and Louis Riel, each with its own set of trustees and administrative staff. This duplication results in substantial costs that could otherwise support educational programs such as literacy initiatives or hiring educational assistants. Instead, funds are allocated to maintain separate administrative structures.

Trustees often claim to be the “voice of parents,” yet it is questionable how many parents actually reach out to them regarding academic issues such as math performance or bullying. Most parents communicate directly with teachers and school principals. Instead of focusing on solutions that directly affect student learning, trustees frequently engage in political discussions that bear little relevance to educational outcomes.

Some regions have already moved away from this traditional governance model. In Nova Scotia, for example, the provincial government eliminated elected boards in 2018, transitioning to regional centres managed by the provincial Department of Education. Similarly, Alberta has appointed administrators to manage school boards when they have failed to maintain balanced budgets. Major cities in the United States, such as New York City and Chicago, have also adopted alternative governance structures, consolidating authority under mayoral control. These changes have not led to educational collapse; rather, they have established clearer accountability.

The current system of trustees lacks the authority to control funding, raise revenue, or alter curricula. Elected by low voter turnout—often below 20%—trustees claim to represent community interests, yet their effectiveness is frequently called into question. Calandra pointed out that trustees are frequently tasked with responsibilities for which they lack the necessary resources or power to manage effectively. This dynamic results in a blame game between trustees and the province regarding funding and resource allocation, leaving parents in a challenging position.

Had Manitoba’s governance structure been designed from scratch today, one might question whether an elected layer of trustees would be necessary between the government that funds education and the classrooms where learning occurs. In 2021, Bill 64 proposed to eliminate elected trustees in favour of regional authorities, but it faced backlash from unions and advocacy groups. The resistance stemmed not from concerns about efficiency or student outcomes, but rather from a desire to maintain established positions and influence.

In Nova Scotia, eliminating boards did not diminish parental input. Instead, school advisory councils were created, allowing parents direct access to principals and staff. This shift redirected millions spent on trustee honorariums and administrative costs back into classrooms, demonstrating a model worth considering in Ontario and beyond.

Education governance has not evolved alongside shifts in technology, demographics, and global competition. While administrative roles have proliferated, test scores stagnate, and school closures occur without significant changes in consultant contracts. Taxpayers demand accountability, yet trustees often cite their electoral mandate as a shield against criticism.

If a private business operated with such inefficiencies, stakeholders would demand reform. The educational landscape is no different; every dollar not directly enhancing student achievement should be scrutinized. Yet, school boards frequently approve larger administrative budgets, resulting in increased taxes, particularly in Manitoba, which has seen some of the steepest tax hikes in recent history.

Critics of eliminating trustees argue it undermines democracy, yet accountability is already embedded within the provincial electoral system. Ministers are elected and responsible to voters, allowing parents to demand results directly rather than navigating a convoluted hierarchy of trustees and superintendents.

The fear of centralizing power is often cited, but decentralization has not yielded positive results. Trustees complicate decision-making without real authority, while centralizing governance could place accountability squarely on one minister. This would eliminate the excuses and the shifting of blame that currently plague the system.

With millions of tax dollars potentially wasted on redundant governance, the question remains: why do classrooms continue to struggle despite this expenditure? Education funding in Ontario and Manitoba is substantial, yet parents are increasingly frustrated by teacher burnout, classroom shortages, and declining academic outcomes.

Calandra’s remarks challenge the status quo, urging a reevaluation of an outdated system. Other provinces should not dismiss this inquiry lightly. If eliminating trustees can enhance educational outcomes and direct more resources toward classrooms, then it warrants serious consideration. The risk lies in refusing to adapt to changing times and persisting with a structure that has failed to deliver the necessary results in an increasingly competitive world. Education should not be shielded from the demand for efficiency and effectiveness that is expected in other sectors. Exploring new governance models could ultimately benefit students and ensure that taxpayer money is utilized effectively.