Race Card Does Not Play Well in School
By: Rachel Marsden
The Ontario Human Rights watchdog has launched a complaint against the 
provincial government and the Toronto School Board for what it claims to be a 
discipline policy that unfairly discriminates against racial minorities and 
students with mental and emotional disabilities.
Sorry, but that dog doesn’t hunt. While the Safe Schools Act might affect people 
in disproportionate ways, there’s nothing discriminatory about it. Unless “drug 
dealing”, “rape” and “gun toting” are prohibited grounds for discrimination.
Under the province’s Safe Schools Act, a mandatory expulsion hearing would take 
place if a student engages in any of the following activities: “possession of a 
weapon, including, but not limited to firearms; trafficking in drugs or weapons; 
robbery; use of a weapon to cause bodily harm, or to threaten serious harm; 
physical assault causing bodily harm requiring professional medical treatment; 
sexual assault; or providing alcohol to minors.”
Mandatory suspensions may be imposed under the Act for offenses such as 
“uttering a threat to inflict serious bodily harm; possession of illegal drugs; 
or acts of vandalism causing extensive damage to school property.”
But even the Human Rights Commission’s July 2004 report acknowledges that 
suspensions aren’t mandatory in instances where “the pupil does not have the 
ability to control his or her behaviour; the pupil does not have the ability to 
understand the foreseeable consequences of his or her behaviour; or the pupil's 
continuing presence in the school does not create an unacceptable risk to the 
safety of any person”.
Seems like a lot of leeway for legislation that’s getting a bad rap for being 
too strict. If a kid commits crimes like this at school, then he should be in 
prison, not the principal’s office.
Nowhere in the report is there any specific evidence that the Act is 
disproportionately or unfairly applied to minorities or disabled students. It 
only features broad statements like, “[b]ased on interviews with members of the 
Black community and others in the GTA, there appears to be a strong perception 
that the Safe Schools Act and the new school board policies on discipline are 
having a disproportionate impact on Black students.”
Right—and I once knew someone who had a “strong perception” that people were 
conspiring to wage biological warfare directly above his apartment. Didn’t mean 
it was real.
Here’s a thought: Don’t break the law, and then maybe you won’t be ballooning 
the statistics for your ethnic group!
Saying minorities are targeted by this law is like arguing that white guys are 
unfairly treated when it comes to white collar crimes. It’s not that the Enron, 
Tyco, and WorldCom types are being unjustly persecuted—only that they’re the 
schmucks committing the crimes.
Playing the race card with a crime and school safety issue like this only 
ensures that the ultimate goal of the Act—keeping kids and teachers safe—becomes 
clouded.
Case in point: This week, I asked Ontario PC Party leader, John Tory—who is now 
calling for Premier Dalton McGuinty to strike a totally unnecessary tri-partisan 
panel to examine ways of improving the Act--“If it comes down to a question of 
(a) safety or (b) getting rid of any hint of bias against minorities on this 
issue, which one takes precedence?”
His response: “Safety in our schools must be a paramount consideration but I 
would take 
issue with any suggestion that it must be achieved at the cost of having any 
group of kids fall between the cracks and end up counted out at [age] 16.”
An honorable goal, but I’d rather see a few young gun-toters, rapists, or drug 
dealers “slip through the cracks” rather than risk a Columbine-like event. If a 
“disabled” kid with Tourette’s Syndrome is going to behave in a way that somehow 
manages to override even the mitigating “I can’t control myself!” loophole 
described above, then he really doesn’t belong in a classroom with other 
people’s kids.
Some things—like violent crime and access to children—you just can’t safely 
reconcile. Common sense should dictate that—not a study, commission or panel.
For the Commission to hint at “racial profiling” in schools is nothing but 
shadow boxing. Even the study they cite in their report can’t back up the claim, 
saying only that “[a]lthough there is little quantitative evidence to assess 
whether the perceptions of the students [perceiving discriminatory treatment] in 
this study accurately represents reality, the authors point out that the very 
fact that racial minority students have these beliefs needs to be addressed 
because it is “a psychological reality for students which undoubtedly impacts on 
their schooling experience.””
The reality is that ethnic minorities are overrepresented in the justice system 
when it comes to violent and drug-related crime like those the Act targets. 
Rather than focusing on unfounded “discrimination” related arguments, how about 
looking at the underlying socioeconomic factors—like poverty and a lack of 
support for youth within these cultural communities?
In crying wolf and playing that race card like they’re Johnnie Cochran, the 
Human Rights Commission only dilutes the real plights of minority groups in 
instances where they face real, serious discrimination through no fault of their 
own.
PUBLISHED: NATIONAL POST (July 16/05)
COPYRIGHT 2005 RACHEL MARSDEN