At the Legislature’s April 27, 2026 Hearings on Bill 101, There was Wide Agreement that Ontario Must Strengthen Supports in School for Students with Disabilities Part 2

Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance Update

United for a Barrier-Free Ontario for All People with Disabilities

Website: www.aodaalliance.org

Email: aodafeedback@gmail.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aodaalliance

Twitter: @aodaalliance

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/aodaalliance

TikTok @AODAAlliance

 

At the Legislature’s April 27, 2026 Hearings on Bill 101, There was Wide Agreement that Ontario Must Strengthen Supports in School for Students with Disabilities Part 2

 

May 25, 2026

 

SUMMARY

 

On April 27 2026, the Ontario Legislature’s Standing Committee on Social Policy held a grossly insufficient single day of public hearings on the Ford Government’s Bill 101. That’s the legislation that largely guts the role of elected school board trustees. It’s a huge power grab by Education Minister Paul Calandra, who can dictate the details of how schools and school boards operate across Ontario, all from his office in downtown Toronto.

 

Of course, the core focus of the discussions at those public hearings was the dramatic changes proposed to how the education system will be governed from the top. However, disability advocates, including the AODA Alliance, injected a second issue into the hearings – one that got quite a lot of attention. The mainstream media has not covered this. You can learn about it from us!

 

In the May 24, 2026, AODA Alliance Update, we presented the text of the evidence given at those two hearings by the AODA Alliance and the Ontario Autism Coalition. In this update, we set out 19 passages from the evidence of other witnesses that touched on our issues. Read them all below. Each passage is followed by our comment on the importance of what was said from the perspective of students with disabilities and their parents.

 

What is especially compelling is that there was overwhelming agreement among witnesses and with the Education Minister himself that there needs to be reforms in the delivery of special education in Ontario. In a passage set out below, Minister Calandra says he’s going to be working on this.

 

On May 15, 2026, AODA Alliance Chair David Lepofsky wrote the Minister. He asked the Minister to set up a meeting with David Lepofsky — a meeting to which the Minister had agreed.

 

How You Can Help

 

Get others to read the evidence we set out below and the evidence we set out in the May 24, 2026 AODA Alliance Update. Publicize this on social media.

 

• Write Education Minister Paul Calandra at edu@ontario.ca to press him to schedule his meeting with AODA Alliance Chair David Lepofsky.

 

• Learn about our advocacy on Bill 101 by visiting the AODA Alliance website’s education page.

 

• Watch the AODA Alliance’s series of informative videos on the campaign to tear down the many disability barriers in Ontario’s education system facing students with disabilities.

 

 

MORE DETAILS

 

Key Excerpts Regarding the Needs of Students with Disabilities from Witnesses Giving Evidence at the Ontario Legislature’s April 27, 2026 Hearings on Bill 101

 

Full transcript originally posted at https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/committees/social-policy/parliament-44/transcripts/committee-transcript-2026-apr-27?utm_source=openai

 

1. Education Minister Paul Calandra was given 20 minutes to make an opening statement. He began by stating:

“When we started debate on this in the House, I mentioned that since 2018 the government has been moving quickly to make changes to the education system to refocus it on student achievement.”

AODA Alliance Comment: The Ford Government has not focused at all on focusing on student achievement for over one third of a million students with disabilities in Ontario schools. For example, it has enacted nothing in response to its receiving the comprehensive K-12 Education Standards Development Committee final report in January 28, 2026. That report gave an extensive review of the many disability barriers in Ontario schools, and detailed recommendations on what should be enacted in an Education Accessibility Standard under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act to remove and prevent those barriers.

 

2. The Minister stated:

“The results have been quite spectacular, to be honest with you. “

 

AODA Alliance Comment: There has been no appreciable improvement for students with disabilities. In various ways, things have gotten worse over that time.

 

3. The Minister stated:

 

“The bill in front of you, colleagues, Bill 101, if passed, has a number of important measures in it, not the least of which are significant governance reforms. The bill, if passed, would strengthen oversight of trustees financially, and local decision-making would also be an element of this. “

 

AODA Alliance Comment: In his 20 minute statement and 40 minutes of answering questions, the Minister never listed what the powers of school board trustees would be under Bill 101. As the AODA Alliance brief on Bill 101, submitted to the Legislature,  explained, nothing in the bill provides a list of these remaining powers. That hurts the day-to-day operations on school boards.

 

4. The Minister stated:

“Colleagues, in conclusion, I think this bill, in addition to Bill 33, puts us back on the right path. It is not the end; there is more that has to happen over the next number of years. So this isn’t the last bill that we’ll have before you.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: This combined with his answer to an opposition question set out below, foreshadows that there is a real possibility that the Ford Government will later bring forward some sort of new legislation concerning education of students with disabilities.

 

5. The Minister had this exchange with NDP MPP Chandra Pasma:

 

“Ms. Chandra Pasma: Well, we certainly do look forward to your announcement on education funding, because the FAO has said that your government is cutting funding for education by $900 million. So I know that parents, teachers and education workers are certainly waiting with bated breath to see what will actually be coming into our schools next year.

 

Have you done any costing of the measures in this bill, particularly the new bureaucracy that will be required at the ministry and the fact that you’re adding a new layer of bureaucracy to school boards with now a CEO and a director of education?

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: There will be no additional costs, and there need not be any additional cost to boards. As I said, the director of education will be now called the CEO, and the chief educational officer can be appointed through the existing cadre of superintendents. The ministry will not be providing boards of education with any additional funding from administration.

 

Ms. Chandra Pasma: That sounds rather like magic. There’s going to be a CEO and a chief education officer, and somehow in all of this there’s not going to be a single penny added to the cost of the school board. What sounds more like—”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: It is unbelievable that Minister Calandra states that there will be no costs arising from this bill. As the AODA Alliance brief explains, this bill creates a great deal of new bureaucracy. For example, school boards will need to apply to the Minister for permission to take all sorts of actions. The Minister’s Office will need to process and review all those applications from 72 school boards. The money to pay for all of this has to come from somewhere. If the Minister takes the position that the bill creates no new costs, there is a serious risk that school boards will take money out of classrooms to cover these new costs. That does not put student achievement first.

 

6. The Minister had this exchange with Liberal MPP and Acting Leader John Fraser:

 

“Mr. John Fraser: I appreciate the answer. I would like to have heard something a bit more definitive. I believe when you look at student absenteeism, it’s a symptom of greater problems. I think the way you are addressing it in the bill is a blunt tool for something more complicated than that. I would have expected that you could give me at least what would be the top reason or what was the largest concern that would lead you to put this into the bill.

 

Kids should be in school, and we should help them be in school. What I’ve maintained is, right now, our schools aren’t safe places to learn or to work, and that’s for three reasons: Class sizes have grown, special education has been starved—kids aren’t getting what they need—and, as you said, Minister, there’s a mental health crisis in our schools that’s not being addressed.

 

When I look at Bill 101, I don’t see something that’s going to make one class size smaller, get one child the help that they need that they’re not getting right now. I don’t see anything that’s addressing the mental health crisis that you mentioned. I think those things are critical to solve, not just because of absenteeism, but our kids aren’t bad, and the carrot-and-stick approach—I don’t think that’s going to work. I think you have to go much deeper than that and address those issues. There are 1,000 classes between grades 4 and 8 of more than 30 kids in Ontario. We’re $800 million short in special education funding. And mental health, right now, is just reflective of what’s going on in our society, and our kids are suffering. They’re suffering because of social media. They’re suffering because of pressures. If we’re addressing what’s important in education, which is student achievement, I would think those things should be top of mind, or top of the list, when it comes to all of us here, and I don’t see that in this bill.

 

So, Minister, is this going to make one class size smaller?

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: Well, obviously—I appreciate that—the bill itself is about governance, how we govern the system. It is about listening to educators.

 

You’re talking about student attendance. This is something that was not necessarily on my radar, but every single classroom that I went into, every single educator told me that we have to get a handle on student attendance and that one of the biggest challenges they have in managing their classrooms, particularly at the secondary level, was the fact that 100% of the coursework determined the mark. Teachers felt that participation was important, that attendance was important.

 

I respect teachers. I think that, using their professional judgment, they’re able to ascertain which students are having challenges and which need more help and that they’ll be able to make that decision in the best interest of their students.

 

Mr. John Fraser: Respectfully, Minister, my question was, is it going to make one class size smaller? Are we going to eliminate having 1,000 grade 4 to 8 classes over 30 kids? That’s incredible. I’ve got one school that’s just got split grades all the way through.

 

What parents want to know is, “Is my kid’s class going to be smaller?”—not what’s going to happen to them if they’re not in school or how that’s going to affect their marks.

 

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell): One minute remaining.

 

Mr. John Fraser: What they want to know is that class sizes are going to be smaller.

 

What they also want to know is—“My son or daughter needs help in school. They don’t have an EA. They haven’t had help. They’ve got ADHD.” And what happens when a student’s needs aren’t addressed in the early development years—it follows them all the way through school. I would say it would be a likely cause of absenteeism in the future, if they didn’t feel they could participate in school in a meaningful way, or they were bad at school.

 

So the reason that I ask these questions is, Bill 101 is not going to fix any of the things I talked about. What I think people want to hear from their government is—“How are you going to make the class sizes smaller? How are you going to make sure that my son or daughter gets the help that they need?”

 

And do you know what? We have this mental health crisis and somehow we have to tackle it in our schools.

 

I’ll just leave it at that.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: The Minister’s answer makes it clear that this bill is not actually about improving student achievement at all, despite the fact that the Government called it the “Putting Student Achievement First Act.” it is about “governance” i.e. how the school board will be governed.

 

7. The Minister had this exchange with Green Party MPP Aislinn Clancy:

 

“Ms. Aislinn Clancy: We know that the number one increase in mental health issues right now is social anxiety.

 

Can you tell me what you’ll be doing to address the root causes of absenteeism? Because this is not a recommended approach.

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: I respect a teacher’s ability to use professional judgment to understand each and every student they have in their classroom and the challenges that they face. I guess I’m just more optimistic that our teachers appreciate and understand the kids they have in front of them and the challenges that they are facing.

 

A student who is missing time because of a mental health issue—a regulation will ensure that that student does not face any challenges.

 

To be clear, though, we’re talking about a 90% standard, which allows the student at the secondary level to still miss 20 days without being penalized—it is those that come after that, and then in what proportion. Absenteeism and participation will form the basis of the final grade.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: The Minister said that “I respect a teacher’s ability to use professional judgment to understand each and every student they have in their classroom and the challenges that they face.” Yet as explained further below, teachers’ unions spoke passionately at these hearings about how bad things can now be in school for students with disabilities. Yet the Government has not listened to that feedback and corrected the bill to address it.

 

8. In response to a question from Tory MPP Natalie Pierre, the Minister stated in part:

 

“In the York region Catholic school board, as I said, there were seven different directors of education over nine years. That causes challenges of leadership in a board.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: Flying in the face of this, the Minister’s hand-picked provincial Supervisor fired TDSB’s Director of Education last fall. He would not have done that without the Minister’s approval That supervisor appointed an interim Director, and has now hired a new “CEO” to perform a comparable role. That means that thanks to the Minister’s interventions, Canada’s largest school boar has had the very kind of leadership chaos which he condemned at the Standing Committee, three different chief executives in under six months.

 

8. The Minister had this exchange with NDP MPP Chandra Pasma:

 

“Ms. Chandra Pasma: There has been some talk about absenteeism already this morning, but there’s one category of kids that hasn’t come up, which is children with disabilities.

 

The Ontario Autism Coalition found that 6% of kids with disabilities are completely excluded from schools. That’s over 20,000 students every day. Another one third are not allowed to attend school full days—we’re talking over 100,000 kids.

 

People for Education, in their survey, found that nearly two thirds of elementary school principals and 56% of secondary school principals have had to ask parents to keep their child with disabilities at home for the day.

 

Parents of these kids are begging for their children to be allowed to attend school full-time. They have repeatedly asked the Ministry of Education to track exclusions when their kids are not allowed to attend.

 

With this bill, you’re giving yourself the power to make attendance part of marks in Ontario. What are you going to do to ensure that every child in Ontario is allowed to attend school full-time every day?

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: First and foremost, there will be a number of exemptions that will be allowed within the attendance requirement, obviously, in addition to professional judgment from our teachers.

 

I tend to agree with you; I think that we have to do a better job of connecting not only my ministry but Minister Parsa’s ministry and the Ministry of Health with respect to how we deliver special education and certain needs. The level of special education across the province is different from school board to school board. I’m frankly unhappy with that. I’m unhappy with the disconnect between the three ministries that are responsible. I certainly think we can do a better job. I will be spending a significant amount of time over the next number of months seeing how we can better perform when it comes to special education.

 

I’m also hearing from a lot of teachers who have differences of opinions, often from their directors of education and from the board.

 

The nature of teaching is so different now. I was in a class where the grade 8 teacher had eight different IEPs—a class of 27 and eight different IEPs. I don’t think parents sometimes understand it’s not just one curriculum—it is one curriculum for 19 and then eight different curriculums.

 

I think we’ve got to get a handle on this, frankly, so we will be spending a great deal of time looking at special education, how it’s delivered in the province, and how we can deliver it more evenly across all boards and, frankly, how we can bring the ministries together.

 

Looking at what we also do well—we have provincial schools that do amazing, amazing work in the deaf and blind community.

 

It’s about outcomes. It’s not only about education and where they are, but it’s about them being able to lead productive, independent lives afterwards.

 

I’m hearing from a lot of educators that we have dropped the ball on this, so we’re going to be looking at that and we’re going to be seeing how we can do a better job with that, for sure. I don’t disagree with you.

 

Ms. Chandra Pasma: There’s so much in what you just said there, Minister.

 

First of all, kids with disabilities—their parents aren’t asking for them to be exempted from this attendance requirement. They are asking for their kids to be allowed to attend school.

 

And the provincial schools, other than the Centre Jules-Léger, are not a model for inclusion. Your government has paid out over $20 million in lawsuits—and there are still lawsuits—over the lack of inclusion, over the harassment, over the conditions in provincial schools. You should actually be providing them with elected boards, rather than controlling them yourself.

 

The supervisor you appointed in the OCDSB is cutting specialized class placements. He’s not taking kids with IEPs out of the classroom and giving them personalized support. He’s forcing kids with disabilities into mainstream classrooms. And now you’re going to have mini-me supervisors all across the province, with these new CEOs.

 

At the heart of it all is this massive underfunding of special education—$850 million: That’s what boards are spending, that you’re not giving them. Some 71 out of 72 school boards are running a deficit for a scenario where this many kids are being excluded every single day. So if you’re genuinely committed to ensuring that you do better by these kids and that they can attend school, will you commit to eliminating that $850-million deficit in this year’s core education funding?

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: Let me just correct one thing. The CEO, of course, will not be responsible for academic achievement in the boards; that will be—

 

Ms. Chandra Pasma: They can certainly make cuts.

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: —the Chief Education Officer, who will be responsible for academic achievement in the boards.

 

As I said, I want to ensure that we do a better job. Some boards are doing better than other boards. I’ve heard from parents across the province that they want the best for their kids, and I think we can do better, and that’s why we’ll be spending a lot of time on special education.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: It is good that the Minister has finally publicly recognized that Ontario needs to do much better for students with disabilities/special education needs and that special education varies significantly from school board to school board. It is also good that he has committed to do a lot more in this area now.

 

There are, however very troubling elements in his statements. He appeared to treat the fact that special education varies from one school board to the next as some recent revelation to him. In fact, he, his predecessor minister Stephen Lecce and his Government has sat on the final report of the Government-appointed K-12 Education Standards Development Committee for over four years. That report amply documents this problem and provides a detailed and practical roadmap for solving it. The Ford Government has enacted nothing in response to that report, earlier claiming that it is still studying it.

 

Moreover, his glowing endorsement of Ontario’s school for the blind shows that he is not aware of serious problems regarding education of students with vision loss in Ontario that the Ontario Parents of Visually Impaired Children has been trying to raise with his Ministry for over six years.

 

9. The Minister had this exchange with Liberal MPP John Fraser:

 

“Thank you again, Minister, for being here.

 

You said something a bit earlier in terms of—the parents did not understand the complexity of the classroom. I think what parents understand, especially parents of a student with an IEP, is that the needs aren’t being met, that they don’t have an EA, that thing that they need.

 

I told the story about Marigold, who is six years old now and has been in school for two years. She came in with an assessment that her family paid for and isn’t getting any services. When you’re six, two years is a long time in your development.

 

I think what parents understand is the underfunding that exists in special education. Kids aren’t getting what they need. So I’m surprised that the minister would say something like, “Parents don’t understand.”

 

It’s eight years in—you’ve been in government for eight years, and special education is in bad shape. Trustees had to find $800 million in money that they weren’t given somewhere else.

 

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell): One minute remaining.

 

Mr. John Fraser: How is this bill going to get one child who needs speech-language pathology or who needs some other form of intervention—how is it going to help them?

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: First, let me just say this: I fully understand the challenges that parents face when it comes to IEPs, and I think every parent, on their own, understands the challenges that their kids face when it comes to ensuring a quality education in the system.

 

At the same time, teachers don’t feel that often parents realize the complexity and the challenges that they are facing in delivering when there is more than one IEP in a class, and the ministry has to acknowledge this, so—…”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: Here the Minister claims that parents of students with disabilities/special education needs don’t understand the complexity of the classroom. Yet he did not consult their organizations in developing Bill 101. He did not take up offers to consult with their advocates, such as the AODA Alliance. (See further the March 11, 2026 Queen’s Park news conference. In which the AODA Alliance was one of the presenters)

 

10. The Minister had this exchange with Green Party MPP Aislinn Clancy:

 

“Ms. Aislinn Clancy: My hope is that, as opposed to individual by individual, you bring us together. We could be part of this together.

 

Your government underspent by $500 million last year. Why wasn’t this money spent to ensure that kids have access to special education? Inclusion without support is abandonment, and that’s what I see in our schools today.

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: It’s a per-student funding model—

 

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: Do you see problems with that, though?

 

Hon. Paul Calandra: —so as attendance decreases, so too does the amount that’s transferred.

 

I said that in the supervised boards I want supervisors to give me an assessment of the current funding formula to see if it’s meeting the needs of kids. I announced that when I assumed—…”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: since last September, TDSB’s provincial Supervisor has refused to attend any meetings of the TDSB Special Education Advisory Committee, or, since the start of 2026, to meet with its Chair David Lepofsky. He is therefore cutting himself from an important source of information to advise the Minister on funding insufficiencies.

 

11. Green Party MPP Aislinn Clancy had this exchange with the president of the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association:

 

“Ms. Aislinn Clancy: What I hear is that the government isn’t paying their bills in certain buckets and then people have to pull from things like special education, building repairs.

 

I’d like to ask Mr. Tigani about what co-regulation means to your members. We know that relationships matter, and most EAs and other education workers are spread really thin, and it impedes their ability to actually help kids learn that muscle of regulation.

 

Mr. Joe Tigani: I think it goes back to even what René just alluded to. There are less caring adults in a building, so those levels of one-on-one support are almost non-existent now. When you look back 10, 15 years, you could provide that level of support. Now you have an EA who might have two, four, eight, 10 different students they’re supporting on a daily basis. So to have that connection, to see—..”

 

12. The president of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation Martha Hradowy said the following:

 

“We are also seeing increasing centralization in decisions that should remain in the hands of educators. Teachers support having the professional judgment to use final exams where appropriate. Educators know how to equip their students for success and what tools and approaches work best. Students will thrive when given the conditions and resources they need to succeed.

 

Attaching marks to attendance and participation does not address that real issue. Students who are not attending are not motivated by marks. They may be dealing with bullying, mental health challenges, safety concerns, and a lack of supports in increasingly large classrooms. Students struggling to attend school are not asking for punishment; they’re asking for support. None of those root causes are addressed here.”

AODA Alliance Comment: This further shows that to address the problem of student absenteeism, the Minister should focus on the causes of the problem, rather than imposing a penalty in a student’s grades for absenteeism.

 

13. David Mastin, president of the Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario said the following:

 

“Bill 101 concentrates power, reduces transparency, and weakens the role of communities in shaping their public schools. If the goal is truly to improve student achievement, the focus must be on what happens in classrooms. Students need smaller class sizes, more supports for special education, safer schools, adequate staffing and resources, and respect for the professional judgment of educators. These are the conditions that support learning. Structural changes that centralize power and weaken relationships do not address these needs.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: This was yet another witness testifying that students with disabilities/special education needs need more supports. No one took a contrary position. No Government or opposition MPP disputed or challenged testimony to this effect.

 

14. Green Party MPP Aislinn Clancy had this exchange with ETFO president David Mastin:

 

“Ms. Aislinn Clancy: Thank you very much.

 

I want to turn it over to Mr. David Mastin from ETFO. You and I saw each other recently at a symposium about children’s mental health. I see that this isn’t something that’s being addressed in this bill. What would you like to see when it comes to working together with the government on addressing the crisis in mental health in our students?

 

Mr. David Mastin: Thanks so much for the question.

 

Just continuing on from where Martha was discussing—the government, if they care about what’s happening in our classrooms, need to consult with the individuals who are on the front lines, to consult with the individuals who are dedicated and passionate. And they care for, every single day, day in and day out, the students in their care.

 

I want to stress this: You can’t just pick a handful of individuals you have a phone conversation with, to warrant consultation.

 

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell): One minute remaining.

 

Mr. David Mastin: You have to have consultations with the bodies that represent those members. That’s the way it needs to be done, and that has not happened. As Martha said, this is the first opportunity we’ve had to represent our members—84,000 members’ voices here with this government, with this bill. And they need to do that. Their decisions need to be grounded on what students need. This is not addressing what students need.

 

That symposium that you attended was to talk about student mental health. Student mental health is at an all-time crisis level, and the actions that this government has taken in the last eight years have done nothing but actually diminish the state of student mental health in our schools. As Martha said, this is why they’re not attending school. They’re not having their needs met. It’s not a place where they feel whole. And it’s something this government needs to take more seriously.”

AODA Alliance Comment: Mental health conditions, also called psycho-social disabilities are disabilities within the meaning of the Ontario Human Rights Code. As such, these comments about a mental health crisis in schools is a disability issue, pure and simple.

 

15. Tory MPP John Jordan had this exchange with the OSSTF president:

 

“Mr. John Jordan: I’m going to direct my question to the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation.

 

We heard this morning that there are many reasons for poor attendance among students. And certainly, there’s no “easy” button; there’s no one solution to that problem. We also did hear about the importance of student attendance and participation towards student success.

 

So, given that, do you think rewarding students who do make that effort to attend and be in the classroom is an important part of this legislation?

 

Ms. Martha Hradowy: The kids who are showing up show up. We need to really turn our minds to the children who are not coming to school on a regular basis.

 

You’ll get no disagreement from me that attendance is an issue at the secondary level.

 

I’ll use my own experience: I come from the Greater Essex County District School Board, and I was a developmental service worker there. There was one time that the board used to employ attendance counsellors. Those attendance counsellors were tasked with reaching out to families and reaching out to children and finding out what was preventing them from coming to school and encouraging them to come back. Unfortunately, as I said in my presentation, when boards are forced to balance budgets, it’s those front-line supports that are often the first to go. There are no longer dedicated attendance counsellors in the employ of the Greater Essex County District School Board—those now lie within the responsibility of a qualified social worker. And those, too, are being unfortunately eliminated as well, or people are leaving to go to private practice.

 

If we’re serious and want to find solutions to really addressing attendance in secondary schools, we have to take a look at the causes which are preventing them—as I said in my presentation, it could be mental health challenges, safety concerns, or just a lack of supports.

 

So we’re willing to sit down and find solutions, but I think the government has missed the mark on attaching percentages to attendance.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: Here again the high school absenteeism problem about which the Minister was so concerned requires an effective response to mental health causes of absenteeism, an unmet disability need.

 

16. NDP MPP’s exchanges with the OSSTF president included this:

 

“Ms. Chandra Pasma: Hear, hear.

 

So when we have the CEOs who have financial background but not experience in education—they’re going to be your bargaining partners across the table from you. I know for OSSTF, your focus in bargaining is on those student supports and outcomes—whether it’s having a professional support staff to address mental health or student learning, or whether it’s bringing down class sizes. What do you think is going to happen in bargaining when that’s your focus and on the other side of the table is somebody whose focus is cuts?

 

Ms. Martha Hradowy: I will say, it’s discouraging that this is where we’ve got to. We’re actually bargaining for supports for kids who need them. Kids are being asked to stay home because they don’t have an educational assistant in their classroom to give them the support that they need. It just baffles my mind that these are the issues that we have to bring to a bargaining table every four years. Kids need these supports.

 

We’re in a mental health crisis here in Ontario, and at the same time, we’re cutting child and youth workers, we’re cutting professional support personnel….”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: The OSSTF provided yet more evidence that in Ontario, there are students with disabilities who can be denied the right to be at school because there’s no educational assistant to support the student.

 

17. Anwar Knight, speaking for the Hold Schools Accountable organization, and a supporter of Bill 101, said this:

 

“When you talk about lack of resources for special education—100%. But the union rep from OPSEU 2100, in a recent news interview, stated—and this is for the PDSB: “We’ve seen an increase in middle- and upper-management positions, but this board still cuts EAs and early childhood supports, so students are not being supervised anymore.” So, on one hand, the board has money to give to middle management and upper management positions, but they’re starving the front lines. And that is a story that needs to be told.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: Even one of the Government’s own pro-Bill 101 witnesses shared the criticism voiced by so many others at the hearings that education for students with disabilities/special education needs is underfunded in Ontario.

 

18. Judy Bornais, a vice president of the University of Windsor, was no doubt called by the Ford Government. Her presentation included:

 

“So I am here today to speak in support of the teacher education provisions in Bill 101, Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026.

 

The University of Windsor thanks Minister Quinn and Minister Calandra for their commitment to investing in teacher education across Ontario. The $152-million investment and 40,000 new seats represent a significant step for the sector. We’re grateful that the government has recognized the importance of training the next generation of educators.

 

My focus today is on the section of Bill 101 that looks to move to a 12-month bachelor of education program and what it will mean for our institutions, our students, our region and our Ontario classrooms. There are four key reasons our institutions see this change in teachers’ education as a positive step for Ontario and students:

 

• The University of Windsor welcomes changes that would reduce financial costs for aspiring teachers. Candidates will save a term of tuition, plus an additional semester of living expenses. For a student weighing whether they can afford to enter the profession, this is not a trivial number.

 

• The proposed model looks to strengthen and standardize practicum which is central to teacher candidates’ development. This emphasis is aligned with the University of Windsor’s approach of integrating strong pedagogical in-class learning with high-quality, hands-on experiential learning for our students. Our faculty of education looks forward to working with the government to identify practicum lengths, maintaining practicum requirements proportional to program length.

 

• We acknowledge this change requires expanded practicum supports and incentives. The province has committed $16.8 million to support the associate teachers who mentor teacher candidates in their classrooms with honorariums. This commitment will help in supporting the effective supervision and assessment of education students’ practicum competencies. Current research supports the view that a high-quality practicum, focused on mentorship and reflective practice, matters more for teacher preparation than program length alone.

 

• It gets qualified teachers into classrooms faster, at a time when Ontario needs them. We have an aging teaching workforce, with nearly 7,800 retirements expected by 2030-31, and real shortages in French, technological education, and in northern and rural communities.

 

Together, we feel these are student-centred changes, and combined with the investment of $150 million specifically for teacher education programs, 4,000 additional seats, and a 27% increase in per-student funding for these programs, we feel the investment gives the teacher education sector a solid foundation…”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: There is nothing in this major reform to teacher training will include a mandatory part on how to teach students with disabilities/special education needs. This is a huge gap in Ontario’s teacher training, unless a teacher sets out to be a specialized special education teacher. This reform is harmful for students with disabilities/special education needs because it shortens the required length of teacher’s college by an entire semester or term.

 

The problem in Ontario schools right now is not that our teachers get too much training in teacher’s college. The problem is that they don’t get enough training, especially as it relates to teaching diverse learners including students with disabilities/special education needs. The K-12 Education Standards Development Committee’s final report amply made this point.

 

The trend in Ontario is more and mor in the direction of placing students with disabilities/special education needs wherever possible in regular classes, rather than separate special education classes. If the teacher in a regular class is not properly trained to teach diverse learners, including students with disabilities/special education needs, this creates more and more problems for teachers and students.

 

19. Patrick Daly, speaking for the Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association, included this in his evidence at the Standing Committee, referring to AODA Alliance Chair David Lepofsky:

 

“With regard to cost to taxpayers, we fully agree with and endorse David’s comments and those put forward by other associations that without considerable discussion and amendments, the bill, as written, threatens to substantially increase red tape, bureaucracy and place additional financial burdens on school boards.”

 

AODA Alliance Comment: Here, an organization representing all Catholic school boards in Ontario agrees with the AODA Alliance’s contention that Bill 101 creates substantial new costs and burdens the school system with substantial new bureaucracy.