Summary#

Bill 67’s short title is the Racial Equity in the Education System Act, 2021. It would amend several Ontario laws, including the Education Act, the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act and the Anti-Racism Act, 2017. Its stated goal is to promote racial equity and address racism in schools and post-secondary education.

• School boards would have to provide annual anti-racism training for teachers and other staff, support people affected by racism or involved in racist behaviour, and set up a protocol to recognize, track, investigate and respond to reported incidents.
• The Education Minister would have to set school policies and guidelines covering training; supports; safe reporting; responses to racism, including discipline; and prevention and intervention plans. Boards would have to create and carry out racial equity plans, consult named groups and the public, publish the plans and review them every three years.
• The Minister could direct a board to further develop its anti-racism accountability program and resubmit its report if, in the Minister’s opinion, the report indicates that new-teacher induction lacks anti-racism and racial equity training.
• For colleges and universities receiving ongoing government operating funds for post-secondary education, the bill would require anti-racism policies, input from students, faculty and staff, reviews at least every three years, and information for the Minister and governing boards. The Minister would have to conduct or direct a survey every three years.
• Teacher performance appraisals would have to include anti-racism competencies. A person who disrupts or tries to disrupt a school or class using racist language or activities could face a fine of up to $200. The bill would also make racist behaviour or language a ground under an existing school discipline provision.

What it means for you#

• Students and school communities: Boards would have to consult pupils, teachers, staff, school volunteers, parents and guardians, school councils and the public when creating plans. Schools would have to implement the board’s plan, which boards and principals would make public.
• Teachers and school staff: Boards would have to provide annual training. Teacher appraisals would include anti-racism awareness and efforts to promote racial equity. The bill would add prescribed anti-racism exams and training as requirements for a teacher’s certificate, but the details would depend on regulations.
• People at publicly funded post-secondary institutions: Colleges and covered universities would have to establish and implement policies addressing racism involving students, faculty or staff. The bill also allows regulations to set further policy requirements, training, supports and services.
• Post-secondary education bodies: At least one member of the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario would need expertise in racial equity in the post-secondary sector. If the Minister learns that a member lacks a proven commitment to racial equity, the Minister would have to require training within six months. Similar provisions would apply to members of college governing bodies named in the bill.
• Taxpayers and the public: The bill would create duties for ministries, boards and institutions, but it does not set out a new tax, fee or benefit.

Money#

No cost estimate or fiscal note is included in the supplied material.

• Boards and institutions would have to provide training, create and review policies or plans, collect and report information, and support surveys. The bill gives no staffing or cost estimate.
• A fine of up to $200 could be imposed for the school or class disruption offence. The materials do not estimate how often fines would be imposed or how much revenue they might raise.

What is unclear#

• The other Acts being amended were not supplied, so the changes could not be checked against current law or existing programs.
• The bill leaves “racial equity” undefined. Regulations would set important details for post-secondary policies, training and supports; the bill does not provide those rules.
• The bill does not set detailed procedures, timelines or appeals for school or post-secondary racism complaints. It also does not say how boards and institutions should handle overlap between their duties.
• The bill text says it would come into force on Royal Assent, but the supplied material does not say whether it passed or is in force.

Case for#

• The bill appears intended to make anti-racism work a defined responsibility of school boards, teachers and publicly funded post-secondary institutions, rather than leaving each organization to decide whether to act.
• Requiring plans, reporting and recurring reviews could make institutions explain what they are doing and give the public information about their efforts.
• The bill would require routes for reporting incidents and supports for people affected by racism, while also requiring responses to racist behaviour.

Case against#

• The bill creates broad duties, but many practical requirements depend on future regulations or policies. Until those details are set, institutions may not know exactly what they must do.
• The bill requires substantial training, reporting, surveys and policy work without estimating the staff time or public cost.
• It does not spell out how complaint decisions will be made, what protections apply to people involved, or how institutions should resolve conflicts between reporting and privacy needs.