(All pictures have been removed from the articles because they take up so much memory in each post. To see the pictures use the web address and visit the sites of the newspapers.)
http://bcc.rcav.org/canadian/2461-low-birth-rate-threatens-our-future
200 schools 'would be enough' to
satisfy non-religious parents
Katherine Donnelly
PUBLISHED
16/10/2015 | 02:300
Small number of non-religious schools: Dr Ken Fennelly
Just 200 of the existing 3,300 primary schools would be
needed to serve parents who want a non-religious education for their children,
according to the secretary of the Church of Ireland board of education, Dr Ken
Fennelly.
Dr Fennelly said figures from the Central Statistics Office
indicated that 27,238 parents with a child of between five and 12 were
"expressly no religion", which equated to the number of Protestant
children in the same age-bracket in the country.
"Given that less than 200 schools is enough to serve
the Protestant minority then it would not be, in my estimation, too much of a
leap to say that the same number would serve non-religious parents," he
said.
Speaking at the same event, organised by the pro-religion
organisation, the Iona Institute, Professor Eamonn Conway of Mary Immaculate
teacher training college, Limerick, described as "bizarre", proposals
to teach a compulsory world religions course in primary schools, including
faith-based schools, called 'Education about Religions and Beliefs' (ERB).
The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) is
at an advanced stage of preparation on the proposed new ERB programme but
Professor Conway said its introduction in faith-based schools "would
undoubtedly adversely affect religious instruction and characteristic
ethos".
Meanwhile, sociologists in Trinity College Dublin say
religious education in Irish primary schools should not promote any particular
religion.
Growing secularisation and the arrival of new culturally and
religiously diverse migrants are posing new challenges, particularly in primary
schools under Catholic patronage, according to the paper published in the
British Journal of Religious Education. The research was undertaken by Prof
Daniel Faas, Beata Sokolowska and Dr Merike Darmody.
Meanwhile, Dublin City University (DCU) president Professor
Brian MacCraith told the annual conference of National Association of
Principals and Deputy Principals (NAPD) that the education debate in Ireland
was still centred on a lot of the things that were being discussed 40 years
ago, including Junior Certificate reform and religious education.
He said that as Ireland emerged from a lengthy period of
austerity, it was time for a step-change in the approach to education and it
was "imperative that we develop a bold, new ambition for the system".
Irish Independent
http://bcc.rcav.org/canadian/2461-low-birth-rate-threatens-our-future
Low birth rate threatens our future
Tuesday, 26 February 2013 12:32
New study warns that 'population aging is key demographic
issue'
By Deborah Gyapong
Canadian Catholic News
OTTAWA — The country's social safety net could be in trouble
as the population continues to age warns a new study by the Institute of
Marriage and Family Canada (IMFC).
“Population aging is
the key demographic issue in Canada today,” wrote IMFC researcher Derek Miedema
in a study released in Feb. 2013 entitled “Forty years below replacement:
Canada’s population is aging. What we can—and can’t—do about it.”
“Many still worry about a population explosion. There’s a
lingering picture of people hanging on to the edge of the globe for lack of
space that remains in peoples’ minds,” wrote Miedema. “The reality is that we
need to pay attention to an explosion of senior citizens instead.”
Even if the nation's
population grows through immigration, that growth does not take aging into
account, he says. The country-wide
birthrate has been below replacement rate for the past 40 years. In 2010, Canada was short 109,000 babies to
replace its population. Miedema said 1,022,971 more babies were needed since
2002.
In the next 25 years, as baby boomers hit their 80s, there
will be a decline in the labour force that is already seeing shortages in areas
such as health care, mining, engineering and science, he said.
“Tax dollars pay for our EI benefits, healthcare and
pensions,” Miedema wrote. But the impact is more than financial, he warned,
pointing to the 2010 rioting in Greece over austerity measures.
Other social
consequences will be fewer relatives, including grandchildren, and friends to
support elderly seniors. “There’s also a
question of what it means for children to grow up with fewer siblings, cousins
and friends.”
The last time Canada met a 2.1 replacement fertility rate
was 1971, about 40 years ago, he wrote.
Miedema pointed out how closely the abortion rate tracks
with Canada’s replacement rate, noting “if every aborted baby had been born in
2006, 2009 and 2020 a replacement fertility rate would have been reached or
surpassed. In 2007 and 2008, the replacement rate would have come close to being
met. He noted abortion statistics are underreported.
In addition to abortion, delayed childbirth and the birth
control pill are also responsible for the low fertility replacement rate of
1.63 children per woman of child-bearing age.
Each woman would need to bear 2.2 children to replace the existing
population.
Immigration cannot solve the problem, he said, noting the
Baby Boomer generation is “so large that no realistic number of young
immigrants could balance them out.”
There is “no quick fix” for the problem, Miedema said,
especially government intervention.
“Governments need to step back and allow for family
freedom,” Miedema wrote. “They can do this by leveling the playing field
between families and individuals.”
He urged government
to institute a delayed promise to introduce income splitting so that one income
married couples would be taxed at the same rate as dual-income couples.
Japan is a case study for problems Canada will face soon
with an aging population. Elderly
Japanese over 65 make up one fifth of population.
“Where Japanese workers used to be able to carry the cost of
the social safety net for one retiree on the shoulders of many, by 2050 the
cost for one retiree will be borne by a single worker,” he wrote.
FAMILY , POPULATION CONTROL
Thu Jul 11, 2013 - 4:00 pm EST
Canada’s birthrate falls for 3rd year in a row, to 1.61
Thaddeus Baklinski
OTTAWA, July 11, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) The recent
increase in Canada's birthrate has receded again, according to the latest
report from Statistics Canada.
In its Fertility Overview of the years 2009 to 2011 released
yesterday, StatsCan reported that in 2009 the total fertility rate dropped to
1.67, then to 1.63 in 2010, and to 1.61 in 2011, the most recent year for which
numbers are available.
In 2011, there were 377,636 births in Canada, up slightly
from the previous year when 377,213 were born. Both are lower than 2009, when
there were 380,863 births.
With a total fertility rate of 1.61, Canada is falling
further and further away from the 2.1 children per woman required to replace
the population in the absence of migration.
"It’s been more than 40 years since Canadians had
enough children to replace themselves," said Derek Miedema, a researcher
with the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada.
"In 2010, Canada was 109,000 babies short of
replacement.
Since 2002, we’re behind a whopping 1,022,971," Miedema
observed.
Click "like" if you are PROLIFE!
A table from StatsCan showing total fertility rates from
1926 to 2011 reveals that the last year when Canadian women had enough children
to keep the population stable was 1971.
In 2008, StatsCan reported that the total fertility rate had
inched up for a sixth consecutive year, rising from 1.53 children per woman in
2003 to 1.68 in 2008. In 2008 there were 377,886 live births in Canada. This
was well up from the 328,802 babies born in 2002, which was an alltime low and
represented 10.5 live births per 1,000 population, the lowest since vital
statistics were recorded nationally in 1921.
In 1926, the average number of children per woman was 3.36.
This dropped to 2.64 in 1937 at the height of the Great Depression of the
1930s.
The baby boom that followed the Second World War saw the
birth rate rise to more than 3 children per woman again, with the apogee being
reached in 1959 with a birth rate of 3.94.
With some variation, which StatsCan attributes to economic
influences, the table shows a steadily declining birth rate.
Nunavut, Saskatchewan, and the Northwest Territories had the
highest fertility rates in the country, with only Nunavut's rate of 2.97
meeting replacement level.
By contrast, British Columbia had the lowest fertility rate
of the country, at 1.42. It was followed by Newfoundland at 1.45 and Nova
Scotia at 1.47.
StatsCan reports that the overall decrease in the total
fertility rate in Canada over the past four decades is due to steady declines
in fertility rates of all age groups under age 30. In contrast, the fertility
rates of those aged 30 and over have generally increased.
The report says that in 2011, the agespecific fertility
rate for women aged 30 to 34 was the highest of all groups with 105.9 births
per 1,000 women, while for 25 to 29yearolds it was 95.2.
"In general," StatsCan reported, "the period
throughout the 1980s to the present has seen the lowest fertility rates for
young women in the data observed since 1926."
Derek Miedema explained that the drop in fertility rates
among younger women and the rising rates among women in their 30s and 40s has
also contributed to the dearth of children born in Canada.
"Another reason we aren’t having more kids is that
we’re having kids later," Miedema said.
"Waiting to have kids means fewer kids for people who
don’t want to be a 50yearold parent chasing a toddler. We’re having kids
later, in part, because we are marrying later. We’re having kids later and
marrying later, in part, because sex and babies are no longer connected, courtesy
of oral contraceptives, aka the Pill."
Miedema said the answer to the problem of Canadian
demographics lies not in immigration or "baby bonus" cash incentives,
but in government policies that allow parents to have the number of children
they want to have.
A World Values Survey, conducted by a network of social
scientists, found Canadians’ ideal number of children is actually 2.7.
"Canadians say in polls that they want to have more
kids than they actually have," Miedema said. "Governments should
allow families to keep more of their money, since finances are a top concern
for most. Income splitting, promised but not yet instituted federally, is a
huge step in that direction."
"Reality calls all of us to make a choice: Have more
kids or deal with lower healthcare coverage, lower pensions and a smaller
economy," Miedema concluded. "In that light, we might just consider
having more kids."
The Statistics Canada birth rate report is available here.
A report on Canada's demographic situation by the Institute
of Marriage and Family Canada, released on February 15, 2013 and titled,
"Forty years below replacement. Canada’s population is aging. What we
can—and can’t—do about it" is available here.
No comments:
Post a Comment