I feel strongly about the subject of school closures as an efficient means to reduce budgets. Maintaining and rebuilding schools in small communities is not just a matter of preserving tradition; it is a strategic investment in Ontario’s future. Strong rural and small-town communities contribute to the province’s economic diversity and resilience. By keeping schools open and ensuring they remain well-resourced, the government can signal its commitment to equity, sustainability, and the well-being of all Ontarians, regardless of where they live. This approach ensures that small communities remain vibrant, and that their children have access to the opportunities they need to thrive.

Schools are the cornerstone of small communities, serving not only as centers for education, but also as hubs for social, cultural, and economic activity. Their presence signals vitality and opportunity, attracting families and businesses while fostering a sense of identity and cohesion. Closing a school, however, often undermines the foundation of a community, creating a ripple effect that can lead to long-term decline. Maintaining and rebuilding schools in small communities is therefore essential to preserving their future viability and ensuring equitable access to education across the province.

One of the most significant impacts of a school closure is the loss of families, particularly those with young children. Families are unlikely to settle in a community where their children must commute long distances to access education, especially if this limits their ability to participate in extracurricular activities or form meaningful connections within the area. Without a local school, the community’s population ages, property values drop, and economic activity dwindles. Schools are often directly linked to local businesses, from daycares and grocery stores to service providers, all of which rely on a stable base of families to thrive. The loss of a school can set off a vicious cycle, with economic decline further accelerating depopulation.

Beyond its economic role, a school is a source of pride and identity for small communities. It serves as a gathering place for events, sports, and cultural activities, fostering social cohesion and strengthening intergenerational ties. Its closure sends a demoralizing message to residents that their community is no longer seen as viable or deserving of investment. This loss of identity can erode the community’s resilience and willingness to adapt to challenges. Rebuilding schools or reinvesting in existing facilities can reverse this narrative, renewing a sense of hope and commitment among residents.

Closing schools disproportionately harms students. Lengthy commutes to consolidated schools in larger towns not only impose financial and logistical burdens on families but also isolate students from their peers and limit their participation in extracurricular activities. Smaller schools offer a more personalized learning environment, where students benefit from closer teacher-student relationships and stronger connections to their community. Preserving these schools ensures that students receive a holistic education that goes beyond academics, grounding them in their local culture and heritage.

While proponents of school closures often argue for cost efficiency, this perspective overlooks the broader social and economic costs to the community. Consolidation may save money in the short term, but the long-term consequences—population decline, reduced economic activity, and diminished community identity—are far more costly. The financial argument also fails to consider innovative ways to make small schools sustainable, such as integrating other services like libraries or healthcare clinics, or adopting flexible education models like satellite campuses or blended learning.