Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs,
Science and Technology
Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education
Issue 8 - Evidence - Morning Sitting
REGINA, Thursday, February 13, 1997
The Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology met this day at 9:00. p.m. to continue its inquiry into the state of Post-Secondary education in Canada.
Senator M. Lorne Bonnell (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Honourable Senators, we have with us today a group of students with whom we will have a roundtable discussion. First, I will ask the students to introduce themselves and to tell us what schools they represent.
My name is Senator Lorne Bonnell. I come from a little place called Prince Edward Island, Anne of Green Gables country. As you know, it is where Canada was born.
Senator Forest: I was appointed to the Senate last May. I was born and raised in Manitoba, received my teacher's training there, taught there and then moved to Alberta just after the war. I took a 22-year maternity leave to raise seven children.
I have been involved in EDUCATION as a trustee and as a member of the Senate and Board of Governors and Chancellor of the University of Alberta. In the business world I have run hotels and was on the board of Canadian National, which I gave up when I was appointed to the Senate. I am happy to be here.
Rebecca Wilkin: I am in my fifth year of studying EDUCATION.
Senator Andreychuk: I live in Regina, Saskatchewan. I was appointed to the Senate four years ago. I received two degrees from the University of Saskatchewan and was Chancellor of the University of Regina. While I was practising law in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, I was appointed to set the aims and goals of the University of Regina, so I have had a long and interesting history in the development of the universities in Saskatchewan.
Norine Barlowe, Vice-President, Students' Union, Brandon University: I am the vice-president of the Students' Union Senate Congressman here at Brandon University, and I am specializing in political science.
Erick Blaikie, President, Brandon University Students' Union: I am the president of Brandon University Students' Union. I am a third-year philosophy student and happy to be here. Thank you.
Linda Vaughan, Activities Vice-President, Students' Association of Mount Royal College: I am the activities vice-president for the Students' Association of Mount Royal College where I have just completed my program in environmental technology.
Bobbie Saga, Vice-President ACTISEC and Vice-President External, Mount Royal College: I am the vice-president of ACTISEC and vice-president, External at Mount Royal College. I am a communications major.
Natashia Stinka, Vice-President External, University of Saskatchewan Students' Union: I am the vice-president, External at the University of Saskatchewan Students' Union. I have a degree in political studies, and I am working on my history degree.
Lindsay Vanthuyne, President of Kelsey Students' Association, Saskatoon: I am president of the Kelsey Students' Association in Saskatoon. I am in my second year of a two-year program in hotel administration. I am also speaking today on behalf of the other three SIAST institutes that could not be here.
Doug Popowich, President of Students Association, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology: I am from a small town southeast of Regina called Fillmore, and I am attending Northern Alberta Institute of Technology in Edmonton, which I will refer to as NAIT. I am the president of the Students' Association there.
Mark Sakamoto, President of Medicine Hat College Students Association: I am the president of Medicine Hat College Students' Association. I am in my second year of political science and considering moving on to law.
Marlene Brooks, University of Regina Graduate Students' Association: I am studying for a master's degree in adult EDUCATION at the University of Regina, and I represent the GSA.
Senator Perrault: I am Senator Ray Perrault, I am a former member of the British Columbia Legislative Assembly where I was a party leader. I am also a former member of the House of Commons. I was leader of the Senate for nine years. My family roots are just outside Brandon in a place call Pearson, Manitoba and in Assiniboia, Saskatchewan. I look forward to your remarks.
[Translation]
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I am Senator Thérèse Lavoie-Roux. I am from Quebec and I live in Montreal.
[English]
I have been involved in EDUCATION for many years. I taught at the University of Montreal and spent some time on the Board of Governors of McGill University. I was a deputy minister and then I was appointed to the Senate.
I am pleased to be in Saskatchewan. It is an enrichment for me to meet all of you.
Jessica Peart, Acting Representative, Board of Directors, University of Regina, and Secretary-Treasurer, Canadian Federation of Students, Saskatchewan Component: I am the acting representative on the Board of Directors of the University of Regina and I am also the secretary-treasurer for Canadian Federation of Students, Saskatchewan component. I am studying political science and history.
Shaun Brennan, Vice-President Academic, University of Regina Students Union: I am vice-president, Academic, of the University of Regina Students' Union. I am in my fourth year of history.
Mrs. Jill Anne Joseph, Clerk of the Committee: I am clerk of the Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education, and I provide procedural, administrative and logistical support. I teach in a graduate program at Ottawa University, so I am also connected to the university environment.
The Chairman: I will now ask Senator Andreychuk, who is from Saskatchewan, to chair this discussion.
Senator A. Raynell Andreychuk (Acting Chair) in the Chair.
The Acting Chair: Thank you. I am very pleased to chair this session. We have found that the time we spend with students is the most interesting and valuable for us because we get facts as well as the feelings and the hopes of the students, as to what they think Canada should be like and what opportunities we should afford, on the record.
I remind you that, while this committee is studying Post-Secondary education, we are sensitive to the fact that EDUCATION falls under provincial jurisdiction. We are looking at the national aspects of EDUCATION and the federal responsibility. If you want to refer to cutbacks, that is acceptable, but I do not think it serves us well to attack individuals in the process. We know that cutbacks have caused difficulties.
I ask you to zero in on the national scene and suggest recommendations which we can put forward to the federal government to assist in Post-Secondary education in the areas of research and development, student loans or anything else. In other words, if you were in our position, what would be your primary recommendations?
Please keep your comments as brief as possible so that we will have some time for discussion. I do not intend to impose time limits. Once we have exhausted one topic, we will move on to another. I may interject from time to time to try to bring those of you who are too quiet into the conversation.
Please proceed.
Mr. Brennan: My first recommendation relates to changes to the Canada Student Loans Program. Recommendations were put forward a few weeks ago by the Canadian Federation of Students and several other organizations at the national level. I think those recommendations are fairly self-explanatory, and I am sure you have heard about them or seen copies of them.
The second recommendation is that there needs to be a stronger federal presence in Post-Secondary education in this country, whether that be through increased funding, the CIBC, or through a national organization which would regulate the delivery of Post-Secondary education in this country and the costs that students are forced to endure to obtain that EDUCATION.
The Acting Chair: Does anyone else wish to comment on student loans?
Ms Vaughan: Tied into student loans are tuition fees. I would ask the committee to recommend standardization of tuition fees, including guidelines on ancillary fees. When a student takes out a student loan, a lot of costs may not be accounted for line item by line item, but they are part of a student's cost of living. I think the income-contingent loan repayment plan would benefit students financially. I do not think that plan should be used as a premise to raise fees, but it would provide some flexibility for students as to their repayment options.
The Acting Chair: When you say "contingent loan repayment plan" are you talking about the one that Mr. Axworthy and his group proposed when they travelled across Canada?
Ms Vaughan: Yes.
The Acting Chair: As I understand it, that was almost universally shot down by students at that time. Now you are proposing it.
Ms Barlowe: Part of the reason that ICLRPs were shot down was that there is not an average wage that university students earn when they get out of school. Someone with a four-year degree could earn $15,000 a year and have $15,000 or $20,000 in loans. It will take that person much longer to pay off their loan and the interest than the person who gets out of a school and earns $60,000 or $70,000. There is a built-in disparity between the amounts of money and the interest that students actually pay back.
However, I do not think a national income contingent repayment program is feasible now that the banks have taken over the administration of student loans. The banks will schedule the repayment according to income, so, ICLRPs already exist through the banks. We do not need a national policy.
Ms Vaughan: I agree with some of the points, but I still think the ICLRP offers some benefits for the Post-Secondary education system. The ICLRP may help maintain interest in programs where the expected potential income may not be as high as that expected after doctoral studies. I am thinking of such fields as early childhood EDUCATION and social work, et cetera, where the potential income levels are not high.
Mr. Blaikie: I should like to talk about student debt loads and the fact that these debt loads are skyrocketing. Currently, they average $17,000 per student. In 1990 they averaged $8,500 to $8,700. By the year 2000 students are going to be facing debt loads of more than $30,000. We have to find a balance between what the student should be paying and what responsibility the government should be taking.
Senator Perrault: It has been suggested to this committee that a system be established to enable students to repay all or part of their loans through some form of public service. Do you have any opinion on that suggestion?
Mr. Blaikie: I should like more explanation of that, sir.
Senator Perrault: Some students have debt loads of up to $40,000. That is a lot of money. The idea is that students could repay part of their loan through some form of community service, such as teaching the disadvantaged or helping in the fight against illiteracy.
Mr. Blaikie: What we have to focus on is that the current system of student loans is not working. What we do not want to do is deter intelligent people from attending our universities.
Mr. Blaikie: Students are the future of Canada. I do not want my decision about whether to attend university to be based solely on the financial aspect. I think we have to explore other opportunities, and community service is one of those opportunities.
Senator Perrault: I take it that you would at least give consideration to the idea. It is unacceptable that young people with ability and a desire to complete their studies are unable to do so because of a financial barrier.
Mr. Blaikie: When I left high school, I did not know what I wanted to do. I am now attending Brandon University where I am taking a philosophy degree. A lot of people say, "Where does a philosophy degree get you?" I would argue that it has expanded all my opportunities.
My university experience has really changed my life. It is important that every young adult, as confused as they are when they are 18 years old and getting out of high school, has that opportunity without racking up a $40,000 or $50,000 debt load. Change has to happen.
Ms Barlowe: I should like to respond to the idea of students participating in community programs. As student leaders sitting around this table, I think we already do that, although I do not know how much we can be compensated. I make $130 a month from my student union and I put in 60 hours a week. I have a part-time time job, and I take a full course load. I also belong to the Big Brothers; I work at women's shelters, I work and donate time to CF, MS and Cerebral Palsy. Once I get out of school and get a real job, I am wondering if I will have the time to take on anything more.
Senator Perrault: That experience will help your CV.
Ms Barlowe: My CV is six pages long.
Senator Perrault: That is an investment in your future.
Ms Barlowe: Allowing students to pay off student loans with community service is a good idea, but I think it has to be balanced with students' obligations, be it while they are in school or after they graduate. How much time will they have to invest and how will that detract from possible job opportunities?
Senator Perrault: It may be possible to work out some program along those lines.
Ms Barlowe: There is a program along those lines in the United States called "Work Study." During the time a student is not in class, they work in offices on campus, such as the president's office. They lick envelopes and stuff papers, for which they get a rebate on their tuition, I believe. That is the type of program we could look into as well.
The Acting Chair: We have a newcomer to our table. Please identify yourself and join in as you wish.
Mr. Hoops Harrison, Vice-President, External, Council of Alberta Students' Union: I am from the University of Alberta and I represent the Council of Alberta Students' Union. I apologize for being late; I just stepped off the plane.
The Acting Chair: No problem. Does anyone else have a view on the burning issue of student loans?
Ms Saga: I will just repeat what I said yesterday, and that is that interest rates are astronomical. I think that question should be addressed. Students should be given a break on interest rates, and perhaps that could be done through the Canada Student Loan Program.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Could you expand on that, please. When you say that interest rates are too high --
Senator Perrault: What is the figure now?
Ms Saga: The prime rate yesterday was 4.75 per cent, so interest rates right now are low. However, in the late 1970s they were 17 per cent and 18 per cent.
What protection does a student have? When they enter university, the interest rate might be low, but by the time they finish they could be facing a 12 per cent to 14 per cent interest rate. The only options we have got is bank prime plus two and a half which is a floating rate; bank prime plus five is the fixed rate. Whether the bank prime rate goes up or down before a student finishes school is a matter of luck. We do not know, when we begin our EDUCATION, how much it is actually going to cost us. We only find that out at the end.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: What you are suggesting actually is that the prime rate should remain the same all the way through or that it should not increase over a certain percentage for students; is that correct?
Ms Saga: Students should know, when they sign their Student Loan forms, what their interest rate will be, not at the back end, number one. That way we would know what the actual cost is. I am talking about the lower end of the economic scale here. Students who have money to go to school are not borrowing the money. Students should be able to make a decision up front, based on the interest rate, whether to attend university at that particular time. That would one way to do it. Another way would be to fix interest rates for students.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I agree with you that students should know from the beginning what the interest rate will be, but are you saying that the rate should be frozen, for example, at 3.5 per cent if that happens to be the current rate at the time?
Ms Saga: No. We are saying that we should know going in what our interest rate will be and that it should be fixed at prime plus one, which is the bank's best customer rate. The government guarantees student loans, so we are not high-risk customers from the bank's perspective.
Senator Forest: This question of prime rate plus five per cent came up at one of our hearings in Ottawa. As I understand it, the government used to guarantee student loans but, when they backed away from their guarantee, the banks were allowed to charge prime rate plus 5 per cent to cover their losses due to the number of loans that were in default. That is the information we were given when we questioned why the banks were charging these rates.
Ms Saga: The banks, as I understand it, are getting a 5-per-cent risk premium for every student loan that is given out, and on top of that the student is paying between prime plus two and a half per cent to prime plus five per cent.
Senator Forest: I just wanted to state their reasoning. The committee really went after the banks about their interest rates, and their response was that the government no longer guarantees student loans and this is their risk premium. Not to say that it is right, but that is what --. We also made the point that, if students are well treated, they will probably be customers for life.
Ms Vaughan: One of the reasons that I think banks should provide lower interest rates for students is the fact that there is good debt and there is bad debt. Good debt is debt that is related to real estate and long-term investments that do not depreciate in value. An EDUCATION actually adds value to the individual and, even more so I think, EDUCATION adds value to Canada as a society. Therefore, I would argue that interest rates should be much lower for students because they represent an investment which will not depreciate.
The Bank of Montreal, because it is now out of the market in Alberta, has come out with a competitive loan program which offers lower interest rates on loans to students.
I should also like to comment on the maximum level for a loan being a hindrance to EDUCATION. A student phoned me yesterday to tell me that she had to leave her course. She was in the second semester of her nursing program, had failed one class and was then removed from three other classes because they were co-requisites. This dropped her down to being a part-time student which removed her from the Student Loan system. In addition she had taken one year of general arts and sciences, so she has now reached the maximum level of student loans available to her. Consequently, she will not be able to get her diploma now because of the student loan ceiling imposed upon her.
The monthly allowances on our loans have not increased since 1993-94, but the CPI for the same amount of time has increased by 28 per cent. This is outrageous. Students are living below the poverty line. We have food banks on campuses, and I have the statistics here. We gave out $55,000 in emergency student loans in one year to students. We give out, on average, 80 food bank hampers in a month at our campus.
Things are not good in Post-Secondary education, and there needs to be some intervention.
The Acting Chair: Does anyone else have an opinion or burning comment on student loans?
Mr. Sakamoto: I just want to say that I would be very worried if the foundation of our post-secondary institutions were to rest on altruistic banks. Banks are not benevolent fathers here. Yes, they have an interest in our future, but to consider them altruistic is quite scary.
The Acting Chair: The banks really should be giving you interest-free loans provided you make your payments, because you will become great clients of that bank in the future. The postated young people of this country will keep those banks going. If you have had good relations with a bank, the chances are that you will use that bank for the rest of your life. The banks should realize that students are great potential customers for the future.
Each month I get my light bill and, if I pay it by a certain day, I get a cheaper price; if I do not pay it within 30 days, the price goes up. If I get a milk bill or a dentist bill, I do not get a cheaper price. I always pay that light bill on time to save that extra few pennies.
Perhaps the banks could make arrangement whereby, if you make your payments on time, your interest rate will stay at prime plus one per cent, but, if you do not make your payments on time, the rate could jump up to prime plus two per cent over prime. In that way, there would be some incentive for students to make their payments on time and therefore keep their interest rate down.
Ms Barlowe: When I suggested such a program to a group of bankers who had graciously promised to attend our university, one of the gentleman said, "Twenty years ago, when I was in school, I could go on a date for $2. I could pay for my movie, I could buy my popcorn and I could get a drink."
The Acting Chair: Cheap date, even then.
Ms Barlowe: He said, "Now I pay $20 for the same movie." That was his justification for having interest on loans. I am not a business student, so I will not even try to explain the concept. One of our vice-presidents was telling me that the value of a dollar yesterday is not the value of a dollar today, and that is the justification for interest. However, I like the idea of interest-free loans.
As to your comment about timely payment of bills, I would pay my bills on time if I had the money to pay them.
Senator Perrault: That is the problem. A number of young people have come to me to discuss their debt situation with me. Some of them are able to secure only minimum wage jobs; yet, collectors are telephoning them and suggesting that they pay or else. It is a pretty depressing scenario for those young people.
The Clinton Administration in the United States is now discussing a scenario where, only when you achieve a certain income, as reflected by the federal taxes you pay, should you be required to retire your student loan. Perhaps we should be looking at something like that here.
Ms Vaughan: One of the problems I faced in trying to pay back my loans in a timely manner was the fact that the rules kept changing and no one told me. Last July the banks changed their rules that governed whether I was eligible for interest relief. I am married, and now I am counted in the dual income column; prior to last July there was no dual debt load column. Last July they did change the rule so that now it takes into account my husband's student loan, but no one told me about that.
Senator Perrault: You are not on any mailing list to provide that information.
Ms Vaughan: No, there is no information. The students who are subject to all the rules and regulations governing student loans are in no way informed. I was told by the bank that, when the rules were changed in July, they took out an ad in The Globe and Mail. That is great, but how many students can afford a daily subscription to The Globe and Mail or even have time to read it?
Senator Perrault: That is right. That is expensive space. Banks seem to be doing rather well these days, do they not? Share prices are up.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Do you know the percentage of students who require student loans to get their EDUCATION?
Ms Saga: I have a provincial figure. Fifty-four per cent of Alberta students receive financial assistance of some sort.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: And the others provide for their own studies, either themselves or through their families?
Ms Saga: Yes. A lot of students work and go to school at the same time.
Ms Barlowe: Sixty-four per cent of the students at Brandon University are on financial assistance. Eleven per cent of that 64 per cent are Native students.
Ms Vaughan: I have in front of me here the Student Finance Board stat sheet from April 1995 to March 1996 for our institution, Mount Royal College in Calgary. I believe last year among approximately 5,400 full-time-equivalent students, we had 3,055 applications for financial assistance, and 2,457 student loans were given out in that time period, and at an average debt per student of $4,813.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Thank you.
The Acting Chair: Perhaps we could move now to another topic.
Ms Peart: I believe that the role of the federal government has to be highly increased. Senator Andreychuk mentioned that EDUCATION is primarily a provincial concern, but there is a great deal that the federal government can do to pressure the provincial governments into taking a greater role in our institutions with regard to tuition freezes, for example. We believe that universities should be universally accessible to all students, I would suggest greater discussions with students along these lines.
The Acting Chair: Are you talking about some broad guidelines or principles?
Ms Peart: Exactly. I believe that CHST's were a great step backward in terms of promoting EDUCATION or other social programs. There are no federal guidelines now on how provinces can spend the funds they get from the federal government. I think greater pressure on the provinces to divvy their finances in a certain manner in terms of Post-Secondary education or health care would be a great improvement.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I think I understand your point, but the formula for transfer payments was changed on three years ago. Formerly, so much was designated for EDUCATION, so much for higher EDUCATION, so much health care and social services, et cetera. Do you have any evidence that the situation is better or it is worse since the change? I do not know if anyone here has been in school long enough to know that.
Ms Barlowe: As political students, we deal with these issues every day. Since the change the amount of transfer payments to the provinces has increased, but now it is a lump sum payment. In past years the funds were allocated. Now the provinces can spend that money on anything they wish. They can decide to build big gambling casinos all over the place and not to fund EDUCATION. In years past, when the federal budget came down, transfer payments were allocated. They said, "Okay, big bad province of Manitoba or P.E.I. or Alberta or Saskatchewan, you must spend X number of dollars on EDUCATION, on welfare and on health." Now provinces do not have the same commitment or the responsibility to spend money in all the areas they did when they were told how to spend that money.
Senator Perrault: It was a bad decision then.
Ms Barlowe: Absolutely. Even though EDUCATION and medicare and welfare are shared jurisdictionally and are constitutionally concurrent, the federal government has a vested interest because they have been funding them for decades. I believe that allowing that shift of power toward the provincial side has destroyed a sense of nationalism and universality in the country.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: On the other hand, the provinces feel that they can make better choices than the federal government in terms of the distribution of the transfer payment. I am sure we could have a great debate over this.
Ms Barlowe: We could. It is true that the federal government must take care of a huge nation and they cannot say, "Okay, Brandon University, did you get your $25 million in funding from the province?" However, the provincial government is localized enough to do that. The federal government can say to the provinces, "You must fund your EDUCATION systems. The reason we have student union groups and student activist groups in our province is to lobby the provincial government. It is difficult, when there are only seven post-secondary institutions in a province, to lobby the federal government and tell them that they must better fund all universities. It is much harder to do when there is only seven post-secondary institutions. The students should be telling the province how to spend the money that is allocated to it.
Senator Perrault: A number of students during the course of our hearings has stated that the standard of EDUCATION has been slipping as a result of these cutbacks. Do you have any evidence of that in the institutions which you attend?
Mr. Blaikie: Small universities are the ones that suffer most from these cutbacks. A certain threshold is reached earlier at the smaller universities. Four years ago we had 4,000 students at Brandon University and now we have 3,000. Our population has dropped by 25 per cent of our population.
Senator Perrault: That is a big drop.
Mr. Blaikie: That is a big drop over four years. I sit on the Budget Committee of the board. We have to deal with a zero percentage rposttion in government funding, a two per cent and a four per cent rposttion to make our projections. We also have to deal with a 0-per-cent increase in enrolment, a 5-per-cent decrease in enrolment, and a ten per cent decrease in enrolment. We also have to take into consideration negotiated salary increases for the professors and for more than 80 per cent of the support staff.
When you walk down the halls of our university, you can literally see where it is falling to pieces. There are less maintenance people, and it is a lot dirtier. We have the bare minimum to provide for three-year degree programs. On our political science side, we have two professors right now who are struggling to supply enough material for third- and fourth-year students.
Senator Perrault: How large are the class sizes?
Ms Barlowe: The political science department is the second-largest department in the arts faculty. We have 57 majors and two professors, so the degree of individual attention is not great.
Mr. Blaikie: We are losing students at Brandon University because we do not have the classes to offer.
Senator Perrault: Are students just dropping out?
Mr. Blaikie: Some are dropping out, and others are moving to other universities.
Senator Perrault: That is not a good sign.
Mr. Blaikie: No, it is not a good sign at all. I will have to stretch my three-year philosophy degree over four years because I cannot get the courses that I require; they are not offered.
Ms Vaughan: In 1989-90 Mount Royal College offered 76 programs. In 1994-95 only 51 remained.
Senator Perrault: Are there specific areas where there have been severe cuts?
Ms Stinka: The University of Saskatchewan is quite an old institution, and we have buildings that are literally falling apart. There are holes in ceilings, et cetera, and classes are still being conducted in those rooms. Obviously, there is not enough money to provide a safe working environment.
The enrolment rate is going down substantially, indicating that students, the brightest and the best, are not necessarily choosing the University of Saskatchewan. We have no way of knowing whether they are choosing to attend any post-secondary institution. When I first enrolled in arts and science, the average enrolment was 73; now it is down to, I believe, 65 or 63, and I am sure it will drop even further within the next few years. Five years ago the number of students in a first-year program such as English was 25; now it is up to about 50.
Senator Perrault: It has doubled.
Ms Stinka: Yes. Professors do not have enough time to devote to individual students, and that is where a lot of the learning takes place.
Ms Peart: I should like to talk about the situation in Saskatchewan and how the quality of EDUCATION there has been decreasing. Recently the MacKay Report, which was commissioned by the provincial government, called for amalgamation of the two universities in Saskatchewan.
Senator Perrault: Amalgamation?
Ms Peart: Yes. We have to tighten our belts, and amalgamation of certain programs is being considered, which would decrease the quality of EDUCATION Saskatchewan. If someone living in Saskatoon wanted to take an arts degree but that program was offered only at the University of Regina, they might not be able to afford to move away from home and they would end up taking a different program. A province with a population of approximately one million people deserves two universities.
Senator Perrault: Is there duplication that could be eliminated as an acceptable way to keep costs under control?
Ms Peart: Both universities offer some similar programs, but they have differences and they are both valuable. The arts program at the University of Regina is quite different from the one offered at the University of Saskatchewan, as are the science programs. There may be some duplication, but each program has different criteria and different professors and a different ideology.
Senator Perrault: In other words, they complement each other?
Ms Peart: Exactly.
The Acting Chair: Perhaps I could clarify that. I understood that the MacKay Report did not suggest amalgamation; rather, it said that there had to be some rationalization between the two universities.
Ms Peart: Right. I am sorry.
The Acting Chair: I understood that they recommended a rationalization of programs in the sense of sharing administrations and concepts where possible. Is that what you really meant?
Ms Peart: Yes.
Ms Stinka: The MacKay Report did confirm that Saskatchewan benefited from two universities.
Senator Perrault: Sort of a friendly rivalry?
Ms Stinka: Yes. The report did point out areas that would benefit from rationalization, such as library acquisitions, administrative duties, and so on.
I do agree with the MacKay Report that universities have to define their mandates -- how they are different, how they serve the Province, how they serve the people. Something has to be written down saying why we have two universities and how they are fulfilling their mandates.
Ms Brooks: In Saskatchewan we are very fortunate that the process is referred to as "revitalization" and that the onus is on the universities to work it out. We have very little provincial intervention in program and curriculum development, whereas in financial and budgetary matters the provincial government is more involved. As far as Post-Secondary education is concerned, at the university level and at the vocational/technical level programs and curricula differ from province to province. In Saskatchewan, unlike some of the other provinces, we have autonomy within the university to look at the revitalization process. Government, business and the universities do collaborate. I think we have set up a good system in Saskatchewan to meet the goals of all the stakeholders.
The Acting Chair: People often say you have autonomy, but sometimes you are controlled by the people who are providing the money, depending on how much they give you.
Ms Brooks: In the MacKay Report there was the implication that, if the universities did not turn things around on their own, then the provincial government would intervene.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: We have heard a lot about the difficulty students have with financing their EDUCATIONs and about the debt loads they end up with and that, if there were more money available, the quality of EDUCATION would be increased, but there are other elements in the quality of EDUCATION. In your institutions have the tools been put in place to evaluate professors, to evaluate programs or to revise programs as required? Money is one element, but I think there are other elements that we have not touched on yet. Do you have any ideas in that regard?
The Acting Chair: If I understand, you are saying that money puts pressure on a system, but you want to know whether the system has the proper evaluation and support to give quality EDUCATION.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Yes.
Ms Vanthuyne: We are a technical institute and we are not autonomous, we are directly supervised by the provincial government. Currently we do not have a system in place to evaluate instructors. This is something that our student association has been working on for years.
We question the quality of SIAST EDUCATION all the time. Money helps, and we do not have very much. Recently a fire destroyed most of our institute at Kelsey, so now we are really in a crunch for money.
Quality EDUCATION and quality programming are necessities. If it is not a quality EDUCATION, then it is not going to do you any good.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: From what I understand, the quality of EDUCATION is not all that great, even putting the money factor aside.
Ms Vanthuyne: But taking the money away does not boost the quality.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: No, it does not. I agree.
I would like to hear more about the quality of EDUCATION in your institution. Is it perfect or is there anything you would like corrected? Do you fell that, if there were more money, there would not be any problem?
The Acting Chair: Perhaps we can broaden the debate to include things like new technologies, distance EDUCATION, and part-time studies. Are we studying the right things?
Ms Vaughan: I just wanted to comment on the quality of EDUCATION. One of the difficulties we face at our institution is instructor evaluations, and one of the inherent biases in that system is that there are different levels of perception of who is in charge and who is not. I think that will be difficult to overcome unless institutions implement their own grievance policies and anti-harassment policies in accordance with the Canadian Human Rights Act.
It is an interesting idea to assess a post-secondary institution, but it is a scary idea when we look at the key performance indicators being used to assess institutions like SAIT versus Mount Royal College which is in the same city. Not only does it cause institutions to be very competitive, which has good points and bad points, but the distressing part is that there is no standardization of formulae within Alberta. Mount Royal College reports one number and SAIT reports another number, and you cannot compare them as though they were two apples. They use different figures to calculate the cost of a graduate. Some are using ancillary fees. What I am trying to say is that the key performance indicators in Alberta are, in my opinion, useless for comparing institutions.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: My question was not about comparison but about evaluation within an institution to see how things can be improved or whether they need to be improved.
Ms Vaughan: There is nothing like that in Alberta now. Instead, the government is comparing us against each other.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: But do institutions not have a responsibility to do their own evaluations? The evaluation does not necessarily have to come from government.
Ms Vaughan: True.
The Acting Chair: I am surprised that you say that. From my experience in Alberta, I understand that there are standardization models for technical programs. I am not sure how good they are.
Ms Vaughan: I can not answer for technical institutes.
The Acting Chair: I think the institutions have attempted to standardize a lot of their processes. Perhaps we should move to a new topic.
Mr. Popowich: I can feel the impact that the cutbacks are having on the students' association at NAIT. We are being asked by our institution to provide better amenities for students who might not even be paying the student association a fee. An increasing number of responsibilities are being imposed upon us. Because our institution cannot provide those services to students, NRSA is asked to pick up the slack. I see that as a direct result of the cutbacks.
I do not know if you people understand like what a student union or student association does, but we do provide many services. Now we are being asked to provide funding for more space for technologies that are coming into NAIT. I just wonder why that has to happen.
Then there is this whole apprenticeship issue, whether they are going to be charged an SA fee. They have always used the services that we provide for them without charge, and there is an uproar now about apprentices having to pay an SA fee. I do not understand why they feel they should not pay, because they are being represented by us.
Mr. Blaikie: I spent some time a couple of weeks ago visiting with the students' union at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota. Their technology, as compared to our technology at Brandon University, is amazing. They are starting to build a $25 million library, and their computer technology is astounding.
Just to tie this in with international students, I read a study which said that the main reason that we are losing so many international students is that we are destroying our own infrastructure and that our EDUCATION system is becoming equivalent to that of a third world country. A third world country knows the value of a strong infrastructure in the EDUCATION system, so they export their students to the countries that have excellent EDUCATIONal facilities. In the past, Canada has been one of those countries, but this study claims that we are losing a lot of international students because we are ripping apart our infrastructure.
The Acting Chair: Where does St. Cloud University get its funds?
Mr. Blaikie: Ideally, they would like to get 33 per cent from the state, 33 per cent from the federal government and 33 per cent from the students. They are moving away from that now.
Senator Perrault: What about the corporate sector?
Ms Barlowe: The only corporate involvement is in running the food services which have been contracted out. The university is not held responsible for any losses suffered through these contracts.
The university receives little corporate support, but they have a $70 million library.
Senator Perrault: Do they have co-operative programs which allow students to work part-time in certain industries?
Ms Barlowe: They do not have a co-op program; they have what is called a work study program. It is primarily an undergraduate university.
The Acting Chair: That is unusual. In the United States, there is state funding, federal funding, student funding, but more and more there is corporate funding, particularly from corporations who do research. We are not getting our fair share in that regard. Foreign students pay phenomenal fees, which help to sustain Canadian students. That is a debate we are hearing in Canada, not from the students I might add, but from others.
Ms Brooks: I have here an e-mail which our student association received a few weeks ago, which deals with some of the questions about corporate involvement in Canadian universities. A friend of mine heard a rumour that the Royal Bank was considering becoming a sponsor of the School of Social Work at the University of Toronto, the Royal Bank Faculty of Social Work.
If you want to find out how much a faculty at a publicly-owned institution costs, take a look at this week's varsity newspaper. There has been big trouble brewing at the U of T over the recent purchase of a faculty of management, the Joseph L. Ratman Faculty of Management as it is called now. If you have a problem with the sale of publicly-owned institutions to private interests and closed door deals between university administration and corporate philanthropists, then you will get a big kick out of the fact that the donated money is tax dposttible and the university matches the total value of the gift dollar for dollar with an additional $15 million in public money. The money does not come all at once, but over 14 years. If at any time Ratman does not think the faculty is acting in his best interests, he can call an external review. The faculty then has one year to implement the reviewer's recommendations or the money stops coming. The faculty also has special status that protects it in the case of budget cuts at the university. This brings up the concept of privatization of our universities.
Senator Perrault: Good subject.
Ms Brooks: The question is: Do corporate funders have any influence on the staffing, curriculum or programs?
Ms Barlowe: I understand that the argument is that corporate sponsorship of a university interferes with way the institution is run. Brandon University has a history of receiving large donations from corporate sponsors. We have the A. E. McKenzie Building, which is named after the owner of McKenzie Seeds in Brandon. Our old library was named after him. We have the new Richardson Library Building. One million dollars was donated to our business program, but they do not have any say in how the university runs. I think corporate sponsorship should be investigated.
Brandon University has the lowest rate of acquisitions of new library books of any university or institution in Canada. They should be going to publications like Oxford Unity Press and saying, "If you give us one copy of each new book, we will name a section of our library after your company." If large computer companies say, "We will give you X number of computers for your student labs to update your technology," wonderful, but those computers do not interfere at all with computer course programs or business programs; they are something for the students to use.
Senator Perrault: We were in the Capilano College library the other day where they have the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce at one end of the library and the Royal Bank at the other end. Each has donated up-to-date computer equipment, and the college is delighted to have it. The only thing the banks ask in return is that there be a commercial running when they turn on the machines in the morning. I asked whether the college had any objection to that, and they said, "We do not find it a difficult thing to live with at all. It is little enough in return for the value of the equipment." They did not suggest that there was interference.
Ms Brooks: I am not suggesting that there is at this point; what I am suggesting is that this area needs to be investigated by the federal government. We have an alumni association and we do receive donations from business. We need to do collaborative work with business and government, but the roles need to be clearly defined.
The Acting Chair: I think most universities are going after corporate sponsorships. I know we were all purists at one time and did not want to name libraries after people, but now we are saying, "Just how do you spell your name?" because we no longer think it interferes with the integrity of the university. I think the greatest debate has been whether the funding of a $2 million research study infringes on the autonomy and integrity of the research. Most universities are struggling with guidelines for this co-partnership because of the spin-off from corporations working with universities. We are quite hesitant in Canada to do that. Most other countries have already developed their guidelines and do not seem to have the fear that we have. We are just starting, and there is a lot of work to be done.
Ms Brooks: Some of the concerns have to do with intellectual property rights and who ultimately owns the product, the researcher or the company. I agree with you that we should not fear this collaboration, but we do need to have the guidelines.
Senator Forest: That is precisely the point I wanted to make. If we are going to get into corporate sponsorship -- and it seems that, with the funding problems we have, it will be necessary -- then we certainly have to set up ethical guidelines not only for physical structures and technical equipment but, most important, in the area of research, because there are so many spin-offs from basic research. It is important that moneys be there for basic research and that the researchers be free to explore their own areas of expertise and interest because of the practical things that come from that.
Naturally, corporations want to have research done in areas which will benefit them, but then we run into the problems of ethics and intellectual ownership. I think Canada has to look carefully at this whole issue.
Ms Brooks: Another issue which we touched on briefly yesterday is what type of research is valued in Canada. Is it research in scientific areas only, which benefits business directly, or should we be doing research in the humanities and social science area as well? I think we have to look at all areas of research.
Ms Saga: I would concur with you on the need for standardization. Further, when business becomes involved in EDUCATION, it is driving technology which, in turn, drives up the costs incredibly. Institutions are spending huge amounts of money on technology, and that is having an impact on quality and acquisitions in other areas.
Mount Royal College has just installed a new fibre-optic system which cost a huge amount of money. That money is coming out of the operating budgets and, as a result, our library acquisitions have declined. More emphasis is being placed on business and less on the arts, and that worries me a great deal.
The Acting Chair: Does anyone else wish to comment?
Ms Barlowe: I have a brief comment. Although I believe that corporate sponsorship is a necessary move for both post-secondary institutions and governments, I do not think corporate support should be used to maintain existing programs. Rather, it should be used to supplement what we already have. Day-to-day operational funding should not be offloaded onto corporate shoulders.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I agree.
Ms Vaughan: On our campus it seems that, as corporations move in, we lose things which, while maybe not of prime importance academically, are important to our students. For example, recently a large corporation donated an Organ Academy, and the space provided for that was the students' medication centre. We were not informed about it.
Senator Perrault: I am sorry, what did they put in that space?
Ms Vaughan: An Organ Academy. It serves approximately 12 students in the Calgary area. This Organ Academy now sits where the college chapel was.
The Acting Chair: Maybe you can describe what an organ academy is.
Ms Vaughan: As in organ music, as in a conservatory.
The Acting Chair: To teach.
Ms Vaughan: Yes.
The Acting Chair: It is a specialized program to teach people to play the organ.
Ms Vaughan: I am sure everyone in this room will agree with me that a Post-Secondary education is not just about learning that such and such happened in 1876, et cetera; it is about having an integrated, holistic experience.
Senator Perrault: Hear, hear.
Ms Vaughan: As we receive more money from the private sector, we lose programs that are vital to our students. We have Muslim students praying in the bathroom five times a day; we have Aboriginal students doing sweetgrass ceremonies in non-smoking classrooms There is no place for students to engage in activities that are important and valuable to them.
Senator Perrault: Where do the students meditate now?
Ms Vaughan: We do not have a place.
Ms Saga: Nowhere.
Senator Perrault: You say there was no consultation?
Ms Vaughan: None.
Senator Perrault: That is strange.
Mr. Harrison: After coming in late I did not want to stifle the debate, but I should like to respond to several earlier questions.
Senator Perrault, you were asking for some examples of the quality of EDUCATION in institutions.
Senator Perrault: The evidence is that it is in decline.
Mr. Harrison: Just off the top of my head, I know that the library acquisitions at the University of Alberta have decreased by 50 per cent, class sizes have increased by 20 per cent, the number of tenured professors is down by one-third, and the number of professors holding Ph.Ds is down by 10 per cent.
Two departments have been eliminated and many facilities have been merged. Downsizing has eliminated one of the top V-P positions in our administration; unfortunately, it was the vice-president of student services, which ties in with Doug Popowich's statement about the more responsibilities being imposed upon the student associations. Traditionally, student unions provided the student life aspect of going to university or to college, but now we are more and more being asked to provide the services which the universities used to provide.
Currently the University of Alberta students' union is a $7 million organization. Within the next two years we will become a $10 million organization because of the additional student services that the university is handing over to us.
There are no standards that the University of Alberta must follow, which was probably the impetus for the performance-based funding which the provincial government has incorporated. I agree with your comments about the inadequacies of the key performance indicators. There is no regulation at the University of Alberta.
Ms Barlowe: I would like to address the issue of standardization. We all know that, when you go to a different institution in a province or you move to a different province, the courses you are required to take are completely different and you know that the quality of EDUCATION will be different. Perhaps the federal government should investigate a national accreditation system for institutions, where each institution would be given a set of standards and would be evaluated every 10 years. With such a system, students from B.C. to Newfoundland would receive basically the same EDUCATION.
Senator Perrault: That is an interesting idea.
The Acting Chair: Do you think it is important that we get exactly the same EDUCATION no matter where we go? Is not the strength of universities and technical colleges that there be diversity of EDUCATION and diversity of methodology which strengthens a society and an individual?
Ms Barlowe: Diversity is important, but I should be able to obtain the same basic degree from any university. Beyond those basic degrees, universities and technical institutions should be able to specialize in any way they wish.
Senator Perrault: Top it up with their local variations, in other words.
Ms Barlowe: Exactly. One of the main reasons for differences between university programs is the different ways in which they are funded. My degree at Brandon University will be completely invalid at University of Manitoba because some of my courses are not recognized there. I have a four-year course called "Politics of Development" which I cannot transfer to graduate school next year because it is not recognized. That is what I am talking about when I say that the system should be standardized.
The Acting Chair: You are talking about transferability and mobility of credits.
Mr. Harrison: I would not want each institution to be the same; however, I would like each institution to provide the same opportunity for students. Currently, a student in Alberta cannot take their student loan out of the province, so the question of mobility and opportunity to receive the same degree anywhere is irrelevant. That is the concern we have about national standardization.
The Acting Chair: If you receive a loan from the provincial government, you cannot transfer it.
Mr. Harrison: When you obtain a loan, approximately half of it is from Alberta Student Loans, and you cannot take that portion out of province. In effect, mobility is only practical if you are affluent.
Ms Brooks: I also wanted to address the transferring of credits from one university to another. It is my sense that provinces in Canada are getting together to look at the notion of transferring credits from one university to another without the notion of standardization. In other words each university would have its own program, but that program would be recognized by other universities. I think students would benefit from that kind of diversity and flexibility more than from some standardized program.
Ms Barlowe: National accreditation would apply not only to academics, but to whether universities in Canada provide the services that students need; whether they have tutorials; whether they have counselling services; whether they have enough tenured professors; whether they have professors holding Ph.Ds; whether they have research assistants, et cetera.
When you transfer a credit, it will be a huge task for the federal government to check each credit to make sure it is an allocated credit. I could transfer some of my 120 credits to the University of Saskatchewan, but I would not necessarily get a degree because they are not recognized allocated credits on my degree. That is the problem.
The Acting Chair: Is there any other burning issue you would like to share with us? Is there a particular issue you believe we should take into consideration in our deliberations?
Mr. Sakamoto: I should like to thank the committee for taking the initiative to travel across this country to look at these issues in depth. They are important, and I thank you.
One burning issue is simply government treating post-secondary institutions like businesses. Student loans are being privatized; tuition rates are skyrocketing; institutions are encouraged to compete for new moneys. The government seems to have forgotten that students are the future of the country; they are not dividends and they cannot be treated as such. Society cannot be treated like a corporation; I think we all agree on that.
I am interested in hearing how the federal government could really have some influence over the EDUCATIONal system. Perhaps something like a National EDUCATION Act could exert some influence on what happens at the provincial level. I am interested in what honourable senators would have to say about that.
Ms Saga: One thing that students have been fighting for and that the government has been promising for a long time is no GST on textbooks.
The Acting Chair: We have it on our agenda.
Senator Perrault: Madam Chair, I should like to assure the people here today that, if they have some further thoughts or revisions to their ideas, they can send them to us. We would be glad to hear from them.
Senator Bonnell: I want to say to all the students here from the different colleges and universities how pleased we are that they took the time to come and tell us their concerns. If you have any further issues you would like to bring to our attention, please forward them to James van Raalte who is my researcher. He will give you a card with his e-mail address and his fax number so that you may forward to the committee any further information you wish.
Mr. Blaikie: We have a lot of issues, and we were able to touch on only a few today. Norine Barlowe has put a lot of time and effort into preparing a document which we will leave with you today.
On behalf of Brandon University, I should like to thank the members of the committee.
The Acting Chair: We have identified a lot of issues. In our report we will do our best to reflect the views of Canadians as they have been told to us. The focus, quite rightly, is on students and on the future. . As the Chairman has already said, if you wish to communicate with us further, please feel free to do so. Your views are valuable to us and I hope we do them justice in our report.
Thank you for coming here today.
The Chairman: We have with us now representatives of the Canadian Federation of Students of Manitoba.
Elizabeth Carlisle, National Executive Representative for Manitoba, Canadian Federation of Students: My name is Elizabeth Carlisle and I am the national executive representative for Manitoba for the Canadian Federation of Students.
[Translation]
My name is Elizabeth and I am a student at the University of Winnipeg in Manitoba. This is my fifth year of studies, but I am in my third year of my academic program. Today, we will be discussing with you the recommendations contained in our report to the Senate. If you would like to ask us questions in French, we will be happy to answer you in French, but I will be making my presentation in English.
[English]
I am in my fifth year of study at the University of Winnipeg but in the third year of my chosen degree program. I have, with much difficulty, avoided incurring debts over the course of my studies beyond the occasional borrowings from friends and family. Like most students, I am finding the cost of EDUCATION increasingly prohibitive. From year to year, despite my love my learning, I contemplate not returning to school because it is really difficult to live on $7,000 to $10,000 a year, to pay about $2,500 a year in tuition, and to try to gain experience in my area of study.
In our presentation we will point out a number of crises in EDUCATION right now and we will give you some examples relating to Manitoba.
Mr. Parsons: I am a student at the University of Winnipeg. I will finish my degree next year. I am lucky in that my EDUCATION is being funded by the Workers' Compensation Board. I am on a fixed income provided by them. My partner and I live off this income, and Karen's tuition is paid through this income. We have not incurred any debt yet, but our savings get lower every month. When I have completed my degree, Workers' Compensation will cut me loose from their income. I am actually afraid of a job market that I find hostile to youth and to wheelchair users.
Ms Carlisle: I think it goes without saying that these few details about our experiences in the Post-Secondary education system are part of a larger and growing sense of uncertainty among students and potential students about taking part in Post-Secondary education at all. I am sure you will hear, or have already heard, testimony about the weakness of decision-makers' support for Post-Secondary education. Our intention today is to provide you with more detailed information regarding the recommendations outlined in the brief we have submitted for your consideration.
CFS-Manitoba's main recommendations are to stabilize and enhance federal funding through transfer payments allocated specifically to Post-Secondary education; the establishment of a national system of grants, not loans, for post-secondary EDUCATION; the creation of Post-Secondary education legislation; meaningful employment initiatives which recognize that not all students are young and which are career-oriented; the creation of a fairer tax system which would allow for greater access to Post-Secondary education up front; and reinvestment in Post-Secondary education through the tax system as students become more able to pay.
In our brief we have outlined the federation's position on the direction we would like the federal government to take in Post-Secondary education. Our focus is on funding and meaningful employment for students and graduates. As to the quality of EDUCATION in this country, the CFS feels that access will always be the key to diversity and quality in any social program or structure such as Post-Secondary education. There will always, we contend, be great debate as to how exactly we can create world-class or high-quality EDUCATION systems. Although the discussion of quality is ongoing and certainly crucial, there is no denying that without basic access, i.e. the lack of financial barriers, the entire discussion is relatively moot or at least sufficiently rarefied in the realms of an increasingly elite academy as to be limited or even arcane.
Canada's Post-Secondary education system needs at least stable funding if not increased funding. In fact, the present funding situation is quite dire in Manitoba. For example, in the past few weeks an entire section of one of the buildings of my university was closed down because it was quite literally falling apart. Other parts of campus are not adequately accessible by wheelchair due to lack of funding. Infrastructure across the province is suffering from years of neglect.
In Manitoba we see Post-Secondary education embarked on a downward spiral. There are only so many unpaid days of work that faculty and staff can take, only so many books and hours to be cut from the libraries, only so many percentile increases in tuition fees, only so many new fees, only so many obstacles in the whole system that we can face before something cracks.
What Canadians heard, when 100,000 students took to the streets on January 25, 1995, as Lloyd Axworthy tried to implement the social policy review with its more than $4.5 billion in cuts and proposals for income contingent loan repayment plans, was the sound of students' backs cracking. Now we are saying that stabilized and enhanced funding absolutely have to be part of the vision for Post-Secondary education in this country. Make no mistake, the Canadian Federation of Students is not saying that we need private funding or corporate funding; we are largely relying on public funding through a fairer tax system that can accommodate not only adequate funding for Post-Secondary education but also funding for health care, social assistance and other important social programs.
Private and corporate funding has already begun to take its toll in Manitoba. EDUCATION with corporate strings attached, in many cases, is simply not quality EDUCATION.. For example, I am currently suffering through a course being taught by an environmental consultant with no research background and only a very limited grasp of the issues he is discussing in class. In community colleges in Manitoba where, because of cost-cutting, the hiring of non-tenured, even non-unionized, teachers has a longer history, we see problems with quality and curriculum. We even had much cheerleading in Manitoba by our own Minister of EDUCATION who supports reliance on corporate funding in all areas of EDUCATION, including primary and secondary EDUCATION. We see that as really problematic.
We are certainly not opposed to some corporate funding, but if it becomes something that institutions rely on, we see that as being dangerous. When we see the awful situation in which granting councils are placed, with cutbacks to their pools of funding, we begin to wonder if Post-Secondary education might not become just a subsidized training system for big business.
I guess the burning question is: How can we afford to fund EDUCATION? Some quite cogent solutions have been put forward in the Alternative Federal Budget of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, which was released yesterday. This project, in which CFS has been an active and proud participant, outlines a fresh perspective for ensuring long-term funding for Post-Secondary education through a combination of fairer taxes, an aggressive employment strategy, and the resulting increases in economic activity. The alternative federal budget puts forward the idea of a Post-Secondary education fund which would provide student grants and loans, increased funding for Aboriginal students who, by the way, are becoming increasingly uneasy with federal off-loading onto the provinces, as well as funding for research agencies and a capital program aimed at rehabilitating and upgrading the Post-Secondary education infrastructure as part of a national job creation strategy.
I will now ask Preston to talk a bit about employment, an increasingly important issue for students as jobs become more scarce, after which we will highlight further recommendations which we have been discussing.
Mr. Preston: The summer jobless rate for students continues to hover around the 16 per cent mark. With the increase in tuition fees, it now costs approximately $10,000 per year to attend school. Summer employment is an excellent way for students to defray these costs and to lower their debt load. Not having a job in the summer often means that students cannot afford to go back to school in the fall, and this causes a downward spiral of unemployed youth. This is no way to create a robust economy.
The federal government does have summer employment initiatives, such as the one that was announced yesterday, but these initiatives have by no means been adequate. Funding for these programs has been inconsistent. Sometimes the job is not consistent with the goals of the program. For example, Green Team was an initiative in Manitoba to give students summer work experience on environmental issues. What the students ended up doing was collecting garbage off the streets of Winnipeg. What kind of future employment is this preparing us for? These were university students who were not being prepared for future work.
CFS-Manitoba recommends the creation of a Post-Secondary education act which would encompass the following principles:
Accessibility, meaning free of all non-academic barriers. With a system of national grants, which Elizabeth will describe in a few minutes, students would not be excluded for economic reasons.
Public administration. Institutions would not be private corporations, but would be not-for-profit and publicly funded, ensuring that citizens of Canada would have a say in the direction of Post-Secondary education.
Comprehensiveness. Students should be offered a full range of options, from a university degree to a community college diploma, professional training and adult EDUCATION.
Transferability and portability. A common problem for students is that they cannot transfer all their credits from one institution to another. Stories range from one student who had to repeat her entire first year to someone who was a few credits away from finishing a degree and almost had to start over. I have had all sorts of problems with trying to transfer my credits. There is an appeal process, but it is time-consuming, and I ended up with only half of my credits being transferred.
Ms Carlisle: I know you have heard a lot from students this morning about debt loads and about the increasing reliance on loans from private financial institutions and the problems that go along with that. One of the suggestions the Canadian Federation of Students has been making for a number of years is that we should have a national grant system in Canada. I think "pay now or pay later" probably sums up the CFS's comment to the federal government in terms of loans versus grants.
As student bankruptcies increase along with the increase in tuition fees, I think the fatal flaws of relying on loans to fund Post-Secondary education become clear. Not only do these mortgage-size debts discourage potential students from pursuing Post-Secondary education, but they are simply unmanageable in many cases. If the federal government does not commit now to funding Post-Secondary education, it will be paying for that decision later with student loan bailouts as well as an economically and financially impaired generation of graduates.
We see an opportunity here for the federal government to assert leadership in shaping a more viable system of Post-Secondary education in Canada. The student debt situation in this country has become somewhat of a crisis. We need to rectify the embarrassing fact that Canada does not have a national system of grants as well as loans.
The CFS applauds the creation of special opportunities grants for students with disabilities, for female students in non-traditional fields, and for part-time students. We would like to see that system expanded to include students with parental responsibilities, and we applaud the efforts that have been made in that direction. Although students are telling us that the scope of these grants is still inadequate and some have expressed the fear that offering more grants may be an excuse to raise tuition fees, we see it as a step in the right direction. The Alternative Federal Budget offers some models of how such grants could be funded over the long term.
Mr. Parsons: "Debt control;" "fiscal responsibility," "deficit rposttion" -- what do these terms mean for programs such as post-secondary EDUCATION? They mean downsizing and doing more with less. We have heard them a million times, but what do they really mean for the average student? I can no longer study all weekend because the library is open for only a few hours on Saturday and Sunday afternoons. Fewer and fewer books and journals are available in the library, which makes it more difficult to write term papers. As tuition rises and the burden of EDUCATION costs increasingly rests on my shoulders, it becomes harder and harder to afford the cost of the EDUCATION that I know to be important to myself and to all Canadians.
We rarely hear past catchy phrases like "We need to keep our fiscal house in order." The truth is that the federal government has not only a deficit problem but also a revenue problem. Why has its revenue been rposted so drastically? Because of corporate welfare and tax breaks for wealthy individuals. It is not that the Canadian Federation of Students is anticorporate, it is that we want the tax burden to be distributed fairly among corporations and wealthy individuals. Among all the G-7 nations, Canadian corporations pay the least amount in taxes. Millionaires can get away with paying less than $100 in taxes.
There are solutions to the federal government's revenue problem. The Canadian Federation of Students participates every year in the Alternative Federal Budget which goes through the same econometric processes that the federal budget goes through. It is not a wish list, but a fully functional alternative budget. A fully-accessible, publicly- funded post-secondary system of EDUCATION is possible.
Although this is a relatively minor part of the larger issue of a fair tax system, the facility with which the federal government can implement the CFS's request for tax breaks for students makes it appealing. CFS has suggested two measures the federal government could take to put money back into students' pockets. One is to change the maximum dposttible for grants, scholarships and fellowships from $500 to $1,000 to cover inflation, and to make student union dues and ancillary fees refundable tax credits. We understand that Paul Martin has essentially endorsed these proposals, and we look forward to seeing them in the upcoming federal budget. We have to overcome what I feel is a well-founded student cynicism during an election year, but we are not in a position to slough off the returns that these measures could bring to students.
Ms Carlisle: That concludes our presentation. We thank you for listening.
[Translation]
We will be happy to answer your questions in French, if you so wish.
[English]
The Chairman: Thank you for an excellent presentation I will ask Senator Lavoie-Roux to begin the questioning.
[Translation]
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I am somewhat disturbed by everything that I have heard, particularly from students, in the past two days and perhaps even before then. However, let us confine ourselves to the last two days since our arrival in Regina. I understand that fees have increased, that universities and post-secondary institutions have suffered major cuts in light of federal cutbacks, provincial deficits and so forth.
On page 3 of your brief, you state the following:
[English]
Affordability means having a post-secondary system that is free of all financial barriers.
[Translation]
Ideally, I think we could wish that for everyone, but in the real world, how exactly are you proposing that we achieve this? I am hearing many requests from post-secondary students, but we must not lose sight of one truth: there are still many students who do not progress beyond the elementary or secondary level because their families are too poor or have too many problems. In as much as it is natural to want barriers at the secondary level to be removed, the fact remains that governments, whether provincial or federal, have responsibilities toward other levels of EDUCATION, the only ones that will help you progress to the post-secondary level. What is your position on this? Should governments cut back further in the fields of health and social security? If governments are wasteful, and there are certainly some who are, then this is the time to denounce them. The fact remains that we must be realistic in terms of what our normal demands should be. What would you suggest we do to achieve this objective?
Ms. Carlisle: We have given this matter a great deal of thought and this is a valid question. If everyone says what it ideally would like from the system, then this may indeed be excessive. What we are recommending is not as extreme as you seem to imagine. We are in no way suggesting that we compete with social programs. Clearly this is not our objective.
We would like to see broad solidarity between the health care and secondary and primary EDUCATION sectors. It is absolutely critical that all levels of EDUCATION be financed realistically. It is also very important to recognize that our governments do make choices and that they could have chosen differently in some cases. That is why we are working on alternative federal budgets because these offer truly viable solutions. For example, one of the solutions would involve collecting taxes that have been owed for a number of years to our government. Even if the government were to collect only a fraction of the taxes owing, this would provide the necessary funding for all social programs for the next five years.
We must not forget that we are talking about significant amounts of money. As I said, our federal and provincial governments do make choices. Sometimes, I think that we resort to the excuse that the economy forces us to act in a particular way or to make certain choices but quite frankly, if the federal government does not take a more proactive role in terms of the economy, our country will encounter many more problems than it currently has.
It is rather like being caught in a vicious circle to argue that because there is no money, then it is impossible to do anything. I think that it is inexcusable for Canada to have children living in poverty, children who cannot go on to a Post-Secondary education because in reality, this is quite possible. Canada is an incredibly wealthy country compared to many other nations that subsidize student tuition fees. It is not a matter of never paying for one's EDUCATION, but rather one of paying for it when it is realistic and cost-effective to do so. In our view, it is more cost-effective for people to pay for their EDUCATION when they have the money.
Clearly, it is unfair for students who earn perhaps $6,000, $7,000 or $10,000 per year to have to pay for their EDUCATION. It makes a great deal more sense for people to pay for their EDUCATION through the national taxation system once they have jobs. That is what the system is there for.
Otherwise, I do not see why we have a federal government. It should be taking a truly proactive role, speaking up loudly and saying that EDUCATION is a priority, along with health care and social assistance. We have not seen the government do this in recent years. We have had a government saying that the economy forces it to make certain choices and I have to wonder if in other world countries such as Sweden, Cuba and France where tuition fees...
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Are you saying that you would prefer Cuba's EDUCATIONal system?
Ms. Carlisle: -- where students pay very little in the way of tuition fees or perhaps receive monthly payments to cover other EDUCATIONal costs. Other countries have systems like this in place. It is really a shame that Canada cannot adopt a similar approach.
You should not misinterpret the Federation's message. We are not asking for this immediately. We are asking the government to adjust its priorities so that these levels of funding can be achieved.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I must congratulate you on your French as this is not your mother tongue. Where did you learn to speak the language?
Ms. Carlisle: I was enrolled in a French immersion program for 12 years.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Excellent. If I understand you correctly, you believe that the government could recover more money by taxing corporations or individuals who, according to your analysis, either manage not to pay any taxes or do not pay enough taxes. Are you leaning more toward taxing corporations or individuals?
Ms. Carlisle: Ideally, both. We should send you the proposals contained in our alternative budget. Everything is explained in this document. First of all, we are proposing that the government go after the taxes that have not been paid in years. For example, the Bronfman family owes the federal government several hundreds of millions of dollars. If this money were collected, each student in the country would see a rposttion of approximately $500 in tuition fees. This is one family that owes $500 million in taxes and it is spelled out clear as day in the report of the Auditor General of Canada. We are not suggesting giving students handouts.
Secondly, increase the corporate tax rate, but not to a point where it would drive corporations out of Canada. That is not what we want. We would like corporate taxes to be increased to a reasonable level, and we would like a more progressive tax system for wealthy Canadians.
We would like to see more taxation levels. In fact, we would like the levels eliminated by former Prime Minister Mulroney to be reinstated. He adjusted the taxation levels so that there would be fewer levels in the higher-income brackets. The old levels should be reinstated and several new ones should be added for the country's highest income earners.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Getting back to Mr. Bronfman, we are not here to judge him, but the fact remains that of all corporate citizens, he is one of those who has been the most generous to university institutions.
Ms. Carlisle: Yes, we recognize this fact. We are not saying that that is a bad thing or that we hate the Bronfmans. Not at all. We are simply saying that it is unfair that average Canadians earning $20,000, $30,000 or $40,000 a year must pay their taxes or face the threat of going to jail and that the Bronfmans can get away with not paying their taxes. It is truly not fair.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I agree with you on that score. When you talk about an alternative budget, what exactly are you referring to?
Ms. Carlisle: Several years ago, a project was launched. It involved drafting an alternative budget using the same econometric processes and data as that used by the federal government. There is a group in Winnipeg, a coalition for social justice, which goes by the name of Choices. The members of this group work with another association, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Group members include economists, people working in social sectors such as students like myself, members of the Canadian Federation of Students and people on social assistance. Coalition members have worked together to draft this alternative budget.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Has this budget been published?
Ms. Carlisle: It has been published by the coalition and is available from Choices. I can give you the address and telephone number of this organization. I believe there is even a representative here in this room who could provide you with these documents right now. I believe it is really important for you to have them.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Andreychuk: I heard a news item yesterday which said that a massive increase in taxes is being advocated. Was it a $4 billion increase?
Ms Carlisle: Right. It is a readjustment of the tax system to bring back the tax levels that used to be in place before Mulroney changed them.
Senator Andreychuk: The gentleman said that it would mean an increase in tax revenue of billions of dollars, and that it would probably occur within the next couple of years.
Ms Carlisle: To keep it in perspective, if one particularly wealthy family in this country owes $500 million in back taxes, that would figure into the total amount, so it would not involve an outrageous tax increase. It would be quite reasonable.
Senator Andreychuk: I seem to be hearing that, if the federal and provincial governments put more money into the system, somehow our EDUCATION system would be better off. Have you given any consideration to the internationalization of EDUCATION and our need to be postated differently? The OECD statistics and the G-7 indicate that we have one of the highest taxation rates and that we continue to lose our competitive edge.
I was somewhat shocked by the comparison with Cuba whose economy is absolutely faltering. One cannot blame it all on the blockade; one has to blame it on the leadership within. This is probably the first time I have heard an economic comparison between Canada and Cuba.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: She was talking about EDUCATION.
Senator Andreychuk: Yes, but that EDUCATION system is obviously being funded in some way.
Ms Carlisle: Sweden's economy is clearly experiencing a lot of trouble, but they have still made full funding of Post-Secondary education a priority.
Senator Andreychuk: But do you think it is a competitive EDUCATION system?
Ms Carlisle: In terms of quality?
Senator Andreychuk: Yes.
Ms Carlisle: I am not in a position to make a judgment on that, but I think quality is clearly an ambiguous issue. There are different indicators and different ideas of what quality means. Sweden certainly has had some problems, and its EDUCATION system probably is not as high-quality as that in Canada. I also think Canada is lagging behind in terms of our international reputation in Post-Secondary education. I do not think we are lagging behind because we do not have quality faculty in this country or quality students in this country; I think it is just because the funding is not there to make the system work. The system is suffering visibly from lack of funding, and that has a bearing on the quality of EDUCATION.
Mr. Parsons: To follow up on your point about the taxation situation, Canada's corporate tax rate is the lowest of all the G-7 countries. In fact, it is almost half that in France. I do not believe there is a lot of merit in saying that Canada's corporations are overtaxed.
Senator Andreychuk: Could you tell us where you obtained your statistics. I have just come from a foreign policy proceeding where I was inundated with statistical reports, and what you are saying is not on all fours with what I received there What report you are basing your figures on?
Ms Carlisle: This is a document from the OECD showing revenue statistics of OECD member countries from 1965 to 1991.
Senator Andreychuk: But which OECD document?
Ms Carlisle: The title is "Sources of Tax Revenue by Type of Tax, G-7 Countries." This is a 1990 document. I can look up in the back of the book to see what the document is called if you wish.
Senator Andreychuk: Just tell me what document you are referring to.
Ms Carlisle: This book is called Japanese Economic Policies and Growth: Implications for Business in Canada and North America. This is clearly looking at the issue of globalization.
Senator Andreychuk: Who is the author?
Ms Carlisle: Mathou Nakamura and Lan Vertinski. It indicates that Canada's corporate tax rate is 6.8 per cent, which is below that of the U.S. at 7.3 per cent, France at 7.3 per cent, Germany at 4.7 per cent, Italy at 10 per cent, the United Kingdom at 11 per cent and Japan at 21.5 per cent. Clearly these countries are competitive in the global economy even with higher corporate tax rates. It is clear that, when governments take an active role in shaping the economy, as Japan has, they can make a difference in terms of what shape their economies take. That is what we are saying.
We are saying that our government has to understand that the economic choices it makes and the outcomes of those choices are all about priorities. We do not buy the argument that we are so constrained by the global economy that we cannot allocate real value to our social programs. We believe that our social programs actually make Canada competitive in terms of a place to do business; we all know the links between having good social programs and having a healthy work force.
Since the North American Free Trade Agreement came in, it is obvious that the pressures to lower our standards are not getting us anywhere in terms of the global economy.
Getting back to EDUCATION, which is our focus here today, while it is important to have a cosmopolitan Post-Secondary education system, one that takes into account international influences, we also must be conscious of the fact that there are international influences other than economic ones. Cultural values also need to be taken into account. The fact that this global imperative has forced our universities and colleges to reach out around the world and to prove that Canada can offer high quality EDUCATION is a positive thing. It is unfortunate that we have differential fees for international students, but that is another issue entirely.
Senator Andreychuk: I graduated from university 30 years ago, and at that time part-time jobs were whatever we could get. I worked at a lunch counter, I cleaned houses, I pushed popcorn in a theatre, and I considered all these jobs as valuable experiences which enhanced my life and my people skills.
I was interested that you felt, both in the environmental sense and in the EDUCATIONal sense, that collecting garbage was somehow wrong. It is still a learning experience and an income-generating device.
Mr. Parsons: I am sure it would be a learning experience, but the intent of the program was to provide people with experience in environmental issues, and I do not think collecting garbage would prepare them for environmental issues. I would not disagree that there would be value in doing that work, but the pay for this job was not very good and that it did not help these students pay their tuitions or to get through the eight months of school.
If we actually paid students enough, it would be a lot better. Also, 16 per cent of students are not able to find work during the summer.
Senator Andreychuk: Your point is that there are not sufficient summer jobs out there which offer sufficient income.
Ms Carlisle: Exactly. There is clearly an inconsistency between the rise in the inflation rate and the rise in tuition fees. The increase in tuitions has outstripped many-fold anything that can be accounted for by inflation. Ten years ago, the tuition for a full course load was just over $500; now it is more than $2,500. Maybe working for minimum wage would have paid the bills 10 years ago, but it is not paying the bills today. It is not covering rent and books and tuition and ancillary fees and all the other expenses that students have.
We are not saying that students are not willing to do jobs that will give them valuable life experience or students are too good to do whatever kind of job. What we are saying is that students and people in general -- we are not talking only about students here -- need a wage that meets the cost of living in today's society.
Senator Forest: I should like to pursue a bit more the idea of higher taxation rates for corporations, government's leadership role in EDUCATION, and the fact that we are lagging behind in research and on the international scene.
I gather you would be interested in money not only to help students pay their bills but also to allow for the kind of research that would make our graduates competitive on the global scene.
Ms Carlisle: You make an important point. I mention in my presentation that granting councils are certainly suffering , along with everyone else, as a result of these cuts.
The Canadian Federation of Students would support something similar to the U.S. Work Study Program in which students would gain valuable work experience on campus and for which half the funding is supplied by the federal government. Incidentally, the cost to the federal government would be about equal to the cost of administering student loans. Such a work study program would employ hundreds of students who now are on student loans. That would be one way of boosting the important research work that goes on in this country.
The Federation also advocates increased funding to granting councils. Clearly, if research suffers, the whole system suffers. Any faculty which is doing a good job is doing research. If the faculty and the graduate students do not have the funds to do research, the result is the downward spiral that we are seeing increasingly these days.
Senator Perrault: The whole Pacific Rim is enjoying incredible growth. Are there programs at the universities that you represent which are designed to make Canadians active participants in the Pacific Rim -- in other words, to create jobs for young people in the Pacific Rim? What is the extent of your language and cultural training with respect to the countries of the Pacific Rim?
Ms Carlisle: The University of Winnipeg which we both attend, along with the University of Manitoba and other institutions in the province, has been reaching out to the Pacific Rim through special missions to pair up with universities and colleges in the Pacific Rim countries.. We have a sister university in, I believe, Hong Kong. Many students participate in the different language programs and teaching programs that are offered in Japan, Korea, and Hong Kong, and so that has been ongoing.
I think we have to be careful about relying too heavily on the Pacific Rim to solve the ills of our system. We must careful to respect each other's culture and methods of operation. We want to proceed with caution, but it is certainly happening.
Senator Perrault: Capilano College in British Columbia has established a co-operative program to train young people from every part of Canada in the language, culture and history of Pacific Rim nations. They are playing a key role in assisting Canadian companies to obtain business in that part of the world. They are working with governments and with the Department of Foreign Affairs. I think more institutions should be sharing in that.
My next question has to do with the communications revolution we are experiencing. We are told that 55 million people are accessing the Internet and that 20 million people own computers. Is your university keeping up with technological advances? Are the budget cutbacks affecting the capacity of young people to learn about these new technological advances? Do you have modern computers here? Are you in touch with EDUCATIONal institutions all over Canada and, if so, what kinds of information do you exchange?
Mr. Parsons: The University of Winnipeg has just installed some rather large computer rooms where all students at the university have access to Internet.
Senator Perrault: Are they are putting it to good use for research purposes?
Mr. Parsons: As far as I know, yes.
To keep the communication revolution in perspective, let us not forget that only 50 per cent of the people in the world have ever used a telephone.
Senator Perrault: Some countries are not very active participants.
Mr. Parsons: That is right. Technology can be a very useful learning tool, but it can also turn into a real menace if we begin to depend on computers only for EDUCATION and no longer have access to live professors. I think that would be detrimental.
Senator Perrault: That view has been expressed elsewhere, and I agree with it. There has to be an interchange of ideas at the human level, does there not?
Mr. Parsons: Absolutely.
Senator Perrault: Technology could be a useful supplement. Could technology help with the EDUCATION challenge in the remote parts of your province?
Ms Carlisle: Yes, distance EDUCATION has been greatly assisted by the use of telecourses and other kinds of electronic communication.
Senator Perrault: Do you have those facilities in Manitoba?
Ms Carlisle: Actually, the University of Winnipeg has taken a leadership role in doing those kinds of program; in fact, it has been spurred on by the cutbacks. If there is a silver lining, maybe that is it -- not necessarily a silver lining, but certainly one of the spin-offs from cutbacks. People have to find more creative ways of communicating.
Let me reiterate my words of warning about the danger of relying too heavily on technology. Technology is only as much as we make it. Certainly through distance EDUCATION there have been many inroads made not only into northern Manitoba but also into northwestern Ontario from Manitoba.
Senator Perrault: Are the students able to obtain full university credits or partial credits?
Ms Carlisle: Yes, they can take credit courses and obtain degrees by telecourse. We do encourage them, if they have opportunity, to come to Winnipeg to visit our university and to meet the faculty members that they see on T.V. or, at least, to phone in or to communicate by e-mail.
Senator Perrault: Has that program been adequately funded?
Ms Carlisle: It is tough. They are making it because they have a lot of creative, intelligent people at the University of Winnipeg and at the University of Manitoba.
Senator Forest: Giving lectures on television is a special talent, I suppose.
Ms Carlisle: Yes, it does take some training. Not all professors are yet trained to do that kind of teaching. It certainty does take some extra effort on the part of the faculty. Winnipeg is lucky in the sense that for a number of years it has been a centre with a lot of talent in that industry.
Senator Perrault: How many visa students do you have at the University of Winnipeg?
Ms Carlisle: An ever decreasing number, I think believe.
Senator Perrault: Why has there been a decline?
Ms Carlisle: It is due to the recent implementation of differential fees. Before that the University of Winnipeg had about double the number it has now. I believe the number now is in the range of 200 students out of 6,500.
Senator Perrault: Visa students have represented a bit of a revenue centre for certain institutions, have they not?
Ms Carlisle: Not really, because of the differential fees. The revenue from the fees has been rposted by the number of students who have not come, so it has been a problem.
Senator Perrault: Would you favour more visa students in Canada, provided they did not displace Canadian students?
Ms Carlisle: We do not want students to come here with no support. It is really difficult to come here and have to learn a second or third language and a new culture.We have heard awful stories from our international students on campus in terms of the lack of support because there are no funds to provide them with support. That has to be part of the package.
Senator Perrault: But your principal allegation today, if one may term it that, is declining standards in EDUCATION as a result of inordinately large cutbacks. Is this your view?
Ms Carlisle: Everybody is trying to make do, but I think the stress has been showing for a number of years now. We have to turn it around before it is too late, in terms of the physical infrastructure and capital programs. Faculty members are being worn down by extra work and days without pay, less resources and less help in terms of teaching assistance. Students are being worn down by debt loads and increasing tuition fees. I think the whole picture is not good for this country right now.
Senator Perrault: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman: I should like to thank the representatives of the Canadian Federation of Students in Manitoba for an excellent brief and for answering our questions.
Mr. Parsons: We have some campaign materials and posters which we will leave with members of the committee.
The Chairman: We have with us now from the Council of Alberta Students' Union Mr. Hoops Harrison.
Mr. Hoops Harrison: Thank you. Honourable Senators, fellow presenters and guests, I should like to begin by saying what an honour it is to be here and how timely and necessary is a federal inquiry into the state of post-secondary EDUCATION. Although Post-Secondary education falls under provincial jurisdiction, the Council of Alberta Students' Union feels that a strong national vision is needed.
Before I begin, I would just like to state that, if it is to the to Senators' liking, perhaps after the inquiry into Post-Secondary education you might consider an inquiry into airline flights, baggage and limited times.
Senator Andreychuk: Especially to Regina; I would second that.
Mr. Harrison: I was a boy scout for a couple of years and I pride myself on being prepared; however, nothing in that youth doctrine told me not to check my presentation materials in my luggage. When I arrived in Regina without my luggage and my presentation materials I find myself ill-prepared, so I jotted down some points on the taxi ride over here.
Mr. Harrison: I am wearing a couple of hats today. I am here as a representative of the Council of Alberta Students' Union, which represents some 60,000 students at the University of Alberta, the University of Calgary, the University of Lethbridge, Athabasca University, and the two graduate student associations at University of Calgary and University of Lethbridge. I am also Regional Director of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations which represents 153,000 students across the country. The political situation in Alberta has severely diluted the number of representatives who could have attended here. As I am sure you know, a provincial election was called recently, and we are all scrambling at the moment.
I want to talk about three issues: national vision; student debt; and school-to-work transition.
First, I should like to state that I am proud to be a Canadian and proud of our society. After all, the United Nations selected us as the best country in the world and Forbes Magazine has selected the city of Toronto as the most liveable city in North America.
Senator Perrault: I do not know about that.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I find that a bit surprising, coming from Montreal. But so much the better for them.
Senator Andreychuk: I find it refreshing that the comment comes from an Albertan. That is the kind of unity we need.
Mr. Harrison: I was about to add that, obviously, Steve Forbes has not been to Edmonton.
From a student's point of view, what is needed is a strong commitment to the Post-Secondary education system. A previous presenter alluded to the G-7 countries. As I understand it, the majority of them have very strong national EDUCATION programs with well-developed scholarship and bursary programs; yet, Canada seems to be somewhere at the rear of that group.
There is a great deal of variability from institution to institution in Canada, and mobility is basically only for those people who can afford it. As I said earlier, Alberta students cannot take their Alberta Student Loans out of province to attend an institution where they feel there is a bitter program or to attend a co-operative program at Waterloo University, for example.
The average level of the student debt right now, as I am sure you have heard time and time again, is $17,000 and will probably increase to $25,000 by the year 1998. To put it in real terms, that is approximately equivalent to three years' income after graduation. This is a deterrent to many people. I have spoken to many people who have refused to go to university because they don't feel that it will benefit them because the quality of EDUCATION has been drastically rposted. As well, the anticipation of finding a job after graduation is not that strong.
Let me emphasize that, even though tuition fees in the United States are much higher than those in Canada, the average indebtedness for students there is lower than that of Canadian students, in Canadian dollars.
Senator Perrault: Do you know what the figure is in the United States?
Mr. Harrison: A 1993 document indicates that the average indebtedness for a Canadian student is $13,000 Canadian and for a student in the United States it is $11,000 in Canadian dollars.
The United States has a very well-established, well-developed bursary and scholarship program for needy students, and we would like to see something like that implemented in Canada. In Alberta almost all needs-based bursaries have been eliminated and replaced with student loans. While we are being told that this will still promote accessibility, the level of debt that students are looking at accumulating upon graduation is very much a deterrent.
Student employment is a real concern amongst our students who are asking: How well is my university EDUCATION going to prepare me for the outside world? Am I going to have the necessary skills to transfer out to a job? All of these questions, of course, are linked with student debt. If you know that you are going to find a well-paying job on a career track that is aligned with your field of study, then you are probably willing to saddle yourself with a mortgage but, if the prospects are not that good, you are going to opt for other things. I think we can all agree that an postated society is desirable.
I am not trying to justify the current funding situation in this nation but, even if funding levels were frozen at the current levels, we would still have to deal with the issue of student employability.
In co-operation with the University of Alberta Senate, we sent surveys to more than 100 companies across Canada and conducted research into more than 420 corporations in different industry sectors. We then combined that information with student surveys on campus and tried to develop the demands as against what the university was providing. Since we had no previous research against which to measure our information, our initial document, which is dated February 10, 1997, does not contain recommendations or conclusions; it is more a discussion paper.
We found some rather startling results -- perhaps not startling to the students, but startling to the administration.
Industries were asked to rank the skills which were mandatory in their sector. Communications skills were ranked highest. Ninety per cent of the 420 industries surveyed required an ability to communicate. When we broke the responses down to specific industry sectors, only 30 per cent of government sectors said that one needed to be efficient -- and I am not lying.
Senator Perrault: That is shocking.
Mr. Harrison: I am not lying.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Are you surprised?
Senator Andreychuk: That is amusing.
Mr. Harrison: The figures we show on the lower left side of this document are industry averages across all sectors. Once I get my luggage, I will be happy to send you the exact industry breakdown.
While we do not want to see a university EDUCATION become dependent on the corporate sector or on whether one will find a job, 87 per cent of all students surveyed said that their primary reason for going to university was to improve their career opportunities. As students are asked to pay more and more of the cost of their EDUCATION and since they are future consumers, their demands need to be answered.
The type of EDUCATION they receive is important. Not only do they want the theoretical skills, but they also want the practical skills to transfer to something that they can do following graduation. Seventy-three per cent of all student responses had to do in some way with work-related studies: more job placements; more career fairs; more practical, hands-on experience, including cooperative programs, mentorship programs, job shadowing, et cetera.
The University of Alberta does not offer sufficient programs that directly relate to the outside world, if you will. We have great theoretical components to our EDUCATION, but the practical components are few. This begs the question: Should the university be simply an ivory tower of learning for the sake of learning or should it become a job training factory? From our point of view, it does not have to be at either extreme; it should be somewhere in between. As society is changing, so should a university EDUCATION. Some people have said to me, "You are going to university to gain knowledge, not to be trained. If you want training, go to a college or a technical institute.". Telling a student who has accumulated $25,000 to $30,000 worth of debt, "You have gone through university and you cannot get a job; now you have to go to college," is ludicrous.
I do not know where to go from here; I wish I had my presentation with me. Perhaps I can talk about technology.
First, technology is a tool, not the basis of an EDUCATION. Distance learning scares me because I do not want to see it replace the university experience. As was discussed earlier in the roundtable discussions, there are many intangibles involved in student life, and they should not be eliminated because of downsizing.
In response to Senator Perrault's question about Internet access, the University of Alberta has 30,000 students and very little space for computer labs. Every student at the University of Alberta has an Internet account, which they are given when they register, but only a fraction can actually access the Internet because the modem lines are tied up and the labs are taken up by classes.
The answer to that is to get more modems for the computers. However, the Telus Corporation in Alberta has a monopoly over the communications and they control the of putting in these new lines. The cost right now is outrageous. All we can do is just jam our students in there like lab rats and limit their access to five minutes.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Harrison. You did very well without your notes.
Senator Andreychuk has a question for you.
Senator Andreychuk: Aside from pointing to statistics and making comparisons with other countries, how do you think we can bring about an attitudinal shift on the part of politicians, business people and even educators themselves to the fact that we need a higher national commitment to EDUCATION and that we simply have to see it as an investment?
Mr. Harrison: I think the components are already in place. Frankly, we need leadership from our elected officials to facilitate getting to the bottom of the problem; I do not think our elected officials can solve our problems for us. I think all students agree that the bottom line is accessibility to quality EDUCATION. I believe that the corporate sector appreciates the value of a university EDUCATION because it reaps the benefits of the research and development that goes on at those institutions.
Our current problems are obviously fiscal ones. The people in Alberta, which is probably the second most separatist province in this country and quite far right, see private sector contributions as one of the alternatives for the funding problems. I sit on the fence on this issue. On one hand, I am concerned about academic integrity of institutions; on the other hand, I can see the benefits. I do not know want to see the University of Alberta Golden Bears become the University of Alberta Golden Coca-Colas, for example.
Senator Perrault: Or a McDonald's Computer Centre.
Mr. Harrison: I would not mind an IBM computer centre. However, with every donation comes a tie. The reason for having a publicly-funded EDUCATION system is to be able to set standards. If the federal government were to outline an EDUCATION standard that all these institutions had to comply with, corporate sponsors would have to follow those guidelines, and that would be acceptable. As it sits right now, no standards exist, and that scares me. I am thinking, for example, of the Richard Ivy Business School in western Ontario and of some of the comments that were expressed here earlier.
Senator Forest: Thank you for your presentation, Hoops; you did Alberta proud.
You spoke about the importance of a national vision, and I quite agree with you, and in a sense you have kind of talked around what would be incorporated, but just could you give to us what, if you had your druthers about a national vision, what are the points or perspectives that you would incorporate, you know, in terms of guidelines, or someone talked about a Canada EDUCATION act, you know, what other things that you see as the most important thing in Post-Secondary education in Canada that would put us on the leading edge again?
Mr. Harrison: I truly desperately wish I had my notes with me because I actually had that with me. The Canadian Alliance of Students' Association has drafted up sort of like a recommended Post-Secondary education act that they would not mind seeing implemented and they outline the things that they would like to see included.
Obviously the first two things that come to mind is that commitment to accessibility and commitment to quality, a standard which upholds true mobility as outlined in our Constitution. If I wanted to access an Atlantic, you know, marine biology or something like that, then I could do that from Alberta, but currently, you know, the thing that is really hindering Alberta students from studying marine biology is that the University of Alberta, which has no ocean, has a department there and they can not go out of province to take that with student aid.
Senator Perrault: You can not use an artificial lake or something.
Mr. Harrison: No.
Senator Forest: Well, we do have the marine on the site of Vancouver Island, what is the name of it? You had the name there.
Senator Perrault: Nanaimo.
Senator Forest: Yeah.
Mr. Harrison: Yes. However, the point is that if I did not have the money through family ties or whatnot, I could not access that through student aid.
Senator Perrault: Good point.
Mr. Harrison: So there is accessibility and there is quality of EDUCATION in that when I am going say in this global market out of country to promote that I have a degree from the University of Lethbridge or the University of Calgary or whatnot, they would know what a Canadian EDUCATION consists of, you have to have this, you have to have that and so forth, because quite frankly we are competing against nations which have much more developed standards than we have.
Senator Forest: It would be the value of the degree.
Mr. Harrison: Yes, very much so, because it is a selling point for a graduate. I do not know how a University of Alberta MBA program can stand up to a University of Michigan MBA when they are both publicly funded but just from different countries. That is two. Another one that comes to mind is national teacher accreditation where teachers must have certain accreditation to teach in a Canadian university and maybe even college and technical institutes. One of the biggest concerns of students in Alberta is that the professors are there more to do research than to actually teach students and for their research abilities and not their teaching abilities, and we have a student union organized teaching evaluation process which goes on, but there is nothing currently in the faculties that bind any of the teachers to abide by any of the recommendations or any of the results. So as a nation we would be assured if we had a national teacher accreditation process that our teachers were there to teach and also to do research as well, but there would be a minimum level that they would all have to stand up to. Those are three that come to mind right now, and if any of the other ones come up as I go along I will pour them out.
Senator Forest: I think one of the concerns at the University of Calgary when I was there, and probably is even more critical now, is that so many of the tenured professors are doing the graduate and the senior courses and that the first-year students are getting the TA's -- and doing their best -- that do not have their qualifications.
Mr. Harrison: Definitely.
Senator Forest: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman: Maybe I could say to you that as your answer to -- or what you thought your druthers would be, and you have your book at home, you say that those are all in your book, maybe when you get back on that airplane and find your material that you have not got with you that you might send a copy of what you have got there to say --
Senator Perrault: We would like to see it, yeah.
The Chairman: -- so we could all see it and maybe add to our records, and Mr. James van Raalte, he can give you a card if he has not already done so and/or to our researcher here when you get back home because we do not want to miss all those points that you think you have got in that brief that you did not get out yet.
Mr. Harrison: Certainly.
The Chairman: So now Senator Lavoie-Roux, please.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I will not come back to this question which I raised this morning because at least you have some evaluation program of the teachers of professors, so this is one good point; but I think one point I would like to raise is the involvement of your university or the universities across the country in the community, because not all universities are coming, whether they are students, professors, the president or whatever, asking for more money, but that money at the end of the day is coming from the people, it is coming from the population, and traditionally the universities have not been very strong at developing significant ties with the community and preoccupation of the community. Of course you are teaching the kids of the community, but I am not talking about that, you know what I am talking about, and do not forget that the government, politicians and so on, are very sensitive to pressure from the larger community in terms of the support you might get from the community, so that is why my question is how much involvement do you have with your community and do you know about the universities around the western part of Canada?
Mr. Harrison: If the president of the University, Roger Fraser, was here I am sure he would be able to proudly tell you all the things that the university does. First off, however, I am very much more familiar with the students' union involvement with the community, with the actual students. We have a -- every student donates 50 cents through their fees to a fund called the Eugene Brodie Fund, which is given to charitable organizations, so every year approximately $15,000 from student pocket books goes to charitable organizations and charitable activities. And the students' union, we have a specific position called the community relations coordinator which ensures that, if there is any community events or whatnot that the students are involved and made aware of and so forth. Again, when I referred to earlier that in the university's downsizing many of the student services have been transferred to the students' union, that is one of those aspects, that we have been taking on an increasingly larger role, and even though I would love to promote my university's community involvement, I feel personally that it is the students that are being more involved in the actual university administration, and perhaps that is how it should be. I will not take a stand on that at the moment, I am just happy the way it is right now. I would love to see more funding for the students.
The other aspect in terms of community involvement that I can tell you about the university is that they have embarked on a fund-raising campaign for the first time, and so this in particular, part of their community involvement, is receiving additional money from the community, and it is -- quite frankly I am just -- while I am talking I am trying to search through my mind thinking of some of the things. There is -- the athletics program at the University of Alberta goes out and does high school promotions and they bring the high school students to the athletics events, but -- and aside from the spin-off companies from research development I can not think of a like a -- sort of a philanthropic activity that the university embarks on, to be quite frank.
Senator Andreychuk: Could I just add a footnote as a plus for the University of Alberta, they have been very, very creative in understanding the demographics of their area, and with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of an independent Ukraine, they have been very, very successfully mobilizing the community, and not just Alberta, but across Western Canada to come together to create academic sources that we work in conjunction with Ukraine, and I have been fortunate to be on an advisory committee for one of them, so the community service is that it mobilizes and empowers both business and NGO's to professional groups under an academic umbrella to transfer skills, training and information to Ukraine, and that has gone into virtually every sector, including Parliamentary Services, and that is one of them, and it is a service that if the University of Alberta was not doing it, I was wondering where it could have been placed as effectively. I do not think it could be placed in government effectively, I do not think it could be in private sector, and it is an initiative that is gaining worldwide recognition and it is at the University of Alberta, so --
Mr. Harrison: Yes. I forgot about that, and I also forgot about one of the biggest things that I am the most proud of at the University of Alberta, which is the Faculty of Saint-Jean, which is the only French college faculty west of Manitoba, and in it and the surrounding community thrives a very large French speaking population in Edmonton and without it I do not know if it would exist as such.
Senator Forest: I think, if I might just add to that, that we have such a diverse population in Alberta and it was the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies being established there a number of years ago that really got things off the ground. And with the incorporation Faculty of Saint-Jean into the University they have now got the French quarter which is out at the east Edmonton, where with bookstores and a lot of things, which is quite unique, and that is a service. We also have the Boreal Institute, northern studies, and so on, so I think we are taking our place with community service. Undoubtedly it could be greater.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: But the meaning of my question is that the population in general feels cut off from university. Universities are the ivory tower, and in order to get the -- really get the mass support of the population you have to get involved in every occupation. I think all those things you have mentioned are very good, and I mean that is it, but you have to go and touch the population and you can get involved in other -- I will just name them -- whether it is the problem of violence, the problem of the homeless, the homeless people and the, you know, that the community feels that the university, okay, they are all the intellectuals there, you have to feel out the population in general things about the university, and in order to get the support of the population they have to feel that you are present and that your presence is not only when students walk down the street because they want higher bursaries or they want lower fees or that sort of thing, they want the university to have an active presence and --
Mr. Harrison: If I may say, it just reinforces my original point when you bring that up, because the University of Alberta has currently over 250 student groups and many of them are philanthropic or volunteer organizations which do many of the things that you are talking about, and that is the main focus of any of this community involvement if they come from the students, and they do it on their own --
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Yeah. But it should come from the administration of the university.
Mr. Harrison: Well, you will not get an argument out of me.
Senator Forest: Well, I certainly think that, you know, I started over there 25 years ago and it is a big difference now from what it was then. It was the ivory tower, and now it is town and gown together, and I think we have come a long way in Western Canada. We see it in B.C. too, I think we have come a long way from that idea of the university being the ivory tower on the hill and too aloof and too much elitist, and maybe that is part of the prairie culture too, but I think they are very close to the cities in which they live.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I mean the objective of my question is to make people feel like they want support of the government, that the government needs to feel --
Senator Forest: Support of the people.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: -- the support of the people. That is the sense.
Senator Forest: You are quite right.
Senator Andreychuk: But I think in the prairie provinces --
Senator Lavoie-Roux: You are models.
Senator Andreychuk: -- not models -- but I think it sometimes has been desperation. I mean I do not think we can work isolated, and in fact if there has been a criticism from time to time, and certainly the University of Regina's history is that if they were faulted sometimes it was -- they were faulted for too much community involvement and not paying attention to the academic side of it at one point I recall, so I think while this committee has not dwelt on that, I think you are in a region where community involvement, and I think whether you see the documents, you see the actions, you will see that community service and community involvement is quite well known.That is also a function of our smallness too, whereas I think it is not so easily seen in Montreal or Toronto. You see the distinction, so it would be interesting to see if it is in the other places.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I just wanted to make the point that, you know, in order to have government to support university more generously or more so, they need the support of the population and --
Senator Andreychuk: Absolutely. Absolutely.
The Chairman: Thank you, Senator Lavoie-Roux. Senator Perrault.
Senator Perrault: Mr. Chairman, I would like to get into another area here. In the past year especially we have seen various corporate executives and other people in leadership positions honoured for their efforts to downsize their companies or their institutions, indeed many of them have received handsome financial rewards for their downsizing activities. What we have here are numerous tragedies of our society. People who are a little older than the ordinary students suddenly find they do not have the skills, they are not wanted anymore. It is a substantial tragedy. It seems to me, incidentally, that we should be honouring those who are increasing the number of jobs and increasing the export campaign of our nation and industrial expansion in various ways. But now look it, we have a whole new group of people who suddenly find themselves without employment, mature students. We are told that we must plan for five or six occupations during our lifetime, it is no matter -- it is no longer the business of going to work for the local factory and getting a gold watch after 40 years. Now, what are we doing and what are we preparing for those people who are in urgent need of re-EDUCATION and updating of their skills so they are not going to be on the economic scrap heap, the mature student you might the describe it as, our mature students in our western EDUCATIONal institutions, indeed our national institutions, is consideration being given to their plight? Are they credited with lifetime experience as they try to obtain and develop new skills? I think it is a serious social problem. And what are we doing about it? Is there anything at the University of Alberta or your associated bodies to help the mature student to re-equip them with the skills they are going to need for new jobs?
Mr. Harrison: The situation with mature students now has developed to such a degree that advanced EDUCATION is no longer called advanced EDUCATION, it is now called adult EDUCATION, because the average age of a university student at the University of Alberta is now 24, and it is going to climb within the next few years --
Senator Perrault: 24.
Mr. Harrison: -- to above youth status, and youth status is 25.
Senator Perrault: At some institutions they are 27.
Mr. Harrison: Oh yes.
Senator Perrault: It is going up.
Mr. Harrison: Yup, Athabasca is well above youth status and adult status, and so that also begs the question is the role to take our youth and cultivate them into adults or is it to retrain the adults that need to update their skills? The statistics that you said, five to six different careers, you are right --
Senator Perrault: Well, it may be --
Mr. Harrison: No, you are definitely right. I have heard the exact same thing.
Senator Perrault: I mean that is an incredible concept, is it not?
Mr. Harrison: It is, and it leads us to require universities -- and this furthers my point that universities should not be a job training facility, but it can not just be a wholly theoretical facility, it needs to give their students, whether they are mature or whether they are youth, transferable skills that apply to more than one area.
Senator Perrault: And it is a way of connecting directly with the local problems of the people. But something is being done in that area, is it?
Mr. Harrison: Well, we have just started it and we have just started to identify the problem by --
Senator Perrault: Are credits given for lifetime experience?
Mr. Harrison: No.
Senator Perrault: That is one. This is being done at Simon Fraser University for example in British Columbia.
Mr. Harrison: We have just recently began substantial negotiations to get credit -- course credit for practical work experience.
Senator Perrault: Yeah.
Mr. Harrison: For instance if you were --
Senator Perrault: That seems to be the trend.
Mr. Harrison: Yes, but that is the first of its kind in Alberta, and as well there is nothing for life experience, and the reason why I am saying that the process is just being started is that that document there is the first thing that the University of Alberta's administration has ever seen about what businesses are actually wanting aside from individual faculties like the business faculty and the engineering faculty which do their own independent market research.
Senator Perrault: And, you know, one depressing side of it, a university administrator came the other day and he said well, he said, if you are over 35 it just does not make any economic sense, he said, to get any retraining at the university because you have to borrow too much money, he said, it would not be a payoff in the long term. Well, that is tough for somebody who may be 45 and find themselves no longer required --
Mr. Harrison: Yes. Definitely.
Senator Perrault: -- and packing a mortgage and with three kids to raise. It is tough.
Mr. Harrison: The age distribution at the University of Alberta ranges from 17 to 77.
Senator Perrault: 77. Good for him or her.
Mr. Harrison: It was a her.
Senator Perrault: Is it?
Senator Forest: I would just like to add to that, I know in my time there they were just beginning to have mature students coming back, and they were doing something, assessing their credentials, particularly with Aboriginal students, to give them, you know, allowing them to enter with perhaps less academic qualifications than normally would be allowed and then allowing them to make it up, and certainly there was a differential fee then at that time --
Mr. Harrison: Yes.
Senator Forest: -- for mature students.
Senator Perrault: That is interesting.
Mr. Harrison: You can get mature status, but you will not necessarily get course credit for life experience.
Senator Perrault: Yeah.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: You might get some credit if you go back to school.
Senator Perrault: A retaining program for Senators.
The Chairman: Honourable senators, we have now reached past 12:15 and we want to thank you, Hoops, for your -- and do not forget to send us that thing you did not bring -- and also I want to let you know that the Senators and their staff are invited to dinner.
Senator Andreychuk: Lunch.
The Chairman: Lunch I guess is a better word, lunch, as the guests of Dr. Eber Hampton of the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College and the vice-president of the University of Regina, Dr. David Bernard. And so with that few remarks we can adjourn till after dinner.
The committee adjourned.