Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs,
Science and Technology
Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education
Issue 7 - Evidence
REGINA, Wednesday, February 12, 1997
The Subcommittee on Post-Secondary education of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology met this day at 2:00 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: Good afternoon. I was going to say welcome to Regina, but actually I am the visitor and I am glad to be here. I was expecting to see green grass and the prairie fields, but instead of that I see snow, and they tell me that the wind-chill factor is 49 below zero.
My name is Senator Lorne Bonnell. I come from the garden province of Prince Edward Island where the grass is green. While you folks have snow, we have rain, and our temperature is about two or three degrees above zero, and when Santa Claus came he had no place for his reindeer because we had no snow. So it is nice to know there is some snow out here.
My colleagues and I are pleased to be here. I want you to know that Senator Andreychuk, who comes from this noble city of Regina, was most insistent that our committee visit your city, and particularly this university; she told us that if we wanted to see leadership in EDUCATION this was the place to come. So far we have heard from centres in Alberta and British Columbia. We went to B.C. first, not because B.C. is better than Saskatchewan, but because we could more conveniently fit in all of our visits on our way home.
We are glad to have with us as our first witness this afternoon Mr. Dan Perrins, Deputy Minister of EDUCATION for the Province of Saskatchewan. By way of apology, Mr. Perrins, I should mention that we senators realize full well that EDUCATION is a matter of provincial jurisdiction; we also realize that we may be seen as intruding a little on the rights of the provinces. However, because I, and others on this committee, believed that EDUCATION in Canada was in a state of crisis for the 21st Century, and that changes just had to be made, we proposed making this trip to receive input from across the country on this important subject. Of course, I would not propose to tell the Ministers of EDUCATION what to do, but I thought maybe they would be interested in hearing an outside voice. In other words, they might read the evidence presented to this committee, and maybe that would give them something to think about, and a basis for going forward for the benefit of our youth and for EDUCATION in Canada, generally. We have to remember that Canada is in the global market now and, because we have gone global, it is no longer a matter of individual provinces, of Saskatchewan or Prince Edward Island or British Columbia. It is now a matter of being world partners in a global scheme.
Mr. Perrins, I want to thank you for coming here to give us the benefit of your wisdom. Just as an aside, I am sure the university would be delighted to hear you say that you had many more millions of dollars available from the department, but of course you might want to leave that for the minister. In any case, we are anxious to hear what you have to say, sir, and you should be prepared to answer more than a few questions afterwards.
With those few remarks of mine, the podium is yours.
Mr. Dan Perrins, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Post-Secondary education and Skills Training, Province of Saskatchewan: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to Saskatchewan. Bearing in mind your description of the weather, I would suggest that you come here in the winter.
Senator Perrault: Well, your fall is tremendous.
Mr. Perrins: First, let me congratulate you on the initiative itself. I think we would all agree that it is very timely, and we really do welcome the opportunity to present a brief to you today; in particular, we would like to say hello and welcome to Senator Andreychuk. I had the pleasure of working with Senator Andreychuk years ago and, several times, of being threatened with being sent to jail if I did not listen to her when she was in court.
Senator Andreyckuk: That is really true.
Mr. Perrins: So I hope I behave better today.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: She must have been a tough boss.
Mr. Perrins: She was.
Senator Andreyckuk: That was when he was a case worker coming into the juvenile court.
Mr. Perrins: That is right. We were both younger, but we will not say how much younger.
The Minister, Mr. Mitchell, as you know, will be presenting a formal submission to you in Ottawa, so today I was really looking forward to sharing with you a description of the post-secondary system in Saskatchewan and talking about some of the initiatives that we have under way. We want to do that more in the sense of a preparatory piece of work for the minister, so that when he speaks to you in April, after the budget speech as I understand it, he will be able to give you even more information.
I thought it would be helpful just to describe the post-secondary system in Saskatchewan. There are two universities serving approximately 29,000 students, the University of Saskatchewan and the University of Regina. The Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science and Technology, which is referred to as SIAST, has approximately 45,000 students, 12,000 full time. There are nine regional colleges, including one interprovincial college, that broker university and SIAST classes in rural and Northern Saskatchewan; as well, they provide community development classes. There are five Aboriginal institutions that work with the universities, SIAST and the regional colleges to deliver Post-Secondary education and training to Saskatchewan Aboriginal peoples. One of these institutions, the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College, is the only First Nations-controlled university college in North America. We are very pleased that SIFC, as it is referred to, has just celebrated its 20th anniversary.
Saskatchewan has a very active apprenticeship program. There are 4,000 apprentices registered in 44 trades, and those are growing. There are 30 private vocational schools serving 2,500 students, and approximately 15 Bible colleges providing opportunities to individuals.
All of this in a sense explains why in Saskatchewan we are very conscious about referring to EDUCATION and training when we refer to the post-secondary sector. As you know, the sector has been under considerable pressure in recent years; the demands on the sector are changing because of the economy, technological developments and demographic shifts. One of the most significant shifts in Saskatchewan is the growth of the Aboriginal population. It is now 12 per cent, and within 20 years it is projected that it will be 20 per cent of Saskatchewan's population.
Over the past year Saskatchewan has undertaken processes that will provide a framework for system revitalization and change. Our universities are the focus of one of these initiatives.
Saskatchewan's universities have served the province extremely well. In a response to fiscal pressures, they have sought to maintain their perspective program array through across-the-board rposttions and selective budget rposttions; however, a year ago the university signaled that the current program array was not sustainable within the current funding levels. Any reconfiguration of programs in response to the technological, social, demographic and fiscal challenges raises the public-interest concern for government.
As a result of this, a two-stage process was adopted to achieve a number of goals. First, supporting university autonomy was seen as being absolutely critical. Second, providing opportunities for the universities to devise their own solutions obviously follows from the first goal in terms of autonomy. Third, fostering ongoing collaboration between the two universities was considered essential. Finally, it was also apparent that it was necessary to facilitate universities and government working together in the public interest.
The first stage of the process was the appointment of the minister's special representative to define, with the universities, the agenda and a process for change. The second stage was identified as the implementation of the recommended renewal process, in effect translating the agenda into action and practice. Harold MacKay was appointed to work with the universities as a facilitator to help achieve administrative efficiencies, program rationalization and innovative approaches. Mr. MacKay was also asked to comment on barriers to rationalization and other pressing concerns, and I will leave a copy of the report that Mr. MacKay has prepared and shared with the universities, the government and subsequently with the public. I think it is fair to say that it has advanced the issue significantly in our province.
A number of developments have also been pressuring the province to re-examine its training strategy. These include, for example, the economic and labour market changes that are now requiring higher skills; they include rapid change, continuous learning, and the social and demographic changes we already addressed; they include the rural-urban split, the aging population, and the increasing Aboriginal population; they also include threats to sustainability, in particular as a result of the federal changes -- the withdrawal from training and the changes that have been made to the Employment Insurance Act.
The province has chosen to be involved as partners in the development of a training strategy, and last May we released a document called "Choices for Saskatchewan Training Strategy." This document sets out a draft set of principles and goals and a vision for a provincial training system. Extensive consultation, as I have indicated, was sought. The key themes that emerged were that we should build on our strengths, which in turn is SIAST and the regional colleges, that training is not just institution-based, but must be rooted in jobs and be responsive to the labour market, and that the training system must meet the needs of the disadvantaged, must be linked to jobs and must ensure an inclusive approach.
The strategy is still being finalized, but when it is implemented we anticipate it will build on a strong public training system with partnerships with employers, labour, industry and communities to meet labour market needs, including the transition from our public EDUCATION system to the workplace. A public document is being prepared and will be released in the very near future, and I will make sure that you receive a copy of it. Students or learners are at the centre in all of the initiatives that we have undertaken.
In the early 1980s, student tuition for Saskatchewan universities covered just over ten per cent of the cost of EDUCATION. Now it is more than 25 per cent and it is rising. The government has expressed concern that a growing number of students will be graduating and entering the work force with a significant student debt load, a debt load that may be difficult to service on a typical entry-level salary. That would clearly run counter to the public interest. Saskatchewan already has one of the most generous student debt rposttion programs in the country, but the majority of student debt is from the federal loan. For that reason the government has established a task group on student assistance, which includes student representatives, public institutions and government. Its purpose is to help develop proposals of possible improvements to current student assistance programs and to recommend innovative approaches to student assistance and post-secondary funding. It is the government's intention to advance these innovative approaches in discussions with the federal government and with other provinces, and the minister will certainly want to speak more about this to you in his presentation in April.
Mr. Mitchell has a particular interest in the broader roles and responsibilities of governments and their institutions to the public. The Saskatchewan government has begun to articulate these priorities with the release of the "Public Interest and Revitalization of Saskatchewan's Universities," which is the third document I would share with you. It really was the government's response, at least in part, to the MacKay report and it addresses five themes relating to the public interest. First, it addresses the public interest in university autonomy, including respective roles and responsibilities; so it sets out a definition of university autonomy. It speaks to the public priorities, it addresses funding of university EDUCATION, it talks about accountability, and, finally, responds to the immediate financial or fiscal pressure.
Through the Council of Ministers of EDUCATION the province is also proposing to work with other provinces to develop a discussion paper on public expectations for the post-secondary sector. It is anticipated that that report will be prepared for presentation and discussion at the fall 1997 CMEC meeting.
I have touched on a number of initiatives presently under way in Saskatchewan. As noted, I will leave with you the MacKay Report, the "Public Interest and Revitalization of Saskatchewan Universities" paper, and the "Choices" document. These documents may be helpful to you in preparing for Minister Mitchell's appearance before the subcommittee.
I think it is important for me to share just some personal observations. I have had the good fortune to work in the social service sector for a number of years, as well as the health sector, and I have been involved in the EDUCATION sector for the last two and a half years. With respect to the role that provinces play in relationship to the federal government, and whilst I acknowledge and appreciate your recognition of the provincial jurisdiction issue, I think Canada was served very well in health through the articulation of the Canada Health Act, which set out the principles and, as a result of that, funding that could follow and could be guided by those principles. The Canada Assistance Plan did the same with respect to social services. It set out in a legislative base the nature of the relationship that could exist between the federal government and the provinces.
Post-Secondary education has not benefited from that similar approach, no doubt for a variety of reasons, but I think it is ironic, because if there is an area where the country benefits from what happens in the province it is in Post-Secondary education, in the sense that we ought to feel possessive or concerned when a graduate of the university or one of the technical institutions finds employment elsewhere in Canada. It is the nature of being in Canada, I think, and therefore you could make a case that, if there is an area where the federal government should be present in a sustaining, continuing way, it is in fact in Post-Secondary education.
Dr. Allan, from the University of Regina, has indicated that Saskatchewan has long been an exporter of students and graduates, and any consideration with respect to funding should take that into account. It is not as simple as doing a head count and dividing the dollars. We ought to really take a somewhat different approach when the federal government sits at the table and talks about funding Post-Secondary education. As I say, it seems ironic at a time when we appear to be going in the other direction in EDUCATION; that is why we appreciate the task you have undertaken, in that it may well help shape a different response.
I will stop there to answer your questions.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Perrins. Before I turn to my colleagues for the question period, I should tell you, since you referred to the health sector, that I am the senator who put the Canada Health Act through the Senate and through Parliament some years ago. I had the help of a fellow Saskatchewaner of yours, Tommy Douglas; he was a great supporter of the Canada Health Act, and we worked together to get that through Parliament. Just as a further aside, today in my little province of Prince Edward Island another former Saskatchewaner of yours is now our premier, Pat Bains. He moved from Saskatchewan to Prince Edward Island and is now leading the government of Prince Edward Island. The point is that he was born in and postated in Saskatchewan, and was "exported" to Prince Edward Island. So, you know, we in the east do listen sometimes to Saskatchewan.
Mr. Perrins, I am going to give you an opportunity to approach this matter as if you were a senator. I know that that is a demotion from the position of Deputy Minister, but I would ask you for a few moments to think of yourself as a senator alongside Senator Andreychuk, and tell me what your first two recommendations to the Government of Canada would on this subject -- as recommendations from this committee. What would they be?
Mr. Perrins: I would recommend that they acknowledge that post-secondary EDUCATION is critical to the social fabric of the country and that, as a result, they begin discussions with the provinces to that end. It may be an odd way to put it, but I would not start with the funding issue; I would begin with the nature of Post-Secondary education and its contribution to the country, however we want to shape that, because I think that that, in many respects, is a discussion that has not actually happened.
We always start with funding, and that is not always the most helpful place to begin; so, of my two recommendations, one positive and the other perhaps negative, I would actually start with an attempt to encourage a national discussion about the value of Post-Secondary education. Certainly, the material produced by Statistics Canada in this area clearly indicates that the relationship between EDUCATION attainment and employability is that, the greater the EDUCATION attainment is, the greater is the opportunity for employment. Therefore, if we are thinking of the nature of the country and the growth of the country, that discussion is a good place to start.
My second recommendation -- and I was speaking sort of tongue-in-cheek when I said I would not start with the funding issue, because it leads us down a path where people do not want to talk about it. I think the second one would be to really bring together the universities and other institutions so that you are talking about an organized approach to all of the post-secondary sector, not just universities. There is still an inclination to define post-secondary as universities, and, while they are an important part of that, they are not the sum total of the post-secondary world.
The Chairman: Some years ago you were in social work, you told us, and you had a judge there who was watching what you had to say. Maybe I can give that judge an opportunity to speak to you again and ask you some questions now on where you stand, and whether you are guilty or not guilty.
Senator Andreyckuk: I will not monopolize the time because I do know the views of Saskatchewan, or at least the stated views in this field.
Mr. Perrins, I just want to follow up on your second point. I hope you mean that we should broaden the definition of Post-Secondary education not just to mean the community colleges, the training institutes, et cetera, but to include a whole concept of Post-Secondary education in the lifelong learning aspect.
Mr. Perrins: Yes.
Senator Andreyckuk: How would you therefore see a provincial government's role in all of those informal training measures that are necessary now as we go into a global market? Maybe I should have prefaced that. Our committee has come out of British Columbia where we were told that there were about 400 formal institutions of one form or another, but that, increasingly, if you want to be competitive, and globally competitive, you go to a community college -- Senator Perrault no doubt will talk about Capilano College -- you get your degree, and then you go and acquire some professionalism, perhaps by working in the Asia Pacific. But there are all kinds of new businesses starting up to give the kind of training people need to compete in the global market that are not regulated; you know, they may pay tax, but how should they be integrated along with all the other informal ones?
Mr. Perrins: Well, I think that is part of the second point. Some of it may be catching up already, because we have not really looked at any of that in an organized way, and many of the discussions that have taken place have been detached, so to speak. I would say that the changes to the Employment Insurance Act, for example, may have precipitated some of those responses. Instead of looking back, we have to look at the labour market needs and determine how to organize ourselves around that across the country.
There will always be room for variation because that is the nature of Canada, I think, but Saskatchewan, of course, does not quite have the array, so it is somewhat easier here to organize the province and the training in that regard. However, when you think of work-based training and all the variations that are emerging there, and all the new apprenticing trades -- just that aspect alone -- I do not have an answer on how you would bring all of that together; but we need to make the effort, right across the country, to do that, because it will not happen otherwise, and we will end up with even more spin-offs, and we will get into all kinds of accreditation issues, the likes of which we have not seen before, and standards, and all the things that go with that. If things continue as they are, before long people will no longer know the value of some of these things.
I guess I have not really answered your question, because I am not sure what the answer is, but if we do not make an effort to bring the players to the table soon, there will be even more variation than there currently is.
The Chairman: The next questioner will be Senator Forest. Senator Forest is from Edmonton, Alberta, your next door neighbour.
Senator Forest: As a former Manitoban, I have spent a lot of time in Saskatchewan. In fact, I was here for the last Grey Cup, and it was just as cold then as it is today, but we had a great time. That was one of the best Grey Cups we have ever been to.
You mentioned, Mr. Perrins, the need for national guidelines, and we have heard a lot about that. This is probably putting you on the spot, but what would you consider some of the important guidelines that we should be looking at in a national framework?
Mr. Perrins: Well, in some areas we certainly do not have to reinvent the wheel.
Senator Forest: No.
Mr. Perrins: In the area if apprenticeship, for example, there is the Red Seal Program, which is something we should look at carefully. There have been some interesting developments in the "K to 12" area, with national testing in science and math and so on, and we have done some things that are indicative of what else we might do. We have had interprovincial cooperation with curriculum development, for example. However, I do not think you can apply those quite the same at the university level. Nevertheless, we have had a lot of experience with understanding standards in the technical areas and in the industrial sectors. Overall, I think we should look to those places we have already had success and try to see what it would mean if we were to extend those a little more broadly.
Senator Forest: Perhaps something could be done to emphasize the importance of the mobility of students.
Mr. Perrins: Well, that has been a goal of the Council of Ministers of EDUCATION for some time, and while we talk about it a lot we seem to be going the other way; so maybe we should stop talking about it --
Senator Forest: And do something.
Mr. Perrins: -- and do something.
Senator Forest: You stressed the importance of Post-Secondary education with respect to employment and job opportunities. We have heard a lot about the value of research, too; over lunch, your vice-president was telling us about some of the research that is being done here with respect to universities. I realize that colleges are not in quite the same situation, but perhaps something along the same lines could be applied to them.
Mr. Perrins: Yes. I think some of that is again part of the national fabric, because we did some national planning.
Senator Forest: Yes.
Mr. Perrins: There may be people here who are better able to speak to that than I am, but I think there were attempts to manage the national research agenda in different ways at different times. I think that is one area in which some attention has been paid to a national approach.
Senator Forest: Yes.
Mr. Perrins: And that is probably a model we could use. I think the funding issue has complicated the outcome there.
Senator Forest: Right. We are hearing a lot about funding with respect to the level of student loans and so on. Would you care to elaborate on that?
Mr. Perrins: Well, funding is a major issue here. As I was saying, one of the reasons the government established the task force to address the funding issue was the debt load that students are carrying. Saskatchewan does have an extensive sort of forgiveness or remission program, but our students are at an average level of $13,000. So, when you think of that as an average, that is substantial.
Senator Forest: And I think across the country it has been higher than that.
Senator Andreyckuk: It is $17,000.
Senator Forest: So it is much higher.
Mr. Perrins: It is definitely higher, yes.
Senator Forest: So we need something that would address the students' situation too.
Mr. Perrins: Yes.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Mr. Perrins, if my memory is not failing me, it seems to me that Saskatchewan was the first province to attack its deficit, and do you not have a balanced budget now?
Mr. Perrins: We do.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: And you have had it for a number of years, I believe?
Mr. Perrins: This would be the second year.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: In terms of EDUCATION spending, at what speed or rate did you proceed year after year to make your cuts, because every province is complaining, you know, about the cuts to the transfer payments and the cuts for deficit purposes, and each province stacks EDUCATION high on the list of importance. Do you have any figures on those rates, or are you still being penalized in terms of funding for EDUCATION?
Mr. Perrins: Let me give you the announced position for Saskatchewan, when the province addressed its budget situation, bearing in mind that the current government began in 1992. The announced budget rposttions for the first three years were all in the minus. According to my finance people here the rposttions were: minus 1, minus 2, minus 4, zero, minus 3 and minus 3.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: So for five or six years in a row it was in the minus, between minus 1 and minus 3, and then, I gather, you went to minus 4.
Mr. Perrins: Minus 4, yes, and it was zero for this current fiscal year. There are several reasons for that. First, the province had to address the situation as it was, and initially it announced a 2-per-cent increase, but then the federal changes affecting health and social transfers were announced, and that resulted in the province announcing a 3-per-cent rposttion in each of the next two years. So the last two figures, the minus 3s, were in the negative as a result of the federal changes.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: In other words, you would not have had any cuts this year or next year, if the federal transfers had remained as they were?
Mr. Perrins: That is right.
Senator Andreyckuk: As a supplementary, does that mean that there is a direct correlation between the amount of money you receive and the cuts you make? In other words, the cut-backs that you received you passed on in the EDUCATION system in a direct way?
Mr. Perrins: No, the total percentage of the cut was not passed on.
Senator Andreyckuk: What is the differential there?
Mr. Perrins: Well, that is a different question.
Senator Andreyckuk: What you traditionally would get from the feds and utilize in institutions was passed on. Is that it?
Mr. Perrins: Yes, I think the term they use is "notional," and the notional amount would have been in the $20-million-dollar range, because what was passed down was health, social services and EDUCATION spending, and that was an annual amount of about $110 million. So in effect the province has committed itself to backfilling and has only passed down a portion of the federal rposttion. Now, that is only the universities. On the technical school side, the SIAST institution and the regional colleges, no transfer rposttion was passed on to them. What has been passed on to them, as announced, although we are still working this through, are the changes in the Employment Insurance Program, and the federal government's decision to withdraw from seat purchases, and that amounts to about $12 million annually. We anticipate that, in addition to SIAST, that will affect the apprenticeship programming and adult basic EDUCATION, as well as some additional seat purchases in the technical programs, and that is an annual amount of approximately $12 million.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: How would you compare the federal cuts -- that is, the lowering of the transfers in percentage terms -- to the cuts that the province has made because of its own objective of deficit cutting? Which was the higher of the two?
Mr. Perrins: Well, had the province passed on all of the transfer cuts, the federal cut would have been higher.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: The transfer cut would have been higher?
Mr. Perrins: Yes.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I believe you said that the cost for students has increased from 10 per cent to 25 per cent.
Mr. Perrins: That is right.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Have you tried to evaluate the effect that has had on enrolment? Has the number of students dropped off, for example?
Mr. Perrins: No. As a matter of fact the enrolment numbers have continued to increase.
Senator Lavoie-Roux:Is that increase related to an increase in population? In any event, apparently the 15-per-cent increase in the cost did not have any negative effect.
Mr. Perrins: No, the enrolment numbers and the population overall have not changed in that sense. The enrolment in post-secondary institutions has continued to go up.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I believe you said that the Aboriginal population in Saskatchewan is 12 per cent and that in ten years from now it will be 20 per cent.
Mr. Perrins: That is right.
Senator Andreyckuk: That is the population attending post-secondary institutions?
Senator Lavoie-Roux: No, no.
Senator Andreyckuk: You mean overall?
Mr. Perrins: Yes, that is overall.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I would like to know the percentage of Aboriginal students in your universities.
Mr. Perrins: If you include the University of Regina and the University of Saskatoon, what is the student population?
Mr. Allan, Technical Advisor, Ministry of Post-Secondary education and Skills Training, Province of Saskatchewan: In terms of enrolments it is about 11,700; of those about 6,800 are full time, and I believe SIFC has something like 1,500 or 1,600.
Mr. Perrins: So SIFC, which is the Federated College here, has approximately 1,500 students, out of 11,700 enrolments.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: However, in terms of the total population of the students, what would the percentage of Aboriginals be in this university?
Mr. Perrins: Well, that would about 12 or 13 per cent.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: That corresponds with the 12 per cent of Aboriginals in the general population?
Mr. Perrins: Well, it would, and it is high because of the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College. On the other hand, the University of Saskatchewan has a student population of about 16,000. We have about eight per cent Aboriginal students.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: So it is a little lower?
Mr. Perrins: It is lower.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: It is the effect of the college that brings it up?
Mr. Perrins: That is right.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Is this a preoccupation for you?
Mr. Perrins: Yes, in Saskatchewan it is, and I think some would say strenuously, but it is not enough of a preoccupation. It ought to be more.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: They would not necessarily have to declare their status.
The Chairman: I hesitate to interrupt, senator, but we have only half an hour left.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: After travelling all this distance, Mr. Chairman, I hope we can ask the questions we want to.
The Chairman: Yes, but I think that we had better ask the rest of the university people rather than the Deputy Minister, who has to look after all the universities, not just one. Am I correct about that?
Mr. Perrins: Oh, I do not have to look after them, senator, I just have to work with them. They look after themselves.
Senator Andreyckuk: Just as a supplementary following on the question about the numbers of Aboriginals, how do you distinguish between the Métis population and the non-status population? Are you really able to identify those numbers?
Mr. Perrins: Right. I think SIFC does a far better job of the identification because of the nature of the self-identification. I think at the University of Saskatchewan it tends to be more difficult, but again it would, by and large, be self-identification.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Coming to my last question, do you have at the post-secondary level of EDUCATION any provision for French students? Is there, let us say, a college for French students?
Mr. Perrins: Yes, there is. It starts in the K to 12 system first, where there is now a Separate School system for French students.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: That is the primary and secondary level.
Mr. Perrins: Right.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: After that what is there?
Mr. Perrins: The Collège Mathieu would be probably the only exclusive French post-secondary college that we have.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: So there is one. Where is it located?
Mr. Perrins: Gravelbourg.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: After they finish there, do they then register either here or in Saskatoon?
Mr. Perrins: Yes, it is almost like a regional college; they broker courses there as well from other institutions.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Is it sufficient to answer the needs of the French-speaking population?
Mr. Perrins: No.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Are they requesting another one?
Mr. Perrins: It is not that they are requesting another one, but rather that they feel it is not adequate and they would like a greater presence. It is not following really from what has happened in the K to 12 system, which is just emerging here; but it is early yet. Literally, the new French school, which is not far from here, is still being built; so I think the reaction we are getting is that it just is early. However, the people from Saint-Mathieu, Gravelbourg, would like it to be much more of a presence than it currently is.
Senator Perrault: I wish we had a great deal more time here, but there are always those limitations. The chairman talked about the weather to start things off. I want to say that my grandfather was a homesteader in southern Saskatchewan, and I still have many, many relatives in Assiniboia, and when some smart westerner would comment about the weather my grandfather would say, "Well, it is character building." So you have good character here in Saskatchewan.
There are so many questions before us, it is hard to know where to begin. Let us start with the quality of EDUCATION at the present time. There is almost a mania on the part of governments to balance budgets, say they have no debt, and then rush to the polls; but in the cut-backs that we have inflicted on the EDUCATIONal system in this country, have we seen a decline in standards? Student representatives came to us during the course of our hearings and told us that there has been a decline in standards consistent across all provinces, and a common theme was that as the public funding of Post-Secondary education is declining so is the quality of our post-secondary institutions and their accessibility to Canadians. Ironically, this loss of access and quality is occurring at the same time as government, business, labour and academics all agree that a highly postated populace is necessary for the future security of Canada. We have heard about school libraries being unable to obtain enough books to advance the studies of their students. In this great passion and this mania to balance budgets -- and all the parties do it -- are we inflicting unnecessary pain on the EDUCATIONal system and the future of this country and the effect it has on young people?
Senator Andreyckuk: Where is the minister when you need him?
Senator Perrault: Are the cut-backs not self-defeating, the cut-backs that the University of Regina has undergone? And I understand there is to be another cut next year, or the possibility of one. Is that really in the long term the way to create more dollars and to rposte debts?
Mr. Perrins: Well, senator, I think you would really enjoy reading Harold MacKay's report. I believe it was Hamlet who spoke about indirection, and I will do a bit of that now, because he answers your question by saying that he thinks perhaps we have gone too far, and have not given post-secondary EDUCATION the priority standing that it needs, and he quite pointedly juxtaposes it to the K to 12 system and health and social services and says perhaps government ought to stand back and rethink some of its positions on this. I think he means governments in a generic sense there.
Senator Perrault: Right.
Mr. Perrins: So I think it is a very important point.
Senator Perrault: There have been a number of programs that we have discussed with those that have come before us. There seems to be quite a bit of support for co-op EDUCATION involving, as it does, the public sector and the private sector. They say it is very expensive, but the results have been encouraging. Have you had much of that in Saskatchewan?
Mr. Perrins: I think both the universities and the SIAST programs have all made significant developments in terms of co-op programs in their engineering faculties, in their business schools, and in their public administration. All the major institutions in the province have co-op-headed programs in a number of their faculties, and they are very successful.
Senator Perrault: The students voiced the concern that, if industry plays a significant role in the program, the students will be operating or studying according to their agenda. Do you think there is a danger there, or can governments make sure there are adequate safeguards to make sure there is sufficient independence?
Mr. Perrins: It is a while since I was a student, but the very nature of universities and the challenge of the institutional experience itself should more than offset that pressure. I will put it another way; most of the faculties at the universities here, and certainly at SIAST, have minds and curricula of their own.
Senator Perrault: They are not about to be pushed around much.
Mr. Perrins: I do not think so, but then, having said that, there is a balance between that approach and what the market requires. However, I do not think that is a major concern.
Senator Perrault: I suppose EDUCATIONal institutions are attempting to identify revenue centres for their own needs, and the role of the university as a fund-raiser is of new and critical importance, raising money outside of government assistance. There is a radio commercial campaign on in Vancouver at the present time, which is where I live, for Queen's University. You can sign up for Queen's Master of Business Administration, which they say is the highest quality program from one of Canada's leading universities, and there will be classrooms established in Vancouver; in addition to that they say they will be using the latest electronic techniques. Do you think that that sort of advertising in the west constitutes raiding on the part of institutions from the east? Is anything being done by the University of Saskatchewan, for instance, or the University of Regina to get on the Internet and establish a virtual university offering courses that way? They could go to any place in the world, I suppose, using the Internet. Queen's University has a very vigorous campaign going; they are using at least two radio stations in quite a well-financed campaign.
Mr. Perrins: On that subject, you are asking a Luddite here. This is just a personal view, but I think some of that is overstated. Especially for undergraduates and younger students, I think the biggest benefit is the university experience itself.
Senator Perrault: The human interaction.
Mr. Perrins: Yes. University life will strike a balance, and there will always be a place for other universities. I mean Saskatchewan people have been going to Queen's University for all these many years.
Senator Perrault: They have, and with some success.
Mr. Perrins: Yes, and that will continue, but both our universities and SIAST are -- and I think this is the other critical thing that is emerging here -- in collaboration to define those areas that they can compete in. Whatever areas they define will be the places that they focus on; they will not be taking a generic approach, and doing everything that somebody else is doing, but will be asking, "What is it we can do here that Queen's does not do?" And there are several things.
So, even in the traditional way of learning, but using the sort of ultra-media approaches that are available, I would expect that our post-secondary institutions will stay competitive, albeit in selected areas.
Senator Perrault: Would you expect Queen's to negotiate with you or discuss this matter with you before they come into Regina and launch a radio campaign to get people to study at Queen's?
Mr. Perrins: No, I would not. No.
Senator Perrault: You said at the beginning, at least in a sense, that what is needed is a game plan.
Mr. Perrins: Yes.
Senator Perrault: Just as the Roughriders would prepare for the Grey Cup, you are saying that we should get the provincial people together with the federal people, get a game plan, forget the politics, and get on with the job.
Mr. Perrins: Well, you have to recognize the nature of the Constitution, but I would just say that a national approach is required.
Senator Perrault: I think that is a logical and pragmatic view.
The Chairman: Mr. Perrins, I want to thank you very much for answering most of the questions that the other people from the faculties would have had to answer later on; you have saved them a lot of time. Let me close off by thanking you and asking Senator Andreychuk to thank you on behalf of the committee.
Senator Andreyckuk: Just as a comment, perhaps I should forewarn the minister that, when he comes before us, the emerging theme that we will probably be addressing -- and I believe my colleagues share this opinion -- is that, if we do anything at all to set things right, Post-Secondary education must be viewed as an investment and not an expense.
Senator Perrault: Right on.
Senator Andreyckuk: Consequently, we have talked today about the students and the universities, and so on. However, the matter of research and development is also very important, and it has to be said that we are losing the competitive edge, bot internally and externally, and so I think the minister should be prepared to address that matter as well, particularly because in Saskatchewan we have the Saskatchewan Research Council, which has been renowned for years, and we have traditionally had a special approach to research programs at our universities, the first one having been founded because we took a particularly different approach to development. I think that is another area we would like to explore with the minister.
Mr. Perrins: Good. Yes.
The Chairman: We will now hear from the Council of Western Canadian University Presidents. I understand that Mr. Dennis Anderson, President of Brandon University, will make the presentation.
Thank you, Mr. Anderson, for coming before us. I hope the weather is better in Manitoba than it is in Saskatchewan.
Mr. Dennis Anderson, President, Brandon University, Council of Western Canadian University Presidents: It always is, sir.
The Chairman: We will give you a few minutes for your opening remarks and then suggest that you be prepared to answer some questions.
Mr. Anderson: Thank you, Senator Bonnell, and other Senators on the committee. I congratulate you for embarking on this endeavour. It is appropriate to have such a study at this time. There has been sufficient analysis, I think, and certainly many reports; we are at the point where we need action, and I hope that you have that as the theme of your report.
I am Dennis Anderson, the President of Brandon University, which is just across the border in Manitoba. I am here representing COWCUP, which is the Council of Western Canadian University Presidents. The Chair of COWCUP is Don Wells, the President of the University of Regina. Beause he is out of the province, he asked me to present on his behalf. I am not sure whether he wanted me to come here just to wager a bet with him, but our two basketball teams are playing this weekend, competing to represent this region in the national finals. I am optimistic that I will win once again.
Honourable senators, I am aware of your mandate. I met with Senator Bonnell during the fall meeting of the AUCC in Toronto.
The Chairman: Yes, that is right.
Mr. Anderson: I have read the mandate, and I have prepared an outline of my remarks accordingly. I apologize for not getting it to you in advance; however, the outline has been given to your secretary and hopefully you will have that before you soon.
I am from Manitoba and I know you are not stopping in Manitoba; so I would be pleased at the end of my presentation to answer questions not only about things that I have said on behalf of the Western Canadian University Presidents, but also in particular about Manitoba, if that is your wish.
I should add that my university, Brandon University, formerly Brandon College, is the place where Tommy Douglas, Stanley Knowles and Olive Diefenbacher graduated in the early 1930's; there was a reference to them in a former presentation here. There is a story that Stanley, Tommy and Olive were sitting on the steps of one of the old buildings, talking about what they were going to do when they grew up, and Tommy said, "Well, I think I will look after health care." Stanley said, "I think I will look after the veterans," and Olive said, "That is okay, boys, you go ahead and do that; I will run the country."
COWCUP represents all of the major universities and colleges in Western Canada; we cover the four provinces from Manitoba west, representing about 30 per cent of the Canadian population. There is a mix of institutions from small, primarily undergraduate ones, to the medium-sized comprehensive universities and then to the larger medical and doctoral universities. There are more than 20 institutions, with more than 9,000 faculty and over 150,000 full-time students, offering or granting over 38,000 degrees per year, and attracting over $450 million in sponsored research. I do not have a figure for economic impact, but it is a massive economic impact if you add the ultra vires factors to the university expenditures.
On February 7 in Ottawa, our national association, AUCC, made a presentation to you, and all of my COWCUP colleagues have asked me to reinforce those messages in AUCC's presentation. Those key messages were: that university research needs strengthening in Canada, that we need to enhance the internationalization capability of Canadian universities, and, also very important, we need to assist students financially.
First, on strengthening university research, you might ask why. I think it is well known, as you will see from the charts attached to my material, that research and development expenditures in Canada are only about 1.5 per cent of the gross domestic product. The OECD average is over two per cent; so we are behind most of the major countries in OECD and we are behind all of the G-7 countries except Italy. Our figures, in short, for investment in research and development in this country pale in comparison to those of the other jurisdictions. We are paying a price for that; we are continually falling further behind.
Canada's universities, unlike the universities in most of the countries in the groups that I referred to, account for a large proportion of Canada's research effort. It is estimated that one-quarter of all research and development in this country occurs at and through universities.
Universities are the key component of Canada's knowledge generation industry. I think we can be described as the root system for research and development, and innovation and technology in the country. It is well known that new knowledge and inventions mean new products, processes and services, increased economic growth and, to use the popular phrase today, increased international competitiveness.
The problem is that there has been a recent starvation of university-based research funding in this country. You are well aware that the National Granting Councils have had their budgets cut by as much as 25 per cent for the period from 1994 to 1998, and that is having a devastating effect on the research activity and infrastructure.
I give you one specific example from my university, and it is a small university, consisting of about 2,500 full-time or equivalent students, primarily undergraduate, with arts, science, EDUCATION and music faculties. We have been supported in the past by grants from NSERC and from SSHRC because we are a small university. I have tabled the last four results of that federal funding, and you will see here that for our small university our funding level from the federal granting agencies has dropped from around $90,000 per year to $13,000 per year. Why has it dropped? Well, NSERC has cut its general research grants to universities, the small ones; it has cut in particular its small university supplement, and that was significant for us. SSHRC has rposted its general research grants and it has eliminated its aid to small universities, so we are operating with about 15 per cent of the federal grant funding now compared to what we had a few years ago. For a primarily undergraduate institution located in a regional area where there are few major industries, which is typical for the prairies, that is a crucial problem. There is a role for the federal government there.
Some of the pleas for government action that you heard from AUCC bear repetition. I will try to put a little bit of a personal flavour on them as I go through them. They are contained on page 4 of the presentation.
We need to promote the research careers of the students as well as of faculty, young faculty in particular. To do that we need to establish some new research frontiers; we need to ensure that research is conducted in crucial fields that are important to the economic and social development of Canada and its international competitiveness, and we need to be sure that we can attract and retain the best and brightest graduate students and faculty members.
The support for graduate students in the prairie provinces -- Manitoba and Saskatchewan I am most familiar with -- is low. We cannot match some of the eastern universities and we cannot match some of the universities in the United States. Consequently, there is a brain drain, and that is a real concern. We need to avoid that patchwork effect in this country and look to addressing it with some increased targeted support for the students and for young faculty members.
We need facilities; we need research equipment. In recruiting young faculty members, it is extremely important that the institution have funds to support them by buying the research equipment they need, and giving them funds to hire research assistants. That is very difficult to do within the operating grants from the province since it is the federal programs that have assisted in that.
The students need to work with industry as part of their research careers while they are studying. There are linkage programs that have been started and we need those encouraged. The funding of the infrastructure for research is eroding and that needs to stop. There is a federal role for funding the core research equipment and the core physical research assets at universities. It is very difficult for the private industry to fund the core, the basic infrastructure that you need for research. Yes, they will fund targeted programs that serve their short-term interests, and some of them have philanthropical interests in the long term, but as to the core, that is a role for government and a significant role for the federal government.
There are overhead costs associated with federally sponsored research. When the Established Programs Financing Program was in place, the universities would go to the government and say, "We need assistance with building our research infrastructure." The answer from the federal government was, "We already do that through the Established Programs Financing." Now that those transfer payments have been cut drastically, when you go to the federal government and say that you need funding for research, they do not respond. So while in one sense they may have claimed that they used to pay it, they certainly are not doing so anymore. Overhead costs are extremely important.
The partnerships and knowledge flows from the university to industry are extremely important. There is a federal program for national Centres of Excellence where groups of universities can get together or a university can build up a Centre of Excellence in a particular research theme, often linked with industry. That program needs to be sustained. There are many ideas and inventions that come out of universities; many patents are taken out. There, however, is not the funding in universities from the provincial operating grants to help commercialize and transfer that technology to the marketplace. I have spent my career in marketing new product development and marketing technological products. I have done that from a university base and I am well aware of the importance of having funding so you can commercialize those ideas.
There is a new idea that the universities should establish outreach or research shops to serve the community. I think that is an excellent idea, and there is a small amount of funding for that from the Social Science Federation within SSHRC, and I think that needs to be encouraged.
In summary, you have been given a number of good ideas by AUCC for supporting research infrastructure and research funding. I have highlighted some of those here and I would encourage you to add your weight to those messages. You have an excellent report on that from AUCC.
Internationalization of universities is very important. There are many benefits that result to our country and to our students from having international exchanges of students and of faculty in universities. Ironic as it is, Canada is cutting its support of the universities' role in internationalization at the very time that other countries are increasing that investment. Figures show that in Canada there is only $3.10 per capita funded for internationalization efforts compared to as high as $20 and $30 dollars per capita in some of our major competing countries.
Senator Perrault: Would it be the U.S. that is doing that funding?
Mr. Anderson: There are European countries, there is Australia, there is the U.S. and there are others. We need assistance in marketing universities overseas. We are losing ground. It is estimated that Australia has about a $2-billion trade surplus in Post-Secondary education serving the neighbouring Asian countries.
Senator Perrault: Australia?
Mr. Anderson: Australia, yes. The federal government through DFAIT and CIDA has mounted Canadian EDUCATION Centres in various countries, and the Asia Pacific Foundation is the implementing partner in that. That is useful, but it is only a part solution, and I want to tell you about the difficulty of universities, particularly the smaller ones, in participating in that. In order to join the Canadian EDUCATION Centre Program in the mostly Asian countries it costs $7,500, whether you are UBC or Brandon University.
Senator Perrault: That is a flat fee?
Mr. Anderson: Yes, a flat fee. If you go to participate in their EDUCATIONal fairs, it costs $10,000 or $12,000 to send a person over there in order to present a human face. It is the same cost whether you are a small or a large university; we certainly have been appealing to the provincial government, and we would appeal federally as well, that in their contracting out of this type of service they recognize the differing abilities of the universities to participate and perhaps provide some assistance for those who are on the smaller end of the scale.
Canadian students need experience abroad; we need to get up to speed with the Europeans in sponsoring academic mobility for students, and currently HRDC's programs are very modest on an international scale. Official development assistance -- I think you are well aware of the important role of that -- has been declining, and it needs to be increased.
With respect to student assistance, you cannot pick up a newspaper these days without seeing problems with the student debt load. Here is one from the Winnipeg Free Press: "Students Awash in a Sea of Red." Look at any major daily newspaper over the last six months and you will come up with dozens of these types of headlines. It is crucial that there be a complete rethink of the funding of the students' assistance and that the federal government try to avoid a patchwork approach to this across the country and provide some core support. When we have decreasing operating grants to universities, that automatically leads to increasing tuition and that leads to an exponential growth in student debt loads. The estimate is that, currently, the average debt load is $17,000; it is expected to grow to $25,000 in two years. That has access, quality and mobility implications.
Senator Perrault, you were asking about the erosion of quality. Well, there is an erosion of quality and I would be happy to give you examples of that.
Senator Perrault: I appreciate that.
Mr. Anderson: We do need some changes. Increasingly, the provinces are putting up barriers to student mobility. Yes, they are putting some funds in to match private-sector funding for scholarships -- at least some of the provinces are doing that, and they are also putting other funds into student bursaries and scholarships, but they are only applicable to people from that province, and it is very difficult for a student to take that scholarship or bursary funding and go to another institution in another province. So we are becoming a number of "silos" across the country in our university systems, and that is entirely contrary to the concept of the university.
The Canada Student Loan Program needs to be worked on as well. In particular, there is a need for grants as well as loans; where there are loans there needs to be more relief in the payback, and that can come in the form of income contingent payback schemes.
The tax system has been changed in some positive directions to help universities and to help students, but we need further change. There still is not full dposttion for grants, private-funding -- or rather, private donors' donations to universities, and there is not full dposttion for all the fees that students pay, or for the loan interest that they pay.
My COWCUP colleagues have abandoned me as usual. I canvassed them for help, asking them to give me their suggestions for messages to bring to you. I received a few faxes late yesterday, and I had some time on the airplane this morning before this presentation to pull them together, and that material is shown on my last sheet. Some of the them have pointed out the difficulty in financing information technology. It is very difficult for an individual library or an individual institution to make that kind of investment. There are many technology networks that are regional, if not national, and there is a role for provincial and for national governments in bringing some sense to that. I am not saying that there is not any activity on that front, but it needs coordination and planning; it needs a national approach. We need to support the institution's ability to invest in information technology. Another president said that an obvious concern for all of us is the cost of implementing, maintaining and replacing information technology. It is one thing to get a one-time grant to get it. How do you keep up, though? How do you get the newer technology five years down the road? How do you maintain the hardware and software in the meantime?
Senator Perrault:It becomes obsolete every three years.
Mr. Anderson: The current funding structures for university from the provinces do not have provision for that type of technology acquisition, for its maintenance or for its replacement.
On research and students, a very important point, the students have a right to expect to be informed of the latest research results. If we are incapable of attracting faculty members who are active in research, if we lose them to the large centres, if the West loses them to the large centres in eastern Canada, in the U.S., or in other countries -- and they are being attracted away -- then our students suffer. All students should be exposed to and included in research, whether they are undergraduates, masters or doctoral level students.
I should like to make some comments about diversity, and I think it will be appropriate for me to close my remarks at that point. It must be recognized that Canadian universities are not homogenous; they are diverse in size, in mission, and in programming. One of our presidents has said that we need to take into account the regional differences among Canadian universities. Many Western Canadian universities have important regional mandates. One may be the only shop in town for doctoral studies, for example, while another may be the only one within the region; therefore, each must provide a "general store" approach to their local citizens. We need government to support the diversity of our institutions and, in some cases, help them with more focused mandates.
There was some discussion earlier of the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College and the aboriginal population. Clearly, the percentage of aboriginals in the population is not reflected in the percentage participation in universities. The number and type of institutions that focus on aboriginals are few, and the current established universities are struggling with providing particular types of programs and facilities for international students, for aboriginal students, including First Nations students. About 20 to 30 per cent of the students population of my university are of First Nations origin, and we have some targeted programs for them, but we have no physical infrastructure particular to their culture. We have a number of innovative programs to serve them and there is high demand, but we are unable to respond with the kinds of student services and facilities that we want and they deserve.
I would congratulate you, honourable senators. I appreciate the effort it takes to go across the country. I am sorry you have been unable to come to Manitoba, but I hope I brought a little bit of Manitoba to you. I can address that more specifically in my answers to your questions.
The Chairman: Thank you very much.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: One question. You said that you are taking steps to develop special programs for the aboriginal population. Could you expand a little bit on this? What would be the nature of these programs? How do they differ from programs offered to other students?
Mr. Anderson: In about 1971 we mounted a Native Studies Department within our Faculty of Arts. It was of the first ones in the country. We started teaching courses on native culture, native legal issues, native government and those sorts of things, including languages. Shortly after that we implemented some innovative programs where we took our EDUCATION to the northern and native communities, particularly those related to our Faculty of EDUCATION. We have an award-winning program called BUNTEP, the Brandon University Northern Teacher EDUCATION Program, where we send professors out to the communities, and the community provides the physical facility. The community now selects which students will participate in those programs. We have graduated over 400 aboriginal students with Bachelor of EDUCATION degrees, and they are the majority of the teachers in the northern areas. We have another program where aboriginals will spend eight months of the year as teacher aides in their school system, and then attend at a campus for four months in the summer where they take a concentrated dose of courses. In about six years they acquire a Bachelor of EDUCATION degree.
We are proposing to mount a new program in counselling targeted at First Nations people. We are also attempting to provide business courses in the northern native communities, which will help with the economic development goals of those communities.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Could you tell me which university is developing this? Is it only one?
Mr. Shaun Brennan, Co-Chair, Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION: It is Brandon University. The bulk of the First Nations students who go to university in Manitoba come to our university. There are some at the University of Winnipeg, some at the University of Manitoba, and there may be some at Collège Universitaire Saint-Bonafice, but the bulk of them come to Brandon because it is a smaller community and because we have had a presence in the north and they identify with us.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I would like to come back to the question of how we can alleviate the student assistance crisis. The deputy minister did not believe that the large increase in students fees made any difference in the enrolment or the perseverance of students. You appear to be much more concerned about it than he was.
Mr. Anderson: There is no doubt that the increasing student debt load is a barrier to students, certain students getting access, and certain disadvantaged groups getting access to universities and staying at universities. It has had another effect, that of demoralizing the potential students who might be thinking about coming to university, because they question whether it is worth going into that much debt and, at the same time, they are questioning the worth of a degree from an employment point of view. The statistics on employment cannot be disputed: there is a strong correlation between employment and having a Post-Secondary education. The unemployment rate is about twice as high among those groups who do not have a Post-Secondary education. However, despite that, there are still concerns about incurring that debt load to attend a university.
In one important respect, I have a different opinion from students, and I have researched this and I have seen a number of other research studies. If you ask students what was the major factors that influenced their choice of a university, the first thing they will mention is the types of program the university offered. About fourth of fifth on the list are the financial factors, tuition fees in particular. Although tuition fees have increased from, roughly, 12 per cent of the operating costs of the universities to 25 to 30 per cent, and that is a tremendous increase, they have not increased much more than the cost of living over the last 30 years. I was a student myself at Brandon University back in the early 1960s and I have considered that. I was paying as much then as students pay now in constant dollars. It is a myth that the relative level of tuition fees is a huge problem.
However, what is a problem is the total cost of going to universities, with the increased price of books, the increased accommodation and food costs, and the transportation to go to universities. The reason there are increased costs to the student has to do with familial support. As one of eight children who was raised in a one-room log house 50 miles north of Winnipeg, I received $25 from my parents all the time I went to university until I completed three degree levels. They probably could have afforded $50 or $75, but I did not need it because there were scholarships and grants, programs that enabled people from disadvantaged financial and social circumstances to get to university. That still characterizes a large percentage of the geographic area, particularly in Western Canada. That is why we appeal so strongly that there must be better financial assistance programs for students. They will eventually pay it back. However, the total amount is both a perceptual and a real barrier.
Senator Perrault: There is some excellent material in this brief. It will be very useful to all of us.
You made reference to student grants. Students told us the other day that we are now the only country in OECD which does not have a national system of grants for students, and that only three provinces still have some provincial grants in place. Is that an accurate statement, to your knowledge?
Mr. Anderson: I do not believe so. We have the national Canada Student Loan Program, but that needs to be shored up.
Senator Perrault: I am glad you clarified that. As to the marketing of EDUCATION throughout the world, you gave a rather startling figure when you mentioned that the Australians have a huge trade surplus in marketing their EDUCATION resources. We are obviously not in that league yet. What should we be doing to capture our share of that market?
Mr. Anderson: We need a coordinated, cooperative effort between different levels of government, the provincial and the federal government in particular. While Team Canada missions are very useful efforts, they have some frayed edges. We also need a cooperative effort among the universities. For example, when our premier and the president of the University of Manitoba were on the Team Canada mission I could not afford to go. I certainly did not want to see a headlines in the student newspaper about spending $10,000 or $12,000 for me to go. However, the head of the major university and the premier did go to one of the EDUCATIONal fairs in Bangkok, and there was no booth or display of any Manitoba university.
I was hoping this message would register with the premier, and it looks like it has because just the other day I got notification of an EDUCATION trade mission which is going to Central America.
We need the provinces, in particular, with some federal assistance, to realize that you need a coordinated approach for marketing EDUCATION abroad. It is extremely expensive for all of us to be doing the same thing. However, the largest universities will tell governments that we can do a better job on our own, that they should leave us alone. The medium- and smaller-sized ones, and that is the bulk of the universities and colleges in the country, though, do need assistance. The Province of New Brunswick pays the fees for the post-secondary institution to belong to these EDUCATIONal centres and I think they provide some assistance for the trips to the individual fairs. I think our province will move towards that, but there is a patchwork effect right now which I think needs addressing. I know I keeping saying that we need more government help, but it makes sense to handle and coordinate some things federally and provincially, and the international marketing of EDUCATION is one.
Senator Perrault: Do you know how many foreign students are in Manitoba?
Mr. Anderson: The chart is at the back of my presentation. Nationally, about 5 per cent of full-time students across the country are visa students. The figure in Manitoba would be little lower than that. The bulk of international students are at the undergraduate level, even though you hear most about their participation in the masters and doctoral programs. Those numbers for Canada have been declining while other countries have increasing numbers.
Senator Perrault: Are tuition fees a factor?
Mr. Anderson: No. If tuition fees were the factor, our universities should have all of the undergraduate visa students in the country because our fees are among the lowest in the country. Until about three years ago, Manitoba had no surcharge over the domestic fees for international students. Many other factors attract international students. I think there is too much made of fees, and I do say that even when students are present. Fees alone are, in my view, not a barrier, with the possible exception of some of the Ontario universities -- and perhaps some in other parts of the country -- where they were charging as much as three times the domestic fee.
However, we do hear of full-cost professional programs for not only visa students, foreign students, but also for domestic students. The Queen's example you were using is a very expensive program. There is a demand for high quality, properly packaged programs and they can be high-priced.
I think there must be a responsive Canadian presence abroad so that students can be signed up on the spot rather than them waiting three months to see whether they will be admitted to our programs. Canadian universities have a long way to go to match Australia, for example.
Senator Perrault: Is Australia far more active in the field?
Mr. Anderson: Yes.
Senator Perrault: There are some long-range benefits attached to this. You have students who are familiar with Canada and Canadian ways and, perhaps down the line, there is an economic return.
Mr. Anderson: If you have research analysts to support your subcommittee, I would suggest that you ask one of them to look at those in political power in the underdeveloped countries to determine where they took their EDUCATION, You will undoubtedly find that a proportion of those took their EDUCATION in Canada. The kind of influence that results from that, and the relationships that would have developed while those people were studying in Canada, are immeasurable.
Senator Perrault: This is not the time to make it more difficult for visa students to come to Canada.
Mr. Anderson: No, and I think the immigration people should realize. I know there is concern about people who come here to study and stay. It is an easy way to come. However, the benefits of having foreign students here for our students to experience their culture, for us to be helping out in lesser developed countries, and, frankly, for Canada's own economic well-being, I think the strategy of internationalization is, to use your word earlier, a wise investment. It should not be looked at as an expense.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Several years ago, people came here for their training and EDUCATION and they would not return to their country. Has this changed?
Mr. Anderson: That still is a major concern in some areas, China in particular. We have just tried to attract students from China to the English for Academic Purposes Program. About 35 applied, but only seven were approved. The hurdle was found in Canada's immigration office in Beijing because they are concerned about this. They have statistics. They know how many do not return. That is a problem and I do not think it is a small a problem. In other jurisdictions the problems are not as great. However, in my view, I think those who do stay are contributing citizens to this country in many ways.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Yes, but it is their country of origin that is asking for them.
Mr. Anderson: Those who were sponsored, yes.
Senator Forest: Dr. Anderson, as a former Manitoban I am well aware of the wonderful work that Brandon University has done for aboriginal students. You were a pioneer in the area. Yesterday, a group of aboriginal people addressed us in Vancouver, and one of their big concerns is that we, the establishment, want to develop programs for them and they believe they should develop and have the ability to accredit their own programs, particularly in areas related to their culture and traditions. How has Brandon addressed that issue?
Mr. Anderson: We have addressed it probably more than a number of universities, but we still experience those pressures. Some are legitimate pressures. Part of the difficulty is: Do you shut down a department in arts or science so that you can use funds to develop new programs or to provide targeted facilities and student services for the aboriginal population? There is no doubt that there is strong desire for more aboriginal universities in this country, and I would bet that, within ten years, we will see several more funded in provinces like Manitoba and Saskatchewan which only have a population of, say, one million, and only have 100,000 or less living in the northern regions. It is a difficult situation. We cannot all do what British Columbia when it created the new university in the north. I do not know what their operating budget is, but it is probably $140 million a year right now. However, provinces like Manitoba and Saskatchewan do not have the population base. I think the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College experiment here in Saskatchewan is a very good one, as is the case with our university. The University of Saskatchewan has, in its various departments, a number of thrusts that do attract aboriginal students, and we are doing our best within the funding, but I think a wise provincial investment would be to increase the capability of the regular, if you like, universities to serve the growing population of aboriginal students.
You talked about credentials. Quality and credentials are extremely important, and it takes a long time to build those up. It will require a significant investment to start new institutions from scratch. I think we will see a balanced approach to that investment, some at the existing universities and some at the new universities, but we should not think that we can have instant credibility or instant quality at a new institution. It takes decades to develop.
Senator Forest: I was not thinking about the setting up of a new institution. Have you used some processes to encourage the input of the aboriginal people into the programs that were designed for them, because you have obviously been a successful.
Mr. Anderson: Yes, we have, we have advisory groups to our various programs but, at the same time, we get criticism for not being as consultative and responsive as we should be. There is a great demand, there is agitation, and there is a great degree of inclination among the Aboriginal people, in my observation, to have their own identity and their own control over institutions, and a portion of that I feel is eminently legitimate. Funding will be a barrier, but I predict that we will see a significant change in that over the period of a decade or two.
Senator Forest: Yesterday, we had the same interesting discussion about EDUCATION internationally, and a comment was made that we, as Canadians, should look in our backyard and see what we are doing for our Aboriginal people. I think that is a legitimate concern, particularly when, in Manitoba, you have done a lot in this regard, but you still run into difficulties in this province with an ever-escalating aboriginal crime rate. That must cause us to consider what it is costing us to keep people incarcerated instead of doing what we can for their EDUCATION.
Senator Andreyckuk: We are running desperately late, so I will be very selective and ask you just one question. We have heard that we must readdress student loans, and some have suggested that we should look not only at the student loan concept but also at taxation. It was pointed out there are tax inhibitives to part-time students. A student has to take 60 per cent of a normal load to claim an exemption. We have asked our researchers to find out, if that were rposted, what would be the tax implication loss to the federal government. Is that something you would see as a great help to students?
Mr. Anderson: I sympathize with part-time students. One of the reasons university enrolments overall have not grown over the last several years, is because the part-time student population has dropped significantly, and the financial barriers may be important. It would help, perhaps, to regenerate that segment of the university population if there were some increased tax incentives for study.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson, for your excellent presentation. We will probably be in touch with you for more information later on as we get closer to drafting our report.
We now have, from the Alberta College and Technical Institute Student Executive Council, Bobbie Saga.
Ms Bobbie Saga, President, Alberta College and Technical Institute Students' Executive Council: Our council is also known as ACTISEC.
The Chairman: I see. We welcome you. Perhaps you would make a few remarks and then we will ask some questions.
Ms Saga: Honourable members, I represent over 55,000 post-secondary students from the province of Alberta. On their behalf I would like to thank you, firstly, for addressing the issues of Post-Secondary education and, secondly, for recognizing the value of student input.
After reviewing the Debates of the Senate, student leaders from ACTISEC worked together to assess the current condition of the post-secondary system in our province. We looked at the direction post-secondary is taking as a result of both government initiatives and business initiatives; we examined the problems many students are faced with as they struggle to complete their EDUCATION; we addressed issues of quality, affordability and accountability; and we worked together to find alternatives to the current system which would better enable our students, both current and those coming up behind us, to compete in today's marketplace.
ACTISEC members maintain that higher learning is essential to the financial, social, and cultural success of our province and of Canada. Alberta has a reputation for having the highest postated population and excellent Post-Secondary educational opportunities and resources, two factors that we feel are intrinsically linked to our province's ability to attract corporate head offices, develop technological industries, and foster vibrant new business and cultural ventures. In the past, we have had world-class post- secondary institutions, employing many thousands of individuals who have contributed an immeasurable amount to our communities. We have also enjoyed national and international renown for athletics, arts and culture, innovative political thought, and recognition as a leader in medical research. All of these are connected to the initiatives of Alberta's post-secondary institutions.
Despite the unique mission and mandates of our post-secondary institutions, they have one concern in common: Advanced EDUCATION resources are being seriously threatened. The need to balance provincial budgets was real, and the public sector sacrificed to achieve this goal; however, we in higher learning have passed the point of belt tightening and are inflicting serious and potentially long-lasting damage on our post-secondary system.
We, as students, recognize the need for a quality system of EDUCATION. The basic element in EDUCATION is communication between students and instructors. With fewer instructors and an ever-increasing number of students, this element is suffering. Over the last five years, the average class size has increased in all institutions. Larger classes are likely to mean a lower quality of EDUCATION. The faculty member has more students to grade, to help with problems, and to motivate. While the numbers denoting the declining faculty are dramatic, we must now add in the rise in student numbers.
At the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, for example, between 1991 and 1994, while the number of faculty dropped by 28 per cent, the number of full-time-equivalent students rose by 29 per cent. Other institutions face similar changes. Mount Royal, for example now has portable classrooms in an attempt to accommodate the increasing number of students. While the number of full-time students at Mount Royal has increased by 27 per cent over the past five years, its full-time staff complement decreased by 14 per cent.
Fewer faculty and more students also results in fewer written assignments, less individualized instruction, and an impoverished EDUCATIONal experience. One instructor confessed that his increased workload meant he could no longer give his students written assignments. He said, "Each written assignment takes about an hour to mark. Each year my class size gets bigger. Something had to give, so I gave up assigning papers."
This band-aid solution is prevalent throughout the province, and both students and faculty find the trend alarming.
The Conference Board of Canada recently described the qualities desired in new employment recruits as the possession of strong technical competence with excellent written and oral communication skills. The fact that a student can now, potentially, go through an entire degree without ever writing a paper or report, is an alarming consequence of cutting budgets too far too fast. Furthermore, the desire for efficient program delivery, coupled with an increased demand for the use of technology, has further exacerbated the situation. Instructors are required to teach courses without prior or little training. The support systems for them are not yet in place, and the cost of retraining, in terms of time and dollars, is staggering.
For students, there is no system in place to provide the financial resources required for the technologies. At some institutions students are having difficulties accessing the technologies. Institutions are struggling under the demands of further decreases in funding while they are, at the same time, expected to keep up with the pace of an ever-changing technological environment. Situations like these only serve to encourage failure and prolong a student's time in school and, in effect, add to the cost of EDUCATION.
Lastly, increasing enrolments and decreasing numbers of full-time faculty are forcing some institutions to extend their semesters. The students of Lakeland College in Lloydminster and Vermillion, for example, are being forced to work past their regular winter semester to accommodate practicums. Not only has this resulted in inadequate funding, because the student finance board does not provide student funding past the 16-week semester, but it also makes it difficult for the students to secure summer employment.
These are just a few of the situations making academic life difficult. There are many more. Students in Alberta now face larger class sizes, inadequate funding, and less access to instructors. There is less government funding at both the institutional and individual level. In effect, students are being requested to pay more for less.
In an era based on knowledge, Post-Secondary education has become a necessity. In a government study conducted in Alberta in 1992, 61.9 per cent of all jobs required a degree or a post-secondary diploma; a further 27 per cent required high school graduation with work experience; while only 10.1 per cent required no EDUCATION. These requirements are not unique to Alberta. Today's society demands a highly-skilled, well-postated work force.
As I have previously stated, higher EDUCATION provides intrinsic and financial benefits to both individuals and society. Income for those with post-secondary qualifications are higher, while Employment Insurance payments are lower. Thus, graduates contribute more dollars to our communities through taxes and spending power, directly returning public investment many times over.
The direct individual benefit argument has been used to rationalize funding cuts and increase tuition fees, creating real barriers to accessibility for certain segments of our society. Studies done in the United States show that those coming from low-income families are less likely to pursue higher EDUCATION if there is potential for high debt loads. In Alberta, the government's philosophy of affordability only seems to relate to the current taxpayer and not to students as future taxpayers. As a result, the percentage students are expected to contribute has increased dramatically, with no end in sight.
Seven years ago the government had a policy that 12 per cent of an institution's net operating costs was a reasonable student contribution. Five years ago, this expectation was raised to 20 per cent. In 1994, the expected contribution was raised yet again to 30 per cent. In fact, this year, the Calgary Chamber of Commerce is urging the Alberta government to raise tuition fees to 50 per cent of the net operating cost of an institution, even though business is one of the direct benefactors of a well-postated work force.
Since the-30-per-cent tuition cap was introduced, institutional boards have been raising tuition to those maximum levels. In addition, the demand for support services has increased significantly. We have seen food banks open up on campus across the province. We have also had emergency student loans through our student associations as one of the consequences of those increases, and our dropout rates are increasing. More students are requiring counselling services in order to cope. Institutions are finding it difficult to cope as well and are downloading the increased need for services onto the students' associations who can barely manage with the limited resources they have.
While all this is occurring, the direct and indirect benefits of higher EDUCATION to society are being downplayed. Post-secondary institutions, their faculty, staff and students, contribute significantly to the local economies. In addition, higher EDUCATION benefits Canadian society directly by assisting in developing tolerance, receptiveness to change, flexibility, willingness to participate in political activity, independence, mobility, orientation, development of critical analytical skills, and less reliance on social programs like Welfare and Employment Insurance.
Lastly, higher EDUCATION assists in creating a knowledgeable and skilled work force, allowing Canada to succeed in a competitive global environment. The preservation of a publicly funded and affordable higher EDUCATION system is necessary for our country's survival.
Along with the drive to publicly fund Post-Secondary education, comes talk of restructuring and accountability. Post-Secondary education in Alberta has been hit with a vengeance with key performance indicators, benchmarks, funding corridors and performance funding envelopes. These are all the rage. Students, faculty and staff are struggling to work with a poorly designed system of accountability. It seems that institutions are no longer to assess success against the goals in which they were established. Students see the new accountability as an assessment for the sake of accountability -- efficient, more stringent and centralized systems of accountability to ensure taxpayers' dollars are spent mostly in accordance with government objectives. This efficiency program delivery becomes important while quality is neglected. Government, in essence, is using the cheapest means to yield the highest scores in systems designed by them alone.
The document we have presented to you today has several suggestions that we would like this subcommittee to take into consideration on behalf of the students of Alberta.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Bobbie, for an excellent brief and good delivery.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: At one point you said that some students, and I do not know at what level, post-secondary I gather, were not asked to write papers on account of budget cuts or on account of staffing difficulties. You said it is not inconceivable that somebody could complete their Post-Secondary education and not have been asked to write a paper or essay or any kind. Am distorting what you said?
Ms Saga: No, that is accurate. Instead of written papers, we are doing more and more multiple-choice examinations. We are not asked to write papers because the instructors have no time to read them. Their workloads are immense. That is changing the system of EDUCATION we are getting and, in effect, it is also changing the quality of the system that we have.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: What do you mean when you say that their workloads are so immense that they can no longer correct the papers?
Ms Saga: We are seeing more and more multiple choice exams rather than written papers. Even in our art streams like English courses we are doing multiple choice exams rather than writing papers. This diminishes the ability of students to get experience with written communication skills.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Do you think this is related to budget cuts?
Ms Saga: Absolutely. We are losing faculty members, and it puts an extra burden on those who are left behind, and we are seeing more and more faculty members stressed out, which is also having an impact on the classroom.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Could we have a copy of your oral presentation since it has some points that I would like to consider?
Ms Saga: Certainly.
The Chairman: We will now go to Senator Forest from Alberta.
Senator Forest: Thank you, Bobbie. You need not need tell me what is happening in Alberta, since I am well aware of it. A few years ago, under another administration, this province put tremendous emphasis on post-secondary EDUCATION and medical research, but we have lost a lot. You now have what is called the "Alberta advantage" which is most disconcerting.
I understand your comments about the workload of faculty members. They may have classes of 300 students and, if it takes an hour to correct each paper, they simply would not have time to do that.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Perhaps teachers should examine their own behaviour.
Senator Forest: That may be so. In any event, you had some suggestions in your paper. What do believe are the most important recommendations you could make to this committee?
Ms Saga: The quality of our EDUCATION is one a major concern, and direct funding to the institutions would be part of the solution to that. The other major concern is that the cost of EDUCATION is increasing dramatically, as it has over the last four or five years. A primary concern is the cost of tuition. Unlike the person who spoke before me, I believe that tuition is a problem for students and, when the tuition cap rose from 20 to 30 per cent, we saw food banks spring up on campus, and that is when students' associations had to get into the banking business to give our students emergency student loans. That was when we saw more and more students dropping out of school, or taking on part-time jobs. The tuition fee is a problem.
Senator Forest: What is the present level?
Ms Saga: Presently, we are moving towards the 30 per cent maximum that the government in Alberta allows. Now, that is only one part of the cost of our EDUCATION. There are many, many other factors. Technology is driving up the cost of our EDUCATION, and the cost of living is escalating. As well, the cost of books is ever increasing. The demographics of students is changing and, as a result, not everybody is 18 years old. Some have families for whom we have to provide health care and medical and dental insurance. Students' associations are trying to accommodate that by putting plans in place, but that is an added cost when they are trying to finish their EDUCATION. Some people have children for whom they have to provide day care. A recent study from Human Resources Canada, which was published on March 8 in the Calgary Herald, found that the average student is taking on a $25,000 debt load. That is only an average. Some students borrow less and, of course, some students borrow more.
Senator Perrault: Up to $40,000.
Ms Saga: At today's interest rate of 4.75 per cent, the cost of borrowing $25,000 at prime plus one is $7,930.40. That is a $274.42 monthly loan payment that they must meet. At prime plus five, it jumps to $14,231.60 and that is a $326.93 payment. That payment would be stretched over a ten-year period. Students are really asking whether the cost of their EDUCATION is worth it.
We would suggest that bank rates be regulated, and that students know what the cost of borrowing is before they make the commitment. They would then be able to make informed decisions as to when to go to school. Nobody takes a mortgage without knowing what the terms will be. Students do not know what their end cost will be. They do not sign their interest payment papers until after they have completed their EDUCATION. That should be up front.
As to the bank rate, students from ACTISEC are requesting prime plus one, not the Bank of Canada prime plus one, because the government insures our loans we believe that we should have best-customer status at the banks. There is no risk to the banks.
We would also suggest that the government could consider allowing students to have a tax write-off on the interest portion of their loans, much like RRSPs. That would also benefit students and rposte the debt load of those who can least afford it. Students from wealthier backgrounds do not need student financing, but those at the lowest end of the socio-economic ladder do.
We are now questioning who should get an EDUCATION and why. Right now, students are shaking their heads. While Mr. Klein was issuing his press releases and his budget yesterday, a petition was being circulated to every post-secondary institution across the province requesting that our tuition cap be rposted to 20 per cent.The administrators say that students can afford the 30 per cent, and that is not the real problem. Students are saying otherwise. As I said, that petition went out yesterday. The university students, college students, technical institute students, and our Alberta vocational college students are joint forces in this petition and, when the new government is formed, that petition will land on the new premier's desk.
Senator Perrault: Yours was a first-rate paper. You have done a marvelous production job on it too. I do not know who did the typeset, but it is very well presented. Whoever did it should be congratulated.
There is a student loan crisis. Young people have told me that they owe up to $40,000, they are in minimum wage jobs, and they are being harassed by debt collectors. That is absolutely wrong, even obscene.
Ms Saga: I believe that too.
Senator Perrault: At least we should have a system whereby repayment is income related. Only when you reach a certain taxation level should that debt be repaid.
In your brief, you mentioned carrying out some sort form of public service as is done in Australia.
Ms Saga: Yes, it does.
Senator Perrault: However, you are somewhat noncommittal in your brief on that subject. Have you resolved your position on it?
Ms Saga: We have just recently started to do our research on that, so I cannot give you as much information as I would like to.
Senator Perrault: It is an interesting idea.
Ms Saga:. It is an interesting idea because students not only give back to the community, but they can do so much more to benefit our communities because they have completed their EDUCATION.
Senator Perrault: I see in your brief reference to the fact that the Australian system is related to income, is it not?
Ms Saga: Yes, it is.
Senator Perrault: The tuition is free in the initial stages. I agree that something must be done about this debt load which is carried by these young people.
Senator Andreyckuk: When you talk about tuition, are you talking about up-front registration? We have heard that the tuition is not the only issue, it is the fact that a student may have to pay to use the computer, or other equipment. There are all these hidden costs. When you talk about tuition, do you mean the up-front tuition fees?
Ms Saga: We would like to ask the government to regulate what an institution charges as tuition. Part of the problem now is that every institution has different ancillary fees on top of straight tuition. We also have lab fees to cope with. When you read in the papers that tuition has gone up, that only reflects the base amount. It costs a student $10 to make use of a lab. Part of the problem is that students do not know what the hidden costs will be and we cannot cope with those little charges because we do not know what they are. We would like the government to regulate what should be included in tuition and what should not be, so that we have some reliable information when we apply for student financing. It is a huge problem, and it is one of the reasons we have emergency student loans on campus. It takes six weeks to renegotiate a student loan, so students come to their students' association for assistance. They cannot apply for welfare because they are students.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: That should be regulated by the provinces, not by the federal government.
Ms Saga: We understand that there is a problem, and that is why, in our brief, we have considered the possibility of a Canada EDUCATION Act, because this is not restricted to Alberta, this a huge problem and there are disparities across the country.
Senator Andreyckuk: I agree with Senator Forest that there should be some additional role played by banks since banks are the intermediary for the administration of the Canada Student Loan and, of course, students are their future customers.
Ms Saga: Yes, we are.
Senator Andreyckuk: Do you see some further role for the banks?
Ms Saga: We feel that the banks should be contributing. They are a direct benefactor, and not just by having a skilled work force, because not too many people without a Post-Secondary education work for them, but they also benefit from the entire student loan process. The more they charge us as interest, the more it costs the taxpayer. I think banks have the responsibility to consider their role in postating the population. This should be a shared responsibility between business, government and students.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: We have repeatedly heard about the students' problem in terms of financing their studies, extra costs that are being imposed on them and so on, but we have heard very little of the efforts made by universities to lower their administration costs. Do believe that as much is required from the post-secondary institution as it is required from students?
Ms Saga: From my experience in dealing with the institutions in Alberta, I can say that our institutions are maxed out, they are at break point, they are going to the community for funding, and they are cutting back in every way they possible. I have been at Mount Royal College for three and a half years now, and I have seen dramatic changes, but as far as administrative costs of the institution are concerned, Mount Royal College is unique. A week ago, the students' association there asked our administration to justify maximum tuition increases. We went through a budget process; they came to the board with their justification; and the board approved maximum tuition increases. The media was present. We have a situation where they can do no more. They are saying that it has to come from the students, and we are saying we are maxed out too.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: There was an incident at the University of Montreal where the students became really angry because lots of privileges were being given to directors, vice-directors or heads of departments or whatever, and that situation finally made the news. I believe there was some fundamental justification for their complaint. I realize that everybody has to make sacrifices, but they should not always be made by the same group, patricularly the weakest group.
Ms Saga: I agree.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I believe someone is volunteering to answer my question.
The Chairman: Please introduce yourself for the record and take the seat at the front.
Mr. Brendan Correia, Research and Communications Coordinator, Alberta College and Technical Institute Students' Executive Council: I am a recent graduate from one of the colleges in Alberta. Recently, I left university because I could not afford the program.
When you were asking about administration costs, Bobbie talked briefly about the accountability measures that the government is instituting. From the perspective of students, that seems to be driving up costs because the college has to provide all the responses to the indicators, do the research year after year, and they have to hire people to do that. The government's demand for this information is driving up administrative costs.
Senator Perrault: I think the background of people in politics affects their attitude towards certain issues. How many members of the Alberta cabinet -- and apply the same to the Saskatchewan cabinet -- have had any form of Post-Secondary education? Do we have any statistics to indicate the degree of achievement of various premiers and ministers?
Senator Andreyckuk: The only comment we hear is that there are two many lawyers in the system.
Senator Forest: I believe our premier is a high school dropout.
Ms Saga: Yes.
Senator Perrault:This is not a provocative question. I ask it because it has some bearing on the attitude of people in many cases. People who have made it in life without a Post-Secondary education do not think the lack of such an EDUCATION is a problem.
Ms Saga: That is a problem because today EDUCATION is an absolute necessity. Without it, you cannot get a job and hope to climb the corporate ladder, if you will. However, that was not the case 25 years ago. You need skills to compete with those who have an EDUCATION.
Senator Perrault: You are an eloquent spokesperson for ACTISEC.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Bobbie, and Brendan for coming in as well. Could I ask you one simple question and get a quick answer? What are you studying?
Ms Saga: Communications.
The Chairman: I thought so. I was going to congratulate you on your communication skills.
We will now hear from Mr. David Milner, president of the Alberta College Institute Faculties Association. I will give you a few minutes to express your views of what we should be doing in EDUCATION, and then we will have some questions.
Mr. David Milner, President, Alberta College Institute Faculties Association: Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you, and I would congratulate you for taking on this task. I would congratulate you on your endurance. We have a saying in the teaching profession that the mind can only absorb what the bum can endure. You have been sitting for a great deal of time.
Our organization is better known as ACIFA in Alberta, but I will not throw that acronym around this afternoon. When I am not working as president of our association, the other two-thirds of my working time is taken up being an instructor at Grant MacEwan Community College which is located in Edmonton. I am speaking today on behalf of the 11 faculty associations of the public colleges in Alberta, and the two faculty associations of the technical institutes. Together, these 13 associations represent 4,000 Faculty.
Our written submission to this committee and my comments this afternoon are based on our support for a significant federal presence in post-secondary EDUCATION. In fact, we see it as imperative that the federal government not only maintain, as a minimum, its current involvement but, indeed, we would argue for increased involvement. We believe that Canada's post-secondary system is already in a crises situation of national scope that demands national attention and solutions.
Honourable senators, knowing that other faculty and student groups from Alberta would provide a picture of Post-Secondary education in Alberta we chose to state in our written submission, which we forwarded to you, a number of suggestions as to roles the federal government could play in assisting Post-Secondary education. I was told to assume that you would read that brief and that the presentation was to be based on it.
However, with your permission I would like to take the opportunity to describe the Alberta experience, which I am sure you have heard about over the last couple of days, from a college and technical institute faculty perspective.
I think recounting this experience is somewhat important because we have been constantly reminded in Alberta that all other jurisdictions in Canada are watching Alberta as the example to follow or perhaps not to follow, and we would like to tell our side of the story. This description also, I hope, will provide insight into the motivation and reasoning behind our five recommendations. I will allude to those later in the presentation.
Throughout much of the 1980s and early 1990s, Alberta government grants to the post-secondary system in Alberta trailed inflationary costs by one to two per cent a year. Capital moneys over that time all but disappeared, used in large measure to finance the small increases in operating grants. We were robbing Peter to pay Paul. By the 1990s it was clear that the system had been trimmed of any slack and, indeed, major capital expenditures in the institutions were being deferred, hoping for better days.
Then, in 1993 the Alberta government launched the Klein revolution to downsize and restructure government. This included the post-secondary system, except with a twist. The post-secondary system -- colleges, technical institutes and universities -- were expected, indeed mandated, to expand, not downsize. This, however, was to be accomplished with significantly rposted funding, the proverbial "do more with less" was at work. At the heart of things was a 21-per-cent rposttion in government grants over three years, accompanied by financial penalties if enrolments dropped. Five per cent of the 21 per cent was made available through a competitive access fund to create 10,000 additional spaces in the post-secondary system. Institutions engaged in what has been described as cut-throat competition in efforts to obtain these funds. Indeed, the strategy was so successful the 10,000 places were achieved with $10 million to spare. I think this indicates that institutions were desperate to get their hands on any money in any way they could.
The restructuring of the Alberta post-secondary system was built on five principles or goals: responsiveness, accessibility, affordability, accountability and efficiency -- words that are commonly used today. What the government said these words meant, or wanted the public to think they meant, is well documented in a plethora of position and strategy papers, and PR statements, but what did these noble sounding words mean in practice for those of us in the front lines, the Faculty and students?
Let me share some of our experiences, and I will use those words to head up my comments.
Responsiveness: Historically this principle has been a mainstay of colleges and technical institutes, in fact we felt it was our competitive edge over the universities. We are noted for our ability to quickly adapt to changing market needs. Now, however, the term "responsiveness" has taken on additional meaning. Now it means institutions dropping their entrance standards in order to preserve or boost enrolment levels in order to avoid financial penalties. The result is that many students in our classes are now ill-equipped to be in college and technical institutes. The teaching, learning process, and environment have become more stressful and less productive.
A recent issue for colleges and technical institutes is the need to respond to the growing demands of a global and technological-based economy, and to prepare ourselves and our students for life in a global market. Faculty are frustrated. In Alberta we are rposted to responding to this need on an institution-by-institution basis with whatever resources can be garnered to do the job. We are berated for not doing enough, but we are not given any additional resources with which to do the job. We are left to compete internationally, as individual institutions, with countries like Australia, Great Britain, and the U.S. who have a national presence in the international EDUCATION market. We wonder why we are losing market share in the international EDUCATION market. Under present circumstances, the best we can hope for would be a provincial presence on the international scene.
Accessibility: The mandate to increase the number of places in post-secondary with less resources means only one thing -- increased work loads for faculty and overcrowded classrooms for students. This results in less interaction time between student and instructor, a critical component for effective learning. You would be hard-pressed to find any faculty member, and I suspect student as well, in Alberta who feels that the quality of EDUCATION has not suffered as a result.
Affordability: For the government, this has meant a 16 per cent rposttion in funding to the system since 1994. For faculty and other staff, it has meant a 5-per-cent rollback in salary levels for the last three years. It was 5 per cent, and it has been held at that level for three years. It has also meant increasing shortages of sources such as technologies that might allow us to work smarter instead of harder. It has meant deteriorating physical facilities to work in, and I believe the announcement in the paper was that one of the election promises is $35 million for the universities to start to upgrade their facilities. It is an interesting amount in light of the fact that the department itself has already identified $500 million is needed to upgrade facilities across the province.
Affordability has also meant the layoff of full-time colleagues to be replaced by less expensive contract employees. For students, affordability has meant rapidly increasing tuition fees, approximately 12 to 15 per cent per year, to a level where the student is to pay 30 per cent of the cost of his or her EDUCATION. The previous presenter from Alberta has described this issue with excellent clarity. As a faculty, we experience, firsthand, the results of the stress students are under as a result of trying to work part-time as well as complete their studies. We see students dropping out due to a lack of funds from our programs. As citizens, we worry about the long-term effects of graduating students with horrendous debt loads. I do not know of any bank that is likely to provide you with a mortgage when you are already in debt for $20,000 or more.
Accountability: The key to this goal has been the development of key performance indicators and performance-based funding. This system of determining grant allocations sets one institution in Alberta against another, because the benchmark between the winners and the losers is the average level of performance in the system. This ensures there will always be winners and losers, and the losers will not be able to afford to lose too many times. It also impacts us in the classroom. It means pressure, subtle and otherwise, to ensure you retain all of your students, no matter what it takes, as retention is an important KPI for funding. It also means placing more students per class as costs-per-student is another key performance indicator driving funding. The massive effort needed to collect the necessary data for the KPI is to strip the institutions of human time and financial resources that would be better spent on providing EDUCATIONal leadership and support.
Efficiency: Efforts in this area have been directed primarily at the Department of EDUCATION Advanced EDUCATION Career Development itself. It has meant a downsizing of the department to a level where we, as faculty, have lost faith in their ability to perform the leadership and support role required of them. They simply do not have enough human resources left to do the job properly. Ironically, they have created a far more complex post-secondary system to administer while, at the same time, stripping away their ability to administer it.
This then is the Alberta backdrop to our recommendations. It is not a pretty picture for faculty and students, and our perception is that things are going to get worse, not better. Our faith in the provincial government to protect and strengthen Post-Secondary education has been greatly shaken, if not completely destroyed.
The Alberta government pays lip service to EDUCATION as an investment in the future. Practice has demonstrated that it is considered to be just another public expense to be cut, with expenditures to be kept as low as possible -- lessen EDUCATIONal services, blame the institutions.
We support a strong federal role in Post-Secondary education. We see Post-Secondary education as having as much benefit for Canada nationally as it does provincially. In addition, some of the challenges facing post-secondary EDUCATION are national in nature, and others are of such magnitude that they are unmanageable at provincial levels. Frankly, as faculty in Alberta's colleges and technical institutes, we see the federal government as the last line of defence in protecting our post-secondary system.
To this end, we have made five broad recommendations in our paper where a federal presence could breathe new life into a dying system. In short, the recommendations call for federal leadership to, first, restore faith in our public post-secondary system to meet the EDUCATIONal and training needs of Canadians; second, to address the issues around technology; third, to investigate the issues around student debt loads; fourth, to set national EDUCATIONal standards and develop a national strategy for international EDUCATION. None of these, from what I have read and listened to today, is new to you.
To use that overworked business expression, "the bottom line" -- leadership is required at the national level to raise awareness of the critical importance of Post-Secondary education to Canada's future. We need action to make the debate real, and not just to content ourselves with lip service as to the importance of higher EDUCATION. There is a need to move the debate beyond the narrow interests of economics and short-term outcomes.
A suggestion I might make, and this is not reflected in our paper, would be to initiate a national forum on Post-Secondary education similar to the National Forum on Health which has just brought down its recommendations. As a nation, we must debate what we want as a society from our post-secondary system, and what role we should play in our national life in the 21st Century.
I would be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Milner, for an excellent paper. You obviously believe that the federal government should be involved in EDUCATION, so I guess you would not condemn me for urging the Senate to convene this committee.
Mr. Milner: I congratulate you.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: You have espoused many points with which I agree. For instance it is time that EDUCATION becomes a priority again. I remember a period when that was the case, but then the priority was displaced in favour of health and many other concerns. If no correction is brought about we will have serious problems in the future. I agree that the federal government must recognize the importance of higher EDUCATION. I also agree that we must invest more money in technology to assist our students. The indebtedness of the student is unreasonable, even if they finish their EDUCATION with $20,000 of indebtedness because they may not get a job immediately after graduation.
Senator Perrault: They might get a minimum wage job.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Yes. I think that should be addressed.
I have two questions. Do you feel that EDUCATION in Alberta has been more severely cut than other provinces? I know that cuts in Quebec will amount to $700 or $800 million. Have you been more ill-treated than other provinces?
Mr. Milner: I am sure that every other province feels they have been more poorly treated than others. The difficulty is that often people see that the cuts to Alberta -- post-secondary system and other public service sectors in Alberta -- have only occurred since the Klein revolution, and I think for those who have been in the system for the last 20 years such as I have -- I came into the system in 1977 -- early in 1980 the grants were not keeping pace with inflation, and that meant the institutions were having to make up that difference as they went along. When the Klein cuts started, there was no fat left in the system. However, there is still a myth in Alberta that the public sector, EDUCATION being included in that, still has inefficiencies and there is lots of fat in the system.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: When you mentioned Australia, were you referring to encouraging students from other countries to come to Canada for their EDUCATION?
Mr. Milner: I believe that a number of steps could be taken in that regard. Certainly, some things could be done to send our students to other countries, and to effect faculty exchanges if we, indeed, are living in a global community. We need exchanges going in all directions. Australia has been successful because they have a national presence. To clarify what I mean by that, let me put it this way: When you are competing it is like going for an interview. At 9 o'clock in the morning, Grant MacEwan Community College goes in to make their bid; at ten o'clock, Grand Prairie Regional College from Alberta goes in; and then, at eleven o'clock Mount Royal goes in. However, at twelve o'clock it is Quebec's turn or Ontario's turn because they have a national presence. However, you then realize the next participants are the United States of America, Great Britain, and then Australia. How can Grant MacEwan Community College compete against Australia? We just do not have the resources to do that.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: You are part of the administration as well as a teacher or professor. Do you feel that sufficient effort has been made in order to save administration costs? Of course, everybody has to make a contribution.
Mr. Milner: That is right.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: In terms of administration, has everything been done that could be done?
Mr. Milner: The cuts and changes have been made. In fact they were probably made about 1990. I think most institutions responded throughout the 1980s by trying to restructure, and, certainly, there has always been a focus on trying to slim down administration because that is always the easy target. Faculty will complain about too much administration, as will the students and the public. I keep referring to the "Klein" cuts, but in the last three years, administration was targeted for cuts, but there were none that could be made there. Once again, the irony is that the system has more administrative functions to perform now than ever, because now the government is playing a direct role in how the institutions are to be run, the directions they should go in, and collecting massive amounts of debt. We are all waiting anxiously to see what they will do with that.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: You suggest that a forum should be held on EDUCATION. Do you not think that it is time that we act and stop spending money in search of answers? The national health forum has cost close to $12 or $15 million, and I am not sure that it was necessary. I am concerned that, if we set up a forum for EDUCATION, we will end up running around in circles again and spend another $12 million.We could certainly help a few students with that amount of money.
Mr. Milner: I tend to favour action over having more discussions and forums, but I think we musts convince the average Canadian of the importance of the post-secondary system. Right now I do not think they sincerely believe it is important.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Our report might touch on that. Then we would save the $15 million.
The Chairman: As senators, we are paid a salary, so we are saving the fees for a royal commission.
Mr. Milner: Scratch my comments about a national forum, then.
Senator Andreyckuk: When the Senate unanimously agreed to study post-secondary EDUCATION we did so with some unease because EDUCATION is a provincial matter.
Incidentally, since you are in the middle of an election campaign in Alberta, I certainly want to be on the record as stating that any comments made in this forum should not be the subject of any debate in the neighbouring province. It would not be good for our credibility as Senators, and it would do nothing to further the cause of Post-Secondary education. Critiquing individual provincial governments was not going to be our perspective, and I appreciate it is very much your problem. That being said, I will stick to what I think are national concerns. In that light, you have a recommendation that the federal government needs to encourage and say monitor all types of EDUCATIONal credits and certifications to ensure maximum transferability. EDUCATION is not the only area in which we have a provincial or a segmented presence in terms of a marketing concept in this country. Would it not be more appropriate that the federal government create a facilitating environment for bringing the provinces together on this? We already have a Council of EDUCATION Ministers and Statistics Canada working on that. Should we not be building on those cooperative ventures and recommending more cooperation?
Mr. Milner: Certainly. I would agree with that. What I said may have sounded like, "The federal government should step in and just take it over and do it," and I think some of our members would agree with that at this point.
Senator Andreyckuk: It would simplify it.
Mr. Milner: Yes, it would. One does have to recognize, however, that some good things happening and, in some instances, we are heading in the right directions. Unfortunately, however, we are spending a lot of time talking and not much is happening.
Senator Andreyckuk: Alberta has been and continues to be a leader in many of the international forums. Do you feel that, in bringing EDUCATION into the international marketplace, that there needs to be some incentives by the federal government to equalize the playing field? I have heard some people from the small universities say that they cannot go to a trade show, and others have assured them that there is room for uniqueness. Some have expressed the opinion that they would not want the federal government presence because they will have set the rules. They feel that a cooperative venture with, perhaps, some arm's length funding and granting would be the way to go. Grant MacEwan has a long history of doing good things out there.
Mr. Milner: That is correct, they do. As a provincial organization, we have just started to address this topic of international EDUCATION. People we consulted talked about having some sort of coordinated approach, with institutions working together as a unit rather than, say, two institutions from the same city showing up in South America to do a project. We believe there will be some benefit in working together.
Senator Andreyckuk: My final question relates to CIDA, ODA and our other overseas programs. We were funding EDUCATIONal infrastructures overseas but, recently, CIDA has suffered dramatic cut-backs which has resulted in us funding basic needs such as health care, which I agree with. In that process, defined infrastructure to be not only buildings such as power plants, but also EDUCATIONal institutions that we were supporting. Would you advocate a reassessment of CIDA's function in technical systems overseas where universities and colleges could play a greater role?
Mr. Milner: I am not sure if I am in a position to comment on that. It certainly sounds reasonable to me. At this point, we are saying that we need to consider everything.
Senator Andreyckuk: Grant MacEwan did a lot of work overseas. Has that been cut back because of CIDA grants?
Mr. Milner: I am not aware of that.
Senator Perrault: Mr. Chairman, reference is made on page 6 of this excellent presentation to the global village. McLuhan's global village has arrived. You talk about internationalization. Then you go on to state:
However, a shared commitment to internationalization does not mean a shared vision, rationale or set of expectations. Other countries, such as Australia, Britain, and the United States have launched major national efforts in this area and have witnessed great success, due largely to effective national strategies.
What are they doing that we are not doing in Canada, and what should we be doing?
Mr. Milner: I am certainly no expert in international EDUCATION, but I understand that they have a national body that represents the country nationally, as opposed to individual institutions trying to make it on their own.
Senator Perrault: The Asia Pacific Foundation based in Vancouver cooperates with a number of EDUCATIONal institutions across the country in trying to develop awareness, I suppose, principally on the potential of Pacific Rim countries. economically and otherwise. That is one form of cooperation, it is not under government auspices directly, but it is supported in part, as you know, by some federal funding. Are any of your members associated with the Asia Pacific Foundation?
Mr. Milner: We have an Asia Pacific Institute within Grant MacEwan College.
Senator Perrault: Would you suggest that we coordinate our effort a little more effectively than what we are doing?
Mr. Milner: Yes.
Senator Perrault: The Internet is now accessed by 55 million people in the world, and 20 million have the equipment. Is there some way we can use this new technology to the benefit of EDUCATION in this country? Perhaps, by so doing, we could save some money so we could provide other services. Does the Internet threaten the jobs of educators because it may be possible to distribute university material virtually free of charge? Simon Fraser University in Vancouver is launching what is being called the "virtual" university and they are going to offer degree courses on the Net.
Mr. Milner: We could probably get into a long discussion on that.
Senator Perrault: It deserves a seminar on its own.
Mr. Milner: Currently, there are approximately 10,000 courses offered on the Internet. There are virtual universities and a variety of other courses. I think it has potential as a tool for information, but there is a tendency these days, I believe, to interpret information and EDUCATION as being one and the same, and they are very different.
Senator Perrault: They certainly are.
Mr. Milner: As an instructor, I do not fear that the Internet would replace me. If it could, then it probably should.
Senator Perrault: In British Columbia where we considering using distance EDUCATION to bring EDUCATION to the very small towns of the north instead of kids being required to go to boarding school. That sounds pretty useful.
Mr. Milner: It certainly has its advantages. However, any studies I have seen indicate that students would prefer to be in a university setting or social setting rather than simply have a transference of information. Lacking the ability to do that, or if that is not feasible, then technology certainly can address that need of transferring information. It is a very effective tool for doing that. However, if we think it can replace the full EDUCATIONal process, I think we are mistaken.
Senator Perrault: In certain courses I am sure it would be most important to have interaction between the instructor and students.
Mr. Milner: Yes. It would probably be difficult to learn how to play basketball on the Internet.
Senator Perrault: Do you not see any great cost savings as a result of using that technology?
Mr. Milner: There probably would be some cost savings in terms of information transmission and retrieval.
Senator Perrault: As I said earlier today, there is a major campaign by Queen's University to recruit students for an MBA program. They will rent a couple rooms in Vancouver. It is a new way to market universities, is it not, and their potential?
Senator Andreyckuk: In Saskatchewan we have had to build strategies to retain our students. We have tried to encourage dialogue and debate and we have our fair share of students.
Senator Perrault: You certainly have.
Senator Andreyckuk: As has B.C.
Senator Forest: In her presentation, the student from Alberta, Bobbie, recommended a national Canada EDUCATION Act. As we have said, we are very sensitive that EDUCATION comes under provincial jurisdiction, but we recognize the need for leadership. It has been suggested to us that, perhaps, federal leadership could occur in two ways. Of course, one way is through funding. The other way would be to set up, in concert with the provinces, a set of national guidelines in EDUCATION such as there are in health care. Would you see that as having merit, provided we could get the provinces and the federal government together? There does seem to be more of a climate of working together, although it is not in EDUCATION. Would you see that as being valuable?
Mr. Milner: Yes, I would. Anything that would start to level the playing field would be beneficial. We are not sure what specifics to recommend because we would be the first to admit that we do not understand all the intricacies of provincial-federal relationships. However, I would think something like that would certainly be a step in the right direction.
Senator Forest: Speaking of a national forum, we will be going from Vancouver to Halifax, and having valuable discussions with all of the "stakeholder groups" you might say, in EDUCATION. Hopefully we will come up with some ideas that will be helpful in providing federal leadership and bringing the provinces together.
Senator Andreyckuk: We need an answer for the record.
Mr. Milner: Yes.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Milner, for your excellent paper.
We have before us, from the Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION, Mr. Shaun Brennan.
Mr. Shaun Brennan, Co-Chair, Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION: With me today is Mr. Kenneth Kutz.
Mr. Kenneth Kutz, Co-Chair, Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION: Mr. Brennan and I are the provincial co-chairs at the Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Are you a musician?
Mr. Kutz: Yes, I am.
We are a rather unique group. The Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION was formed a couple or three years ago when the impending federal cuts to post-secondary EDUCATION brought a number of people together. Our group represents faculty, support workers, students and teaching support from the public university, technical school and regional community colleges throughout the province, and they total between 35,000 to 40,000 people who are involved, in one way or another, with Post-Secondary education.
A number of concerns were raised, certainly not the least of which was the self-interest concern when it appeared there were going to be some major changes. Both provincial and federal governments were struggling with the reality that deficits and debt load had created. One of our objectives at that time was to try to ensure that groups of people working in different institutions did not work against one another to see who would be the last person left standing at the end of the deficit rposttion row, but rather that unions, associations, and student unions took a proactive stance to try to articulate our view of the Post-Secondary education system in the province in particular and in the country. This unique alliance of people, from technical schools, universities and community colleges made up of the workers, from the people who provide secretarial and caretaking support, to faculty and other teaching professionals, was formed. Through the process we have learned quite a bit about the needs and aspirations of people in our group.
Our first challenge was to try to convince not only our provincial government but also the general public of the importance of Post-Secondary education. Many of our groups not only perform a self-serving function, that is, what you might call looking after the narrow self-interests of workers or students or whoever, but they also expend human and financial resources into discussing what we need as a society and as a country, as well as what we want, require, and hope for, for our children.
The Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION is thankful to be invited to this Senate committee hearing on this important subject. As you can see from my brief, we have tried, in general terms, to articulate a number of areas of concern that I know are similar to those expressed by the previous speakers but, during the question and answer session, perhaps we will be able to put more of a Saskatchewan spin on the issues from the viewpoint of the frontline students and workers. I think the brief is self-explanatory. I would now ask Shaun Brennan to introduce himself and to tell you a little bit about some of the students' concerns.
Mr. Brennan: I would begin by just telling you a bit about myself. I am the vice-president, academic, of the Students' Union at the University of Regina, and I have worked with the Provincial Alliance for EDUCATION for the past two years.
I am sure the committee has heard reams of information on the two major issues affecting students: accessibility and student debt loads. However, I think I can add a Saskatchewan element to that, which will go along with some of the national statistics you have heard.
At the University of Regina in particular we have seen rising tuition and a proliferation of ancillary fees for students. Today, when discussing the cost of EDUCATION, you not only have to consider tuition, you also have include a user fee. No longer are fees simply the cost of books and classes. Universities have been forced into a position where they have to add various service fees to make up provincial and federal funding shortfalls.
In 1985-86 students at the University of Regina were paying roughly 15 per cent of the cost of Post-Secondary education. Today it has risen to 27.1 per cent.
Senator Forest: Over how many years?
Mr. Brennan: Over the last decade. The problem has been accentuated over that same period of time by rising unemployment among youth aged 15 to 24. The numbers I have are from labour force annual averages. In 1986 the unemployment rate in this province for all youth in Canada between the ages of 15 and 24 was 13.2 per cent. That has increased to 16.1 per cent over the last decade. Minimum wage, on a national average, has not increased a great deal over that time period, and students are facing increasing tuition fees with decreased source of revenue, if they are working part-time.
A trend you would expect to see, would be decreasing enrolments, but that has not happened, at least at the universities in this province. However, over that same time period, there has been an increase in the number of students on student loans And then we get into the issue of increasing student debt loads. That is probably the largest problem students face today .As an indication of that, it is important to note that the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada and the Canadian Federation of Students agreed on a position paper on changes to the Canada Student Loan Program. Two years ago these two organizations would never have been at the same table discussing student loans. Now, however, they have come forward with a concrete proposal for how the Canada Student Loan Program could be changed to help right the increasing student debt loads in this country. The federal government does have a role in Post-Secondary education through the Canada Student Loan Program.
Within this province we have a student advocate who helps students with student loans appeals and other academic concerns on campus. The latest statistics I had from her indicated that 80 per cent of her clients had a problem with student loans. I attended a seminar given by a bankruptcy trustee two weeks ago. He indicated that, of the slightly over 900 bankruptcies in this Canada last year a little over 200 involved student loans, so I think the student debt crisis is already occurring.
Mr. Kutz: In my other life, I am a faculty member for the Gabriel Dumont Institute, a Metis-controlled institution. I am also part of the Saskatchewan Urban Native Teacher EDUCATION Program housed at the University of Saskatchewan. I, too, have become an expert on student loans whether I wanted to or not. Part of my responsibility, other than teaching, involves dealing with students, and they have very specific concerns which are of paramount importance
Our province has tried to backfill the shortfall from the federal government, and it has done so successfully for one year. We should keep in mind that, part of the reason the government had to rationalize some services, was obviously because we had a large accumulated debt, and there was little room for flexibility. At the same time we were fortunate in that, because of other global situations, the prices of wheat, uranium and potash were up. Hopefully, in this next funding cycle beginning fiscal year April 1, we will have the same good fortune. However, Saskatchewan is at the mercy of economic forces, and I am fearful about what will happen when the price of wheat and other commodities dips because we, unfortunately, have one of the highest accumulated per-capita debts in the country. To assume that a small province like Saskatchewan can continue to withstand the government shortfall for an extended period may be naïve, at best.
Many people are under the impression that our First Nations students, because they have funding support from the bands -- and it used to be from The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development -- will simply have their tuition and books paid for. That is only partially true now. Bands only receive so many dollars and there is a queue of students for the money. If you are at school and you have regained your aboriginal status, you, along with others in this province, are eligible to apply for a student loan. However, First Nations students are not eligible for some of the assistance that student loans provide. Many people assume First Nations students are receiving funds from their bands to cover their EDUCATIONal expenses, such as tuition, books and living expenses but, in fact, they are not. In the next few years, I believe that many more First Nations students will have to access student loans. There is a whole other group of students, the Métis students who are, in fact, part of the working poor. I have heard it said, and I have said it myself, that universities are creating a class of working-poor professionals because, in many cases, the debt load of graduates is so high that it has made EDUCATION, like smoking, a class issue.
Saskatchewan has a unique community college system, and we also represent some of the workers and students in that system. We have a high degree of integration between the community colleges, the SIAST, the technical schools, and the universities. There is a history of cooperation in this province, and staff and administrations, have worked hard to create a system where credits are transferable. As a result, students in rural Saskatchewan have saved money because it results in a relatively inexpensive system where people can access a class or two at the university or a particular program at our technical school without having to apply for a full-time student loan to cover living expenses, tuition, and so on. With that, and our EDUCATIONal television network, there is a high degree of integration. However, more work remains to be done. We have a good deal of cooperation in this province between boards, administrators, provincial government staff, and students, but it is a fragile system.
We have pared away many of the excesses of administration as well as a lot of worker excesses, and there is not much left to pare away. We are perilously close to having a fairly workable and innovative system disintegrate because we have lost money for apprenticeships and money to purchase seats in particular programs. That applies to everything from adult basic EDUCATION, to technical skills, to a university class here and there. At the same time, the Pathways Program run by the Métis and the First Nations has helped with some of that shortfall, but there is no guarantee that those funds will be there in the long term.
[Translation]
Senator Lavoie-Roux: When you go back home, this evening or tomorrow, you ought to remember that it is important for a young person like you to learn French. With people my age, I have given up.
We have a French-speaking stenographer and she does not have enough work because, in the West, there are not too many people who speak French. Nonetheless, I find it interesting that, in this building, there is a whole department to teach French. I will ask you my question in English and, in five years, when I come back, I will ask it in French.
[English]
You talked about the financial difficulty students find themselves in, and you said that fees have increased. We all agree with that. You then mentioned that students now have to pay for books and so on. Students have always had to buy their own books. This is not new. It sounded like an extra burden you had to bear.
Mr. Brennan: No, the point I was trying to make -- and I am sorry if I did not make it clear -- was that, given the limited resources of students to begin with and the increase in tuition, the money they will earn over the period they are not in school, would merely cover their tuition. I agree that books have always been additional costs. On average, a student in this province would have to work for approximately three months over the summer to make money to pay tuition, and that would be about $3,000. Additional fees or expenses have to come from somewhere else, and usually the answer to that is student loans.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Does the provincial government have a bursary program?
Mr. Brennan: No. The Saskatchewan bursary program was eliminated in the 1980s. Supplemental loan funding is available from the province through the Saskatchewan Student Loan Program.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: That would just add to the debt.
Mr. Brennan: It does.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: How many provinces still have a bursary program, apart from Quebec?
Mr. James van Raalte, Research Assistant to the Committee: I believe British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario have a limited bursary program. That is under review. Quebec has its own bursary program.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I have a second question.
[Translation]
That is very interesting. I believe you are a teacher at the Gabriel Dumont Institute?
Mr. Kutz: Yes.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Did the Métis people not speak French, originally? Certainly Louis Riel spoke French. How can an institute where French is taught be strictly English-speaking? I do not know whether the Métis have their own language.
[English]
Tell me a little bit more about Gabriel Dumont Institute, not the man himself.
Mr. Kutz: Gabriel Dumont Institute came about in the late 1970s in response to the needs of the Métis community in our province. As you know, the Métis, historically, have been somewhat marginalized in that they do not have enshrined rights in our Constitution like First Nations people. It was instigated in collaboration with the provincial government of the time to address, in particular, the post-secondary needs of Métis people. At the heart of the program was the Saskatchewan Urban Native Teacher EDUCATION Program with three small campuses in Saskatoon, Regina and Prince Albert. Saskatoon, for example takes about 20 Métis people a year, many of whom are older learners and have been away from school for a while. We offer some ancillary and support services. We provide some degree of academic and financial counseling to assist people to cope with the stresses of university life. Almost all of our teachers are employed in school systems in Western Canada because many of the school divisions have affirmative action programs that have been agreed to with the Human Rights Commission. We have made some significant strides but, in the province, the intervention and affirmative action programs have come largely in the area of teacher EDUCATION, both for Métis and First Nations people. The other areas of instruction are in social work and in nursing. We also have a Native Law Program at the University of Saskatchewan, which is a national program. As to language, although we have had a number of French-speaking graduates, not from Saskatchewan but from the Red River area of Manitoba primarily, as do not have a French class as part of the mainstream program. We do, however, offer a Cree class which most of our students access.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Can they take the course in French as an option?
Mr. Kutz: Yes, they can. As a matter of fact, we are in the same building as the Second Languages Institute.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Do the Métis still constitute a community in Saskatchewan?
Mr. Kutz: I am not an expert on the Métis. There are certainly pockets of communities, like those north of Saskatoon in Duck Lake and Batoche. There are very strong communities in parts of the northwest. However, there has been migration to the cities of Saskatoon, Regina, Prince Albert, Moose Jaw, and others. There is a community, and they do have a provincial political association, the Métis Nation of Saskatchewan, which is the steward of our kind of institute and other economic development institutes. They also have a national organization, a Métis National Council, which is made up of the presidents of the various provincial Métis organizations. Yes, they do have a presence. In fact, currently, they are carrying out a census to determine the number of Métis people.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Is it correct to say that, before immigration, the Métis community played an important role in the history of Saskatchewan?
Mr. Kutz:. Yes.
Senator Perrault: That is because of Batoche.
Mr. Kutz: Yes. That was a matter of race or racism. With the opening of the Gabriel Dumont Institute there is a new sense of pride, and that is reflected with the graduation of many professionals who are working at our schools and going into other endeavours. I think it is safe to say that the community is a developing one. It is coming of age. I also think that there is a strong political agenda to recognize Métis rights.
While we do not have bursaries, we do have some incentive programs like the Special Incentive Program to assist Métis people in post-secondary EDUCATION. However, I am afraid that, even with that assistance, the debt load for many of our graduates is too high.
Senator Perrault: This is a somewhat depressing brief, but I do recognize that there are some serious problems. You say, however, the crisis is rooted in the perception that institutions of higher learning and training are not adequately performing their appropriate roles. You then go on to say that there is a crisis in competence and the belief that the quality of EDUCATION is in decline. Is it in decline? You say that is the public perception. Have the cut-backs caused an identifiable and absolute decline in the quality of EDUCATION in this country?
Mr. Kutz: Although people from Saskatchewan are noted for social progress in this country, we cannot help but be affected by Maclean's magazine polls and other ratings. There was a news item yesterday that the medical school at our largest university, the University of Saskatchewan, received only two of 27 grants which is far below our average. One of the reasons cited was that we do not have the personnel on staff and, as a result, we cannot compete with large eastern universities. Over the years that medical school has made a lot of breakthroughs and it has an excellent reputation. Are we now teetering on the brink of asking whether we can afford that medical school? Not being on the board of governors, I cannot answer that question. Then, when some agency gives our MBA program at the U of S the lowest rating, after a while you start to develop an inferiority complex.
Senator Perrault: You fear a doomsday scenario, and it is very depressing.
You also say that we need a new public awareness and representation of Post-Secondary education. I agree with that, as I do with many statements in this brief. A decade of under funding has resulted in the loss of several hundred faculty and support staff positions. Have those people gone to Eastern Canada or the States?
Mr. Kutz: There is a concern that more programs, even graduate programs, are being taught by nontenured people. In some cases that is because there is no choice between a full-time, ongoing person and, basically a contractual worker, some of whom we represent. We have many people with doctorate degrees from prestigious universities who simply cannot find work, so we have a problem.
Senator Perrault: The standards are at least threatened by the cut-backs.
Mr. Kutz: When I graduated from the College of EDUCATION 15 or 20 years ago there were 106 faculty. Now they are talking about decreasing it to 50 in the next year. Classes are larger, there is less hands-on instruction, less individual attention for students and, of course, tuition has doubled or tripled in the meantime. The conclusion most people would draw from that is that the quality has declined, and it has.
Senator Perrault: It has been at least jeopardized.
Mr. Kutz: Certainly.
Senator Perrault: You state a rather a limited support for the idea of cooperative studies. You say the post-secondary sector should not collaborate and cooperate with other interested parties from the private sector. These cooperative programs involve contact between the private sector and Post-Secondary education institutions. There is much support for the cooperative idea. Some would hail it to be as important as the invention of the wheel, but you have expressed a restrained support for the idea.
Mr. Kutz: It depends on the nature of the program. Do not forget that the universities have provided human resource training and EDUCATION to large corporations and smaller businesses for years. In our view, there has been only a limited payback of that debt to the universities. If corporations are going to invest in universities or community colleges simply to gain a sphere of influence and to try to tailor training even more, then I think that we would be opposed to that. In the last number of years, especially in the area of Native EDUCATION, all kinds of corporations are lining up to make donations towards the construction of a building only because they will be able to put a plaque with their name on it.
However, they have limited ongoing support for universities, and that is problematic. We have enough buildings but not enough people to work in them.
Senator Perrault: You are suggesting that the proper controls be in place.
Mr. Kutz: Yes, absolutely.
Senator Perrault: If standards are established, you would have no problem with the idea.
Senator Andreyckuk: I found your association very interesting because you came together from all sectors to talk to each other.
To what extent do you think you have been successful in getting your message across to either level of government in terms of getting them to start a debate on Post-Secondary education?
Mr. Brennan: In the last six months we have seen a lot of interest by the provincial government in Post-Secondary education and, in particular, the revitalization of universities in this province. At the federal level there has been less evidence of interest, currently at least, in Post-Secondary education. The students' union here is a member of the Canadian Federation of Students, so we rely on our national organization to work for us at the federal level. I believe that the proposals that were made as a result of the changes to the Canada Student Loan Program were fairly warmly accepted at the national level. Provincially, some work has been done on it. We can about what universities should look like in the year 2010, and we can talk about how they should be revitalized, but unless there is additional funding those changes will never materialize.
Senator Andreyckuk: My concern is that the parties may be spending a lot of time rebutting each other's proposals, whereas all of the stakeholders should be trying to find a collective answer. Has there been cooperation?
Mr. Brennan: A close working relationship between the provincial government and the university administrations in trying to develop something workable, is relatively new to this province, particularly given the current fiscal resources of the province, although those are improving. My own personal experience of cooperation was working on the Student Assistance Task Force which the provincial government launched beginning of December. Many ideas being discussed at that level are quite revolutionary. Much of that discussion focused on what we should be moving towards.
Senator Andreyckuk: It seems to me that Saskatchewan, having had a long history of recessions and droughts may be better equipped to come through these difficulties and to work cooperatively.
Mr. Brennan: You could make an argument for that, I suppose. It does not make it any easier, though.
Senator Andreyckuk: It seems that students are not as shocked as those in other provinces when they are asked to pay 27.1 per cent and that may be because of your history of ebbs and flows, so to speak.
Senator Forest: You say that it is important for all political parties to stop fighting over how much money is to go to infrastructure, roads, industry, foreign aid and start worrying about our capacity to provide post-secondary EDUCATION to add value to our youth. I would agree with that. What would be your recommendation to this committee?
Mr. Brennan: I have two priorities because I think there are two issues that are very important to the future of Post-Secondary education in this country. The first one would be to tackle the problems of the student debt load. I believe recommendations from this committee should support the suggestions made by the national organizations in this country.
The second issue which I feel is fairly important is that there should be some national presence in the funding of Post-Secondary education. If there is no national presence, I think that Post-Secondary education in this country would deteriorate even further. Whether that comes through national legislation similar to the Health Act, or whether it comes through additional funding to the CIBC I think it is a necessity.
Mr. Kutz: I would just mirror those recommendations. If we do not do something about the debt load and the cost of university, we will have a very stratified student population. I think that is beginning already. I have to tell people coming into my program that a university is no longer good value. For people who are 35 years old who have children and who may only have 20 years or 25 years left in the work force, it is just not good value. If people are doing this for economic reasons they must be careful, because they are being misled by the rhetoric, and that is terribly unfortunate.
We need a strong public presence in EDUCATION. Despite all the problems with public EDUCATION, it is a much better value when we have control of it, and our elected and appointed officials have some control over what we do. We can change our elected officials, but once we sell it or give it away, we will never get it back. That will not help national unity, it will not help our young people, and it certainly will not help our economic well-being. We must support a vibrant public sector involvement in the EDUCATION system.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: I know that as a result of these cuts EDUCATION is under great financial pressure, but I have seen a couple of reports on biotechnology research that was done in a Saskatchewan hospital that was most encouraging. They seem to be doing excellent work. Do not give up all hope.
Senator Andreyckuk: We never do.
The Chairman: Thank you for your presentation.
Now there may be some people in the audience who want to say a few words or ask a few questions. If so, please come up and introduce yourselves.
Ms Marlene Brooks, President, Graduate Students Association, University of Regina: As president of our association, I have been in contact with the University of Saskatchewan and their graduate association. Together we have looking at the impact of the rposttion of transfer payments.
The Chairman: You are a graduate student in what science?
Ms Brooks: My own field is adult EDUCATION. I also work with first-year university students and with the counselling services to advise students how to survive this environment.
I especially want to address the questions of quality and the rposttion of faculty. One of our main concerns as graduate students, is that, in business there has been a trend towards contingency work forces, so there is little full-time employment available. The university is following the same trend.Early retirement proposals are being offered by the province. The notion of early retirements may not be negative unless they are followed by the loss of full-time professorships. If that happens on this campus or in Saskatoon, the number of graduate students professors have to supervise will increase. I do know that some professors on this campus are supervising up to 12 or 14 students at any one time. I believe this impacts, in the long term, on research and the quality of research. The majority of our graduate students are masters students who become researchers. If we do not have access to supervisors on an ongoing basis, or if we have to wait two or three months for the feedback, then I that, in the long term, the quality of researchers will decrease in Canada. I know we are not the only province experiencing this. However, we must have assistance from those are accredited to supervise. Otherwise, for graduate students, the programs will not be taught as well. Right now, graduate students are out on their own basically trying to get support from one another and develop a community. One of the presenters mentioned that we are a bare-bones level of human resources, and I agree with that. Saskatoon is undergoing the same process.
We would ask the Senate to be the watchdogs over what is happening as a result of these early retirements and the trend towards the contingent worker.
Senator Perrault: At what ages are early retirements taken?
Ms Brooks: The MacKay report identified the average age of professors in Saskatchewan as being 54. From our point of view, that is very young. By the time someone completes a doctorate degree he or she could be 45 or so. Then that person would only have five or six years to work, and at 54 they would be offered early retirement. We are losing the expertise, the accredited professors. Although it is good to bring in young professors with new ideas, our concern is that they are being brought in as a contingency work force. We should not necessarily adopt business ideologies in this environment.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Are they being offered early retirement or being discharged because of budget cuts? My understanding was that some universities cannot do that to any professor before he is 65 years of age.
Senator Perrault: If he is tenured, that is the case.
Senator Andreyckuk: This is the proposal.
Ms Brooks: It is very similar to what is occurring in business with the downsizing of middle management. The government has downsized middle management and they are applying that trend to universities now.
Senator Perrault: It is sad.
Ms Brooks: This is the institution of EDUCATION, not the institution of business. We must consider how that will impact upon the quality of EDUCATION across Canada. I think this requires careful scrutiny. We are not saying weare at that point where it has been devastating, but I do know of some professors who are supervising 12 to 14 graduate students at any given time. Their workload is such that it took a whole semester for my own proposal to receive an ethics clearance. That is too long to wait. The people who are working there are not too blame. The business ideology of downsizing is not working in the university setting.I agree that we have to make cuts, but if we go too far it will affect the quality of our EDUCATION, and that could be devastating for our graduate students who are our future researchers and the people who will give back to society.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: What do these people, who take early retirement at 55 years of age, go on to do?
Ms Brooks: That is exactly what they are asking too: What are we going to do now? Much depends on the type of early retirement package, and each province has made different proposals.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Are they being hired by industry?
Ms Brooks: Sometimes they are actually hired back by the same university in contract positions.
Senator Perrault: That would save them more money.
Ms Brooks: Yes.
This whole area needs to be looked at. A decade of underfunding must result in the loss of several hundred faculty positions and increased class sizes. The level of expertise may not be so important in a university that deals only with undergraduates, but a research institution needs to provide all of the expertise it can to graduate students so that they, in turn, can become the researchers.
Senator Perrault: You say these cut-backs are cutting right to the bone in terms of the structure.
Ms Brooks: The structure, yes.
We have not had the early retirements here in Saskatchewan. I certainly know that Alberta and other provinces have. No studies have been done on the effect of this because it is a new phenomenon in Canadian Post-Secondary education.
Senator Perrault: It certainly happens in industry.
Ms Brooks: Yes, it is quite common now. Some of those ideologies have been brought into the EDUCATION system.
Senator Forest: That has been going on at the U of A for a number of years.
Ms Brooks: Yes.
Senator Forest: Part of the reason was to get new blood into the university, which I agree with, but another part was because a tenured professor could be replaced by two or three associate professors.However, the problem is that we have found that the best people retire because they are capable of starting their own consulting firms.
Ms Brooks: The important question, I think, is whether these positions are being filled with sessional people who are accredited to teach and supervise graduate students. Is the number of competent instructors at each university decreasing? If that is so, then we must ask ourselves what the impact will be on graduate studies throughout Canada.
Senator Forest: It is a real problem.
Senator Andreyckuk: We have not zeroed in on graduate studies to any extent and the problems that might arise because of the specialized supervision these students need in order to learn how to conduct research.It seems apparent that emphasis is being placed on computer sciences, perhaps to the detriment of some of the more traditional fields such as philosophy and the arts. We could certainly deal with this issue in our report.
Ms Brooks: It does not appear that those distinctions are being made on our campus. We are a fairly progressive university and, although there is this trend towards technology and computers, I think it is fair to say that each department, including the philosophy department, has some research funds.
The Chairman: Thank you Ms Brooks.
If no one else in the audience wishes to participate, we will adjourn.
The committee adjourned.