print this page

Quick Summary:
Ontario – A Leader in Learning
Bob Rae’s Report on Post-Secondary Education

A Balanced Report: 50 per cent good news – 50 per cent bad news

The report presented by Bob Rae gives Ontarians a sense of hope. The report recognizes post-secondary education as an essential pillar in the well-being of individuals, the community and the economy. Steelworkers strongly support the "overarching goals for reform" in the Rae report:

• Great Education
• Opportunities for More People
• A Secure Future for Higher Education

The report proposes:

• Increasing funding from the provincial government to the average of Canadian provinces as well as multi-year predictable funding (a minimum of $1.3 billion by 2007-08).

• Increasing student services to improve the students’ experience; the measurement of these services and the satisfaction level should be part of the quality assurance model to be implemented.

• Dedicating $700 million for academic renewal (hiring faculty and developing their skills).

• Dedicating $200 million per year for three years to infrastructure renewal at universities and linking new buildings only to new enrollment; also $40 million per year for three years to colleges for new equipment purchases for apprenticeships.

• Re-introducing grants for the poorest students (full grants to cover tuition fees for families making up to $22,615 per year, sliding grants for families making up to $35,000, minimum grant $500).

• Increasing the weekly loans limits for middle-income students and reducing the family threshold to obtain student loans.

• Passing a new provincial Act to ensure "the commitment that every qualified student in Ontario should find a place in college or university regardless of means should be enshrined in new legislation."

• Paying special attention, forming special councils and putting new resources for Francophone students, aboriginal students, students with disabilities and "first generation" students (students that are the first in their families to attend post-secondary education).

• Encouraging collaboration among post-secondary institutions for course credit and other functions.

• Creating a Higher Education Council to monitor and suggest directions for the sector.

• Urging the federal government to increase its contribution to post-secondary education and to play a more active role in education and training.

 

The report has some bad news for what it says but also for what it leaves unsaid.

The report proposes:

• That tuition fees be allowed to increase after the current freeze is lifted in 2006. It presumes an increase of 20 per cent.

• Tuition fee increases will be set by the colleges and universities, not capped in regulations enacted by the provincial government.

• "Differentiation" among institutions’ goals and mandates (differentiation and setting their own tuition fees could lead to creation of elitist post-secondary institutions).

• Creating a new loan system for parents of students who cannot pay for their education (it is not enough that students finish their education with large debts; the report suggest the parents also should be indebted).

• The Higher Education Council will be formed only by experts appointed by the government, it will not have participation from stakeholders.

• On the Research Council to guide research priorities and commercialization, representatives of the "donors" will be members and experts in the field (which raises serious concerns about the independence of the research agenda when donors have a special place at the table).

The report leaves unsaid:

• The fundamental role that support staff plays in the post-secondary education system.

Support staff is not mentioned at all in the report. The report talks about the general need to improve student services but does not propose funding allocation for hiring, training, compensation and working conditions of support staff.

The voice of the support staff is not mentioned in any of the areas in which the report calls for consultations. Of special concern is the multi-year planning for "revenue requirements" in each institution (the report says students, government and the community are to be consulted).

• There is no discussion of what will happen if Ottawa does not provide extra resources as recommended.

• How much an expanded enrollment of international students will be expected to pay. We oppose the current model in which international students are "cash-cows" for the institutions. We are also concerned about the effect expanded international student enrollment will have on places for Ontario students.