The U of T is seeking the right to increase undergraduate tuition more than presently allowed, but does not support Queen’s University’s request to change the law so that universities can charge whatever they like for undergraduate education.
The administration had previously said they supported more “flexibility” in tuition, which was interpreted by some as signs that U of T would also seek to deregulate.
“This is getting too confused,” said Sheldon Levy, Vice President of Government and Institutional Relations at U of T, when asked why he supports deregulation. Levy says he doesn’t want deregulation, just higher tuition to deal with inflation.
He pointed out that for the past two years, and in the next three years, the government has said tuition increases should be limited so that the compound—roughly the total—is not more than a ten per cent increase.
“All I’m saying is that the Governing Council should set that fee, and that fee, in my estimation, should reflect the cost of living or the general cost of what the universities costs go up by each year, which is closer to 4 to 5 per cent.”
Levy thinks the regulated amount should reflect inflation, and that money should come from students and government.
“If the fees become too large for any student, the university has a financial aid structure that can support that student, whether they’re coming to the university for the first time, or in their second, third year, or in graduate school.”
As to the government, Levy asserted, “The government has provided us (on inflation) zero, not a nickel.” In short, the block grant for education only increases with more students—but not to account for inflation.
“It’s not that the government isn’t giving us more money, but they’re giving us more money to take more students. Are they giving us any money to handle the increase cost of existing students? Zero!
“There is an expectation of a level of education and a quality of education those students have when they come to the University of Toronto. We have a responsibility for delivering on that expectation.”
Levy believes the administration should demand support from the government in order to accomplish this, noting that the public has put far more attention on health care than on post-secondary education, causing a lack of funding for education.
“Government simply has to stand up and take their responsibility in funding at the minimum inflation, and students should take the responsibility in funding inflation.”
Tanya Chorlakov, the Senior Media Relations co-ordinator at the Ministry of Education, says the government is providing adequate funding.
“Obviously the government is committed to ensuring that all of the qualified and willing Ontarians have access to a formal post-secondary education.” She noted that the Ministry projects $293 million by 2003-2004.
When asked to respond to Levy’s assertion that no money was going to support existing students, Chorlakov said, “I’m not going to get into a cat and mouse game.
“My position as the Ministry spokesperson is only to speak on behalf of technical things, and Dave’s position is to speak on behalf of political things.”
Eventually, she said, “The universities are funded based on students, not just new students. All students that meet the eligibility criteria are funded.”
