The discussion paper issued by former Ontario premier Bob Rae is a first step toward hiking tuition fees in this province, said NDP Education critic and Toronto MPP Rosario Marchese on Friday. Although the final report will not be issued until January 2005, the paper is a preview to Rae’s research, Marchese said, and all the signs point to fee increases.
He said this was the plan all along, noting that Premier McGuinty’s two-year freeze on tuition fees will soon expire, allowing the increase. He also said that during a press conference the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, Mary-Anne Chambers, “hinted at [the tuition increase] by saying that we have to look at good loans systems in case fees go up.”
The section regarding postsecondary funding for students was strategically crafted: while its mandate emphasised finding a solution to postsecondary funding that was both fair to the government, institutions and students, the discussion paper also emphasised the fact that those with a University degree get higher paying jobs, versus those without one. It noted that compared to the United States, Canada’s tuition is low; it went on to say that the rate of OSAP loan default after students graduate has decreased; and finally it stressed that Ontario institutions have been required to put aside 30% of their revenue for student aid. “This creates a significant capacity to help students in need of financial assistance,” the report concludes.
Marchese said that the next logical step is not to leave tuition fees at their current levels or reduce them, but instead plan for an increase.
Although Marchese agrees “we expect young people who have benefited from University education to pay their fees [which] the [discussion] paper hinted at,” he does not agree with the notion-that he says some wealthy individuals have-that “tuition fees are not so bad because they are higher in the US
“Burdening students with high tuition has high social and economic effects. Some students will simply not go to University because tuition is a deterrent. Students who would otherwise want to become doctors or lawyers are discouraged. It means only families who already have a mother or father already as a doctor or lawyer [will have children] who are in these professions.”
Marchese cites a study conducted at Western University which found that students who come from households with incomes under $60,000 were 35% less likely to enrol in postsecondary institutions.
“A young person will come out of university with a 25 thousand dollar debt,” said Marchese. “That means that paying off their loans would take 7 to 12 years, [and as a result] they will put off having families, children, or getting married. These are negative implications for society.”
The high tuition crisis is linked to many other problems, Marchese said. He added that funding is especially important for marginalized groups like low income families, individuals with disabilities, and aboriginals (only half of Northern Ontario aboriginal students attend some sort of postsecondary education). But the answer, Marchese said, will not be solved by simply giving them money. He said there needs to be a comprehensive review done, which he suspects will reveal that low enrolment is linked to many other social issues, such as geographic distance and housing.
Ultimately Marchese says making students pay more and the government pay less is not the answer. “Tuition fees went up $1,500 in the last 10 years, [while] government support went down 27% for operational funding for universities. Government has to commit itself to raising money through a progressive income tax system. If we don’t, the poor students will get whacked.”
When the report comes out in January, Marchese said, “I suspect the report will be positive, but tuition fees will become a big issue.” He said he’s prepared to “wage war against raising tuition fees.”
