This morning Ben Johnson, Dylan Sherlock, James Coccola and myself from Uvic, and Matteus Clement from Camosun met with Provincial Cabinet Minister Ida Chong and Assistant Deputy Minister Victoria Thibault to discuss issues affecting students across the province. Even with a full hour of discussions, we still didn't have time to talk about everything we wanted to, but we were able to hit on some key issues.
The first issue discussed was that of interest rates on student loans. Clement made the case that the interest rates had an inhibiting effect on students choosing to enter post-secondary education, and Sherlock followed that up with the argument that saddling students with paying all this interest was bad for the economy as it left graduates unable to effectively participate in important economic activities due to the inability to get more credit once they graduate. Thibault responded that reducing interest rates has been looked at, but not acted upon because government didn't have the money to cover that cost. I take a bit of an issue with this statement as while it may be true that the ministry might not have the money in their budget to do this, the government as a whole seems to have plenty of money to spend on frivolous things such as a new roof for BC Place, a new conference centre, and the Olympics.
The second issue talked about was the issue of grants and non-repayable loans. Chong pointed to the current programs as a strength of our student aid system, but Sherlock pointed out that BC has the lowest rates of grants and non-repayable loans in the country. Much of this discussion hinged on whether grants should be up front or on the back end. Chong said the reasoning for the current back end grants program is to ensure that students complete their programs so that the government doesn't waste their money. Clement made the point that back end grants don't get students in the door, because they still have to put up the money up front to start school. Sherlock followed this up by saying that back end grants were income contingent because a student would still have to have a certain amount of money to start school and may not be able to wait until they are done their courses to get that money back.
Coccola then turned the conversation to university funding and asked about changes to the way universities to be funded to keep up with inflation, especially for schools that have maxed out their enrolments to try to keep up. Chong expressed concern about increasing funding for schools that have maxed out their enrolments as she didn't want to take money away from regional schools that had lower enrolments to fund the bigger schools. For me, this sent up a big alarm bell in that the way she framed her concern was that there would be no room for an overall rise in funding for education, just a shift of funding from one department to another, in fact this was the tone of the entire conversation of the day.
Coccola also asked about the government's throne speech commitment to remove universities from Government Reporting Entity status. Chong said that this was understandably running behind due to the uncertainties going forward with the leadership in flux. She also said that it was a complex issue that might have unintended consequences such as damaging the province's credit rating. Sherlock asked if an opt out option for some schools that took issue with the status might be in the offing, and Chong said that was a solution that might be looked at.
Finally Johnson asked what the rationale was for the splitting of colleges and universities into two different ministries (though at the moment Chong oversees both ministries). Chong responded by saying it allowed each institution to focus on what they did best. For colleges that would means training people within their regions and partnering with local skills training organizations to help local economies. For universities this means a more research focused funding and partnerships with business research bodies. After, the meeting Johnson mused that this does sound good in the colleges case, but we all agreed that for the universities it could lead to an increasing role of private interests in our universities which is a place we don't want to go. Further to this issue, Coccola asked whether the split of ministries would effect the 2% cap on tuition fee hikes on either colleges or universities. Chong responded that this was not on the table at this time, and expressed willingness to talk about the cap and whether it could be raised at all, but she indicated that bringing that cap down to 0% was a no go zone.
In all, it was a very useful meeting in which we gathered a solid amount of information from Chong and Thibault. They both committed to continuing the conversation, and Thibault was willing to set up another meeting in the near future. I was left with the impression that they are willing to look at several different policies to help improve access to post-secondary education, but also that it did not look like their would be any more funding than current levels. I realize that Chong is not in a position to make more funds available, but she is in a position to lobby strongly for increased funding for post-secondary education and that is something we sincerely hope she takes up.
Rob McDonald
