Council of the Federation

Here is the news that I have found regarding the recent meeting of the Council of the Federation and post-secondary education:

• Competing for Tomorrow: A Strategy for Postsecondary Education and Skills Training in Canada (PDF) - Council of the Federation document

• Premiers Must Engage the Federal Government to Restore Funding to Post-Secondary Education - CFS press release
  
• Premiers' Post-Secondary Education Strategy is Lacking - CFS press release
  
• Lack of Progress Stalls Commitments on Education - CASA press release
• Comprehensive strategy needed for post-secondary education - CAUT press release (prior to the meeting of the Council)
  
• Students concerned national vision and funding for higher education will be bogged down by fiscal imbalance finger pointing - OUSA press release (prior to the meeting of the Council)

Blogroll Added

I just did what I ought to have done months ago - added a blogroll! Thus far, it's kind of small. So if you're a student politician, a student journalist, or are otherwise in any way interested in student unions, post-secondary education, student journalism, etc., and you maintain a blog that touches - if only sometimes - on such subjects, then please email me and I'll you!

Also, in an unrelated matter: I blogged earlier on a press release from Lakehead University and Lakehead University Student Union (LUSU) concerning tuition fee increases at that university. LUSU has since issued a press release with the title "Lakehead University Student Union Stands in Solidarity with the Canadian Federation of Students." Seeking to "clarify" its earlier joint press release, LUSU reaffirmed its "alliance" with the Federation and noted that while they continued to believe that "Lakehead University is doing the best job it can under this difficult provincial regulation," LUSU nonetheless supported the Federation's goals of "lowered tuition fees." This press release also questioned the use of the term "market value" to characterize tuition fees, even though this term was used in their original joint press release.

Canada's student financial aid system in 'crisis' by 2010: think tank

The Canadian branch of the Educational Policy Institute (EPI) has released a new report, entitled "Student Aid Time Bomb: The Coming Crisis in Canada’s Financial Aid System" (PDF document). The report claims that by 2010, Canada's student financial aid system may be underfunded by as much as $800 million. The report suggests that there are four pressures being placed on the system:

1. By increasingly devoting funds towards the subsidization of advanced education without targetting those funds to low-income students, governments (both federal and provincial) are left without money to put towards means-tested financial aid. This sort of subsidization includes direct government subsidization of the costs of education; tuition tax credits; and the subsidization of individual savings (i.e. the Canada Education Savings Grant).
   
2. The Canada Student Loans Program (CSLP) is increasing its costs dramatically due to increasing student demand and increasing interest rates, but there does not appear to be much political will to increase funding for the program.
3. The Canadian Millenium Scholarship Foundation (CMSF) is due to 'expire' in 2009, and political pressures may mean that this foundation might not be renewed.
4. The Conservative government, due to its 'open federalism' (re: means of gaining the support of the Bloc Quebecois), may be transferring responsability for student financial aid to the provinces. The report does not disparage this idea in principle, but warns that such an upheaval would be a "distraction" from the real issue: the need to increase student financial aid funding.

Sifted into the report one will find jabs directed (primarily) against the Canadian Federation of Students. In the report's commentary on the "distraction" that would be caused by transferring responsibility for student financial aid to the provinces, it is suggested that much of the opposition to such a move on the part of national post-secondary student organizations would be pure self-preservation: "[CFS and CASA] would be left with precious little to do if student aid policy were decisively dispersed to the ten provincial capitals" (p. 28). More bluntly, the report complains that provincial intiatives to freeze or regulation tuition fees came due to their decision to heed "the ill-conceived and transparently self-interested advice of student groups" (p. 12).

The CFS responded with a press release declaring that the report was "misleading," that it "distort[ed] the legitimate pressures placed on Canada's student financial aid system to justify tuition fee increases," and that was intended to influence the upcoming meeting of the Council of the Federation. "This isn’t research. This is a public relations campaign against affordable public education," said Amanda Aziz, National Chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students. CASA had no response (on its website, at least).

All this in spite of the fact that the CFS and the EPI report actually agree on a number of issues. First, "Student Aid Time Bomb" (p. 12) and the CFS both question the merits of the Canada Education Savings Grant. Second, "Student Aid Time Bomb" (p. 17-18 et al.) and the CFS both agree that tuition tax credits are a poor way of expanding access to post-secondary education. Third, the primary argument of "Student Aid Time Bomb" - that Canada's student financial aid system needs more money in order to assist low-income students effectively - is one that the Federation would likely readily agree to.

That said, there are clear ideological differences at play here. "Student Aid Time Bomb" describes the trend towards tuition fee regulation, tuition tax credits, and other non-means-tested subsidizations of students' education as "Sleepwalking Towards Universality" - "universality" being held in a rather dim light.

But ideological differences are not the only reasons for this quarrel. One of the author's of the EPI report is Alex Usher, Vice-President of EPI and the original National Director of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA). He has also written for EPI "Much Ado About a Very Small Idea" (PDF), concerning Income-Continent Loan Repayment schemes. This report was throughly savaged by then-CFS National Director of Research (and current CAUT employee) Michael Conlon in his report, "Income Contingent Loans: Inequity and Injustice on the Installment Plan" (PDF). Conlon devoted an entire three-paragraph footnote (p. 12, footnote 10) detailing Usher's involvement in CASA and suggesting that Usher and CASA were formed as pawns of the Canadian Liberal government. In particular, Conlon claims that Lloyd Axworthy (then Human Resources and Social Development minister) sought to undermine the CFS by establishing "an unrepresentative minority voice opposing the Canadian Federation of Students' call for lower tuition fees and a national system of grants." Axworthy currently sits on the Board of Directors of the Educational Policy Institute.

Personally, I agree with the proposal of Spencer Keys (PDF) that governments should agree to set student tuition fees as a set percentage of the total cost of a student's post-secondary education, and then allowing fees to rise (or fall) provided that government funding also rises (or falls) proportionately. I also believe that it is important for our various lobbyists to present a united front on those issues where there is a strong policy consensus: that the Canada Educational Savings Grant should probably be scrapped (or at least seriously reformed), that tuition tax credits are a bad idea, and that there is a very substantial need to overhaul and renew the financial aid system.
..........
UPDATE (2006-07-25): The Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA) has issued a press release in response to "Student Aid Time Bomb", essentially agreeing with the Federation's press release but using softer language and placing a greater emphasis on the need for more direct institutional funding.

Update on Evan Cole Resignation

Joey Coleman has obtained the following resignation letter from Evan Cole, ex-President of the University of Saskatchewan Students' Union:

 

Students for a Democratic Society Reborn

Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the left-wing American student activist organization made famous in the 1960s, has been revived. In an interview on an anarchist website, SDS organizer Patrick Korte explains that the new Students for a Democratic Society is meant to be a student-centered organization that is nonetheless open to non-students:

"Over the years, many students have been shafted in the American Left, and we believe it is necessary for students to lead their own organization and to determine the direction of their own movement without isolating themselves from the non-student Left.... The reason we chose to keep the name SDS is because it accurately describes us (we are students for a democratic society), the ideas expressed in the Port Huron Statement, the focus on participatory democracy, and the militancy and radicalism that defined the original SDS are much needed in the 21st century."

As the SDS Wikipedia article indicates, Students for a Democratic Society played a preeminent role in fostering student activism in the 1960s. Areas of concern included civil rights, the Vietnam War, free speech on university campuses, and democratizing academia. However, this organizing work largely took place outside the American student unions. Indeed, SDS didn't think much of them. The Port Huron Statement, the founding document of SDS, described student unions thusly:

"But apathy [among American university students] is not simply an attitude; it is a product of social institutions, and of the structure and organization of higher education itself. The extracurricular life is ordered according to in loco parentis theory, which ratifies the Administration as the moral guardian of the young. The accompanying "let's pretend" theory of student extracurricular affairs validates student government as a training center for those who want to spend their lives in political pretense, and discourages initiative from more articulate, honest, and sensitive students. The bounds and style of controversy are delimited before controversy begins. The university "prepares" the student for "citizenship" through perpetual rehearsals and, usually, through emasculation of what creative spirit there is in the individual." [emphasis added]

SDS had good reason for such a dim view of American student unions - to this day, many of them have little autonomy from their administrations. Consider for example, the University of Florida Student Government. Their Constitution (Article III, Section 8 (c) and (d) to be precise) specifies that any bill passed by the Student Senate may be vetoed by the Student Body President or by the President of the University! Talk about student power....

Canadian student unions may be more autonomous of their institutions, but they are nonetheless quite distinct from groups such as Students for a Democratic Society. A student union's membership consists of all students, regardless of political affiliation, whereas student activist groups such as SDS are controlled solely by those who agree with 'the cause.' A student union executive that sees itself as a kind of vanguard will eventually find itself replaced - witness the victory of "Evolution, Not Revolution" in the 2003 Concordia Students' Union elections following a year of radicalism.

(Hat tip: Caelie Frampton)

Evan Cole Resigns from USSU Under Pressure

Joey Coleman reports that Evan Cole, recently elected President of the University of Saskatchewan Students' Union, has resigned, following a narrow decision of USSU Council to call for his impeachment from office.

I blogged on the controversies surrounding the USSU referendum on joining the Canadian Federation of Students in May 2006. Evan Cole, then a Vice-President of the USSU, had campaigned against joining the Federation at the time.

CFS and CFS-Services Bylaws, Policies, and Annual Reports, 1981-Present, Now Posted

In accordance with federal law, non-profit corporations under the Canada Corporations Act are required to file all amendments to their Bylaws with Corporations Canada. In addition, they are required to file an Annual Report every year, detailing the membership of their Board of Directors. These documents may then be retrieved by interested citizens for a modest fee. And so, this interested citizen has retrieved all the documents of the Canadian Federation of Students and of the Canadian Federation of Students-Services from Corporations Canada. They are now available online here. A link to this page has also been established on my main CFS information page.

Unfortunately, I was not able to compile a full list of Federation executives, for two reasons: first, the Federation didn't bother to submit that many Annual Reports (especially for CFS-Services); and second, many of the old Annual Reports that were submitted frequently did not list the names of the representatives from the provinces (as they were required to do). (Since 2004, however, both CFS and CFS-Services have been completely compliant with respect to both Annual Reports and [to my knowledge] Bylaws and Standing Resolution amendments, thanks to the diligence of Internal Coordinator Lucy Watson.)

The historical bylaws, policies, and reports of the Federation are extremely fascinating. We find, for example, that the original bylaws of the Federation conceived of an organization that would not operate in Quebec. Instead, the "organized post-secondary students in Quebec" would elect a non-voting observer to the Central Committee of the Federation (later called the National Executive). It was only in 1987 that the Federation voted to establish a voting provincial representative on the National Executive from Quebec.

We also find that the bylaws of CFS-Services were once quite distinct from those of the CFS. The original bylaws of CFS-Services stipulated that the Board of Directors of CFS-Services would consist of nine provincial representatives (again, excluding Quebec), one representative of the Federation, and the Executive Director of CFS-Services as an ex-officio, non-voting member. This Executive Director was one David Jones, who appears to have served from 1982 until sometime in the mid-nineties. (Anyone know what happened to him?)

The names listed in these documents are also interesting. We find that one Diane Flaherty was an early Executive Officer of the Federation (an office since disestablished) - and, indeed, Ubyssey archives show her as such (here, here, and here). The National Chairperson of 1993 - Kelly Lamrock - is presently a Liberal MLA in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick!

Having a look at these bylaws has also raised some interesting questions in my mind:

• Have a good look at CFS Bylaw 1, section 2.a-vi. Remember that the Bylaws of the CFS and of CFS-Services are identical - as such, member local associations owe a $3.75/student fee to both the CFS and to CFS-Services! Technically speaking, doesn't this mean that all member associations have been delinquent in paying their fees to CFS-Services for many, many years now? And technically speaking, doesn't this mean, as per Bylaw 1, section 3.b-i, that no student associations are allowed to cast a vote at meetings of CFS-Services? Thus - unless the National Executive of CFS-Services have granted an exemption "on a case-by-case basis" to all member local student associations for the past several years - it would appear that all votes done at Federation meetings that purported to affect CFS-Services are, technically speaking, null and void.
  
  
• Take another look at CFS Bylaw 1, section 2.a-vi and 2.a-vii. Now check out this definition of "notwithstanding" in Duhaime's Canadian Law Dictionary. (This is also the only definition that makes sense when interpreting s. 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.) Technically speaking, does this not mean that the fee continues to be $3.00 per student? (Incidentally, this sort of mixup is not limited to the Federation; the Bylaws of the Kwantlen Student Association, specifically Article 3, clause 4 (v), technically require the organization to break its own bylaws as well as provincial law in order to consider special resolutions, due to a confusion between the meaning of the words "proscribe" and "prescribe.")
  

Anyways, have fun looking at these bylaws, discovering when certain bylaw provisions were added or deleted, and finding out what CFS alumni are up to these days! I, for one, will be in Sechelt, BC, on vacation until July 16, 2006. As Internet access will be very limited, this weblog will not be updated until then.

[Disclaimers: [1] I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice; use at your own risk. [2] The absence of certain documents on my website (such as certain Annual Reports) may not necessarily be due to a lack of compliance on the part of the Federation; it may also be a clerical error on the part of Corporations Canada, or (hopefully not!) of myself.]

Student Representation at Conestoga College

Conestoga Students Inc. (CSI), the student association that represents students at Conestoga College, has a very interesting governance structure, to say the least. In accordance with their bylaws, the Board of Directors of the organization consists of 13 members, of which only seven are directly elected by the members themselves! The remaining six members are: the President and the Vice-President (who are appointed by the preceding Board), the General Manager of the association, the Past-President, and representatives of the Alumni Association and of the College administration (the "College Liaison").

Furthermore, this association has adopted the 'Policy Governance' system of governance (also known as the Carver System). It's policies consist of 'Governance Process', 'Board-Staff Relationship', 'Executive Limitations', and 'Ends' policies. And, as is all too frequently the case with Carver System organisations, CSI has tried to sneak in 'Means Policies' into its Executive Limitations through double-negatives. For example:

"The CEO shall not fail to improve client service. Therefore, the GM shall not be without a focus group on services and activities. The majority of the committee members will be students-at-large as they are the actual clients of the corporation."

Voluntary Student Unionism Begins in Australia

A federal law that bans universal membership in student unions - the "Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill 2005" - is now (as of July 1) in force throughout Australia. As the law's Explanatory Memorandum explains, this law goes far beyond merely banning universal student unionism:

"The Bill will make student unionism a voluntary activity in higher education institutions.

"The Bill will amend the Higher Education Support Act 2003, to prohibit all higher education providers (public and private) from:

· requiring a person to become a member of a student association (union or guild)

· requiring a student to pay fees for non-academic student services"

Thus, ancillary fees charged for institution-provided services such as health services, support for student clubs, or athletics, are banned. Further motivation can be found in this press release issued by the Minister for Education, Science, and Training.

The organisation primarily responsible for the passage of this Act is the Australian Liberal Students' Federation (ALSF). Students aligned with the ALSF has happily participated in NUS (National Union of Students of Australia) meetings even while hoping for its demise. According to the ALSF's Wikipedia article, "No other faction carries the notoriety attached to the ALSF at NUS National Conference. ALSF does not recognise the Aboriginal welcome preceding the NUS conference, thus have sung 'God Save the Queen' throughout the welcome for the past three years." This can be confirmed by reading the online Minutes of NUS National Conference 2004, which record the Chair "call[ing] the Liberals to order" and ruling "that the Liberal caucus not sing on conference floor" during the Indigenous Welcome to Country. (The remainder of the Minutes are similarly full of hillarity; indeed, they are one of the most amusing set of minutes I have ever read!)

Other organisations were not as impressed. The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), representing faculty, as come out strongly against Voluntary Student Unionism, producing a host of documentation supporting their stance. So has the Australian Vice-Chancellor's Committee (AVCC), representing university administrations. Even the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) expressed concern at the estimated AUS$100 million loss to collegiate athletics. On the political side, the Australian Democrats expressed their opposition to such legislation. The opposition Labor Party tried (unsuccessfully) to split the bill into two portions - one banning universal membership in students' unions, and another banning compulsory fees for non-academic services, expressing their support for student services but opposing universal student union membership.

News on this issue:

• 'Voluntary student unionism' law takes effect (Green Left weekly)
• Grim future predicted for student association (ABC North Queensland)
• Union services scaled back as VSU takes effect (The World Today, ABC)
• Anti-union law costs jobs, help on campus (Sydney Morning Herald)
• Union a closed shop as funds dry up (The Australian)

Could it happen in Canada?

If so, the initiator of similar legislation might be Harry Bloy, BC MLA for Burquitlam. In a Private Member's Statement, Mr. Bloy lamented that BC students "have to pay third-party fees to such organizations as the Canadian Federation of Students, CFS for short, and the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations." Expressing concern about students' welfare, Mr. Bloy suggested that "some students might feel better if their money were spent elsewhere." The valiant, eloquent response from the opposition NDP? "I'm afraid I just find it really difficult to find any passion to respond to what has been said."