Click here to visit the mobile version of winnipegfreepress.com

Winnipeg Free Press > Opinion > The View from the West > Ignatieff proves impossible to pin down

The View from the West

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Ignatieff proves impossible to pin down

By: Carson Jerema

18/01/2010 1:00 AM | Comments: 6

MICHAEL Ignatieff likes to bill himself as a man of ideas. Unfortunately, at his talk at the University of Manitoba Thursday morning, he demonstrated that he forgets those ideas when asked about them. In particular, Ignatieff's position on the role of the federal government in higher education is a moving target, impossible to pin down.

In 2006, when Ignatieff was campaigning (unsuccessfully) for the Liberal leadership, he distributed a direct mail pamphlet to party members, titled Agenda for Nation Building. The document outlined Ignatieff's major policy proposals, including a radical rethinking of post-secondary education and federalism.

He wrote of federal post-secondary transfers, that Ottawa should "calculate some portion of the education transfer on a per-student basis to reward those provinces' institutions that attract the best and brightest from across the country and around the world."

The radicalism of this idea appears to have escaped the then-Liberal leadership hopeful, as he only devoted half a sentence to it.

Presently, transfers to the provinces for education are calculated according to population, rather then the number post-secondary students a province actually educates.

This means provinces like Nova Scotia, which take in a disproportionate number of out-of-province students, ultimately end up with less federal money per student than a province like Manitoba.

Understandably, the present funding formula creates tensions between provinces, but to distribute funding on a per-student basis in order to reward "provinces' institutions" should immediately raise the question: Why not give the money directly to universities, rather than to the provinces? After all, most provinces, other than Manitoba, distribute funds to institutions on a per-student basis. Why not just cut out the middleman?

Although such a reshaping of federal-provincial relations pertaining to post-secondary education would be radical, it wouldn't be new. During the 1950s, Ottawa transferred money directly to universities. It was tolerated largely because provincial education systems were only beginning to develop. Still, it was not exactly uncontroversial. Quebec protested, and the provincial government prevented institutions from accepting federal grants. By the 1960s it was all over, and federal money was folded into a direct, mostly unconditional, transfer to the provinces.

Funding for education now comes as part of the Canada Social Transfer, which also includes funding for social assistance and other social programs.

In any event, when Ignatieff spoke at Dalhousie University on Monday, Metro News in Halifax reported that he restated his desire to implement a per-student formula into federal transfers, although he quickly reneged. "When I think about it, I still like the idea of creating this market so we reward success. I just don't want to punish failure so that we have a lot of other institutions drying up," he said.

At the University of Manitoba Thursday, Ignatieff backed away even further from his initial proposal. When asked by a reporter after the talk to clarify his federal per-student formula, and how it would be implemented with the provinces, he immediately shot the idea down, saying, "You're taking me further than I think the Liberal party is prepared to go... we respect provincial jurisdictions."

Ignatieff noted that it would be a "big change."

No kidding.

What Ignatieff did advocate was a "dedicated transfer" for education intended to ensure money transferred to the provinces would actually be spent on education, rather than fall into "general revenue." It is an idea he also discussed in his Agenda for Nation Building pamphlet. Presumably ensuring education transfers are spent on education would require the legislating of a post-secondary education act, similar to the Canada Health Act.

A PSEA that sets out a national standards and requirements for financial reporting would no doubt alter federal-provincial relations in the area of higher education, but it would not fundamentally change provincial responsibilities. It would be a more collaborative effort between the two levels of government, rather than an usurpation of educational responsibility by Ottawa, as Ignatieff's earlier proposal would do.

The idea of a PSEA is also quite mainstream. The New Democratic Party has been calling for this sort of legislation for years. Even the Tory government promised to impose educational conditions on provinces in their 2007 budget, but they have, so far, failed to follow up.

No doubt Ignatieff is a deep-thinking man, but his changing position on higher education should raise questions as to whether his policy positions are dictated by what is easy, rather than by what he thinks would be best for the country.

Carson Jerema has an MA in politics and is a former editor of The Manitoban.

carsonjerema@gmail.com

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition January 18, 2010 A10

  • Rate this Rate This Star Icon
  • This article is currently rated an average of 5 out of 5 (1 votes).

    • We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

    You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

    Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

6 Commentscomment icon

re: hollinm

What's the basis for your criticism? Do you have any idea how much more it costs an international student than a Canadian resident to go to university?

We should all ask ourselves why do Canadian universities exist. Do they exist to educate Canadian students/citizens or are we simply educators for the world community such as China? Look at any university campus and you will see that the majority of students are not Canadians but students who are being sent to Canada to be educated by their parents who live in other countries. Having so many foreign students increases the cost of education. Our universities should be used for educating our own population. In this way we can reduce the costs of supporting our vast university campuses and focus on educating our own kids.

@Western expat: Good points and good solution. If we want Canadian Universities to improve the quality of education then there is nothing like competition. If the transfers are handed to the provinces as a per capita amount they get lost in general revenue, if they are handed directly to the Universities the thorny question of program spending and filtering down to the student body become almost impossible to predict. The only solution is that a grant going directly to the individual student that is exactly the same from coast to coast to coast for each Canadian citizen that applies seems to me the only fair way of going about it. Then each university would be forced to provide an ever increasing quality of education or lose students to the educational facilities that are more proactive. Housing costs aside, each university would be forced to develop, maintain and expand services and programs lest they not attract a significant amount of tuition spending by potential students. This would however require a quantum shift in thinking at every university in Canada and I don't believe they are up to the challenge and some would face near bankruptcy as they would not be able to react quickly enough. Canadian universities would need to shape up or shut down. It's sounds harsh but why should Canadians accept mediocrity at the highest levels of academia.

"questions as to whether his policy positions are dictated by what is easy, rather than by what he thinks would be best for the country."Well stated, Mr.Jerema.After the "Thinker's Conference" in March, Mr. Ignatieff will be able to answer your questions more fully.

Carson Jerema's critique of Mr Ignatieff's vague proposals on funding of post-secondary education is quite sound but does not really offer a practical solution.
The provinces for several decades now have used transfers for post-secondary education for other purposes. Ottawa responded by directing all additional funding for post-secondary education into research funding, that is, funding that went directly to professors.
What Ottawa needs to do is set up a national program that directs funding directly to post-secondary students - that is, University and college vouchers that allow students to enroll in any Canadian university or college and use their vouchers to pay for Ottawa's contribution to their education.
This approach has the benefit that students will be free to attend the Canadian university or college of their choice and universities and colleges will have to compete quite vigorously for the students or they will loose much needed federal revenue.
The federal government, under Canada's federal constitution, can't make direct grants to universities or colleges. Ottawa can make direct grants to individual Canadians who can then use these grants to help Ottawa pay for post-secondary education Canada wide.

You're faulting Ignatieff for being honest about that question? He was asked point blank about his idea and he flat out said that it was going too far for the party. Reading between the lines reveals that Ignatieff is far more pro-education than his public persona admits. This is a very good thing for a country that needs to be more skilled and better educated if it wants to be competitive in the world.

The comment period for this story has ended.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

Special coverage

Our Communities

Poll

Should the province spend $3.1 million to keep Greyhound inter-city bus service in Manitoba?

View Results

View Related Story