The Quebec government’s announcement regarding changes in the structure of tuition fees, increased for students from outside Quebec and foreign students, as well as in their distribution, has sparked considerable debate. In my opinion, the debate reflects the deep inconsistencies that characterize the initiative and its demagogic roots.
A key aspect of the new government initiative concerns how increased tuition fees are managed. The new law proposes to return to a framework that existed before 2018, where the increased tuition fees were not retained by each receiving university, but rather went into a common fund which could then be distributed among the universities. I think that increased tuition fees for students from outside Quebec represent an important resource for our university system, but this resource should be distributed equitably between establishments, which is not currently the case.
I therefore agree with this part of the government initiative.
What vision?
What is important to understand is that the change in the method of distributing tuition fees did not necessarily have to be associated with a change in the fee structure and could have been implemented based on current costs. However, with this change, the government has also decided to double the rights of students from outside Quebec. This is where things get more complicated, as the rationale and magnitude of this increase is not at all clear.
On the one hand, the Minister of Higher Education, Pascale Déry, declared that it was essentially a financial decision, because the fees currently charged to students from outside Quebec do not cover the real costs, and, by As a result, the province is subsidizing the education of these students to the detriment of our university system and local students. Presumably the decision included a balance analysis between the fee increase and the potential decrease in enrollment, and it was concluded that the proposed increase would still result in a net gain to the system.
In this sense, Mme Déry publicly declared that he was hopeful that students from outside would continue to choose Quebec in large numbers. The entire Quebec university system would benefit from this scenario, even if it means that some establishments will have to make adjustments, but this remains entirely speculative.
On the other hand, François Legault publicly justified the sharp increase in these tuition fees by declaring that foreign and Canadian students, in particular those coming from other provinces, represent a threat to the French language in Quebec and are partly responsible of its decline, and that reducing the number of these students by increasing tuition fees represents a valid strategy for protecting the French language.
This implies that the decision to double these fees was based on the objective of dissuading these students from coming to Quebec rather than on the intention of improving the financial situation of Quebec universities.
We presume that Mr. Legault would not have made these statements if the government had not had projections according to which student registrations from outside Quebec would decrease drastically due to the proposed increase in tuition fees. . This scenario would therefore be associated with a significant drop in tuition income, among several other negative consequences which have already been highlighted, likely to harm not only English-speaking universities, which welcome more of these students, but the entire Quebec university system. .
It is difficult to see how these two strategies and visions can be mutually compatible. And who should we believe, Mme Déry or Mr. Legault?
What objective?
Regardless, it is time for the government to clarify its position. If he wishes to manage the increase in tuition fees in order to maximize the resources available to Quebec universities and improve their distribution, he will have to clearly explain how this objective will be achieved and what the potential gains will be.
At the same time, the government must assure the community that such an initiative does not replace its responsibility to address the chronic underfunding from which the Quebec university system suffers compared to that of the rest of Canada, underfunding which is structural, and which will not be resolved with the illusion of increased rights; we should not let ourselves be distracted by this fact.
Furthermore, if the government does not want the province to subsidize part of the educational costs of students from outside Quebec and foreign students, it should explain why we continue to subsidize the education of thousands of French and Belgian students. , who have little or no connection with our country or our culture and who pay the same tuition fees as residents of Quebec. Most of these students leave without leaving much behind, and they disproportionately populate French-speaking universities, which the government says are already at a disadvantage in terms of resources. But this fact does not seem to concern either Mr. Legault or M.me Déry. Is the situation justified because they help us so much to improve our accent?
And finally, if the ultimate goal is to significantly reduce the number of students from other provinces and foreigners (except perhaps those who are French-speaking) who come to Quebec, regardless of the negative consequences not only for English-speaking universities , but for the entire Quebec university system, the government must assume the consequences of its rhetoric which clearly aims to satisfy its partisan needs and attract potential voters.
There have been public comments claiming that malicious lobby groups and the usual Anglophile suspects have distorted this new government initiative by generating a false dichotomy and conflict between French and English speakers.
In reality, the ambivalence, confusion and opposition have been generated by the Quebec government itself, with an initiative which certainly includes certain sensible and positive elements, but combined with blatant inconsistencies, all marked by a strong smell of demagoguery. Our university system deserves and needs more than to be manipulated in this way for the benefit of partisan and myopic interests.