|
Speaking Notes for
The Honourable Lucienne Robillard
President of the Queen's Privy Council and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Annual Meeting of the AUCC
Ottawa
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Madam President and CEO,
Ladies and
gentlemen,
I was pleased to
accept your invitation to meet with you at the annual meeting of the AUCC, an association
that plays such an important role in strengthening higher education in Canada.
I feel right at home, for a number of reasons. First of all, as Quebec's minister of
post-secondary education and science, I had the opportunity to talk with you at
a previous annual meeting, in 1992, in Vancouver, of which I have
many happy memories. And your President and CEO, Claire Morris, to whom I
extend warmest greetings, was Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, the
department I now lead. It has always been a pleasure for me to meet with
leaders of post-secondary institutions. I see some new faces, but also many
people who remind me of the wonderful years when I was involved with
post-secondary education on a daily basis and had very productive experiences
of cooperation.
In inviting me here today, you knew I would not be making any specific
announcements, as training and post-secondary education are files under the
purview of my colleague at Human Resources and Skills Development, the
Honourable Belinda Stronach. Nor do I have any new or specific messages with
regard to intergovernmental relations and post-secondary education. Instead, I
plan to share a number of convictions
about post-secondary education in Canada. I
also want to talk simply about some concerns,
or need for clarification, relating to those convictions. I will thus leave
you, as one does among friends and as is necessary when there is agreement on
the basics, with a number of questions
that I feel would be useful to explore so as to advance the Canadian consensus
with respect to post-secondary education.
I have three personal
convictions that I wish to share with you today. I say personal,
because they truly express what I think, in light of my experience and of the
values I firmly hold. But they are also the subject of a consensus taking shape
throughout the country. While some of them may seem self-evident, let there be
no mistake: agreeing on the basics is
never insignificant. Indeed, it ensures we are all onside on what is really important,
that we have the same take on realities and share converging goals. It is the only way to make progress on
avenues for action, as there is rarely unanimous agreement on the choice of
means.
In short, these three convictions are as follows: 1) post-secondary education has become a key
issue for the future of Canadians; 2) we absolutely need to devote more
resources to post-secondary education in Canada; 3) there are many stakeholders in
post-secondary education in Canada,
and they need to collaborate and work in concert with one another as real
partners. Now I would like to briefly explain each of those statements,
identify issues they raise and – because I want to leave you with some
homework! – ask you a number of questions.
1. Post-secondary education
is a key issue for the future of Canadians
In Canada and throughout the world, there is growing awareness that knowledge and
skills are now the key to prosperity and success. We talk about the
"knowledge economy," with the conviction that knowledge and those
that master or create it are now the number-one resource, the only resource
that can give us an advantageous position in a globalized and highly
competitive world. Current economic teaching rightly talks about "human
capital," from which the greatest economic and social dividends are
expected. It is people, after all, who control innovation, productivity and
growth. So people need to be the focus. And in today's context of demographic
change and an ageing population, that necessitates greater participation by
groups currently under-represented, and for capitalizing on the potential of
new immigrants.
This economic concern is to a great extent the basis of the Government
of Canada's interest in post-secondary education and skills development. But it
is obviously not the only reason. After all, widespread participation in
post-secondary education also yields substantial social benefits. We know, for
example, that there are direct links between education levels and such major
realities as poverty rates, dependence on government assistance, crime rates,
and better health; in short, everything that affects our quality of life. We
have an increasingly better understanding of the impact of education levels and
schooling on many aspects of the lives of individuals and communities. In terms
of generating and distributing wealth, there is really no better investment
than post-secondary education. For that reason, we must ensure that this
precious asset is accessible to all Canadians, throughout the country. This is
part and parcel of the meaning of a federation, and that is why the development
of post-secondary education is so important to the Government of Canada.
These economic and social perspectives, which we are committed to
building on, must obviously not make us lose sight of the very real cultural,
personal and collective impact of any successful education measures.
Personally, I have always felt that education in general, and post-secondary
education in particular, do not need to be embarrassed about what they are,
which is essentially an educational enterprise. After all, the ultimate goal of
education is the individual engaged in the learning process. It is that
person's development, access to skills, the capacity to live a full informed
life, active participation in democratic life, professional development and
contribution to society. And the joy of learning and understanding is important
as well! For all these reasons, the
primary purpose of the institutions you lead is the development and learning of
their students. John Newman was right:
without students, there is no university. I am strongly convinced of
that.
While there is broad consensus on the importance of post-secondary
education for Canadians' lives and future, the same cannot be said for the
arguments advanced to demonstrate and establish that fact. Socio-economic
arguments, which are largely advanced by governments and businesses, as well as
academic leaders, are obviously not universally supported on your campuses.
There are questions in the academic community as to whether espousing
prevailing arguments threaten to divert post-secondary education from its true
mission and engender "mercantile" conceptions of academic research
and teaching. Academic leaders are even reproached with "selling their
souls" – and too cheaply, at that!
You know all of that better than I, but I feel it is important to talk
about it, because efforts in the post-secondary education field are too
important and too demanding for us to be unclear about the goals we are
pursuing. All of us have to make sure we understand and share converging
visions, which are the key to mobilizing energies and resources. To that end,
would it not be useful for academic leaders, now more than ever, to forge
consensus on the goals, role and importance of post-secondary education? In
convincing more Canadians of the key role of post-secondary education and its
extensive impact on their own lives, primary stakeholders naturally have their
own views. It would be unfortunate if academics themselves neglected certain
aspects of a mission that no one is better placed to promote and explain than
they are. Such a commitment by primary stakeholders in your institutions may
well be required to bring academic communities onside, as well as a more
balanced understanding of the issues involved.
And so I leave you with this first
question, which is also an invitation. Do you think it appropriate to
contribute more to the emerging consensus on the importance of post-secondary
education by thoroughly demonstrating its importance, based on your own
understanding of your mission? I for one sincerely hope you will.
2. We need to devote more
resources to post-secondary education in Canada
We have a very solid post-secondary education system in Canada.
Canadian institutions enjoy an excellent reputation worldwide and in
international organizations. And that reputation is well deserved. According to
G-8 and OECD data, for example, we have the highest enrolment in post-secondary
educational institutions and the highest percentage of graduates. Canada is
also among the OECD countries that spend the most on education, both per-capita
and as a percentage of GDP. Canada
also leads the G-7 in terms of research and development conducted in
post-secondary educational institutions, with 25% of its research capacity
located in universities. That's a higher proportion than most other countries,
and I don't need to tell you how that creates an excellent research
environment.
These are measurable, quantifiable facts, but we must not overlook the
more qualitative dimensions of our performance. For example, our graduates are
recognized and welcomed in the best universities and the largest technology
firms in the world, our professors and researchers are highly respected, and
indeed coveted. And you don't have to spend much time abroad to see how
esteemed and attractive Canadian institutions are. We need to salute these
achievements and all those who make them possible.
And yet we in Canada do not invest in post-secondary education to the same extent as our
American neighbours – and we know it is important to compare ourselves first
against those who share the same North American environment. According to AUCC data, U.S.
governments invest CAN$5,000 more per university student than Canadian
governments. Tuition fees give U.S.
institutions CAN$3,000 more per student, compared against net revenues from
tuition fees for Canadian universities. That makes U.S.
institutions CAN$8,000 per student better off overall in terms of available
resources. That is a very big gap, and it means that U.S.
universities can allocate more resources to improving the quality of teaching
and services provided to their students.
The Government of Canada's commitments to post-secondary education are
long-standing, as is the assistance it provides to provincial and territorial
governments, which have constitutional jurisdiction for providing quality
education services. As far back as 1966, at a First Ministers' Meeting, Prime
Minister Pearson clearly set out the rationale for the Government of Canada's
interest: to develop policies and
measures to ensure economic growth, full employment and prosperity; to promote
equal opportunity for all Canadians, wherever they live; to ensure
interprovincial mobility of students; and to prepare young people for
productive jobs. Those reasons are just as relevant today. And they continue to
sustain and inform the Government of Canada's actions to promote those
objectives.
You well know the main levers the Government of Canada has used and
continues to use for that purpose: tax
point and cash transfers to provincial and territorial governments; student
assistance (loans, tax measures, grants) and; direct support for various
aspects of post-secondary education, mainly for research (granting councils,
Canada Foundation for Innovation, chairs and centres of excellence program,
indirect costs). When all that financial support is added up, it accounts for
25% of all post-secondary education spending in Canada.
That's major, and it makes the Government of Canada far
more than just as spectator or a mere bystander. The Government of Canada is
clearly a partner in post-secondary education in Canada and
it has every intention of remaining so, as it is convinced that its support is
essential to maintaining a quality post-secondary education system. And it is
very clear on that point: it shares the
growing consensus that Canada needs to invest more in post-secondary education.
That being said, the question of how to do so springs to mind, and on
that front there is much less of a consensus. Not everyone agrees, for example,
that raising tuition fees would be a good idea. With respect to the federal
government specifically and the support it provides, opinion is also mixed as
to the type of support that would be best. Some are convinced that payments
under the Canada Social Transfer is the path to take, essentially because they
would be especially respectful of provincial and territorial jurisdiction and
policies and help the most to assist provinces and territories in funding
services they are responsible for. There are fears, however – I know on the
part of some of you, – that unconditional transfers will be used for other ends
and that such "diversions" cannot be prevented. Others believe that
student assistance is the most effective lever, as it directly gives students
and families the means to overcome financial barriers and access to
post-secondary education, and feel it respects both provincial and territorial
jurisdiction and the objective of equal opportunity inherent in the very ideal
of federalism. Others favour direct support – so-called targeted programs,
especially for research. Rather than throwing money into a "bottomless
pit," the thinking goes, recognized specific needs are targeted and
solutions are found that really "make a difference" and are not
subject to the whim of provincial and territorial budget choices. On the other
hand, some people believe that this in fact constitutes direct intervention,
with structural implications that are not necessarily in line with provincial
and territorial priorities, or even institutions themselves.
These are familiar debates, to be sure, and it is quite normal that they
take place within the Government of Canada itself, at the very time it is
looking to participate more in the efforts needed, with a view to
effectiveness, fairness and harmony. My colleague the Finance Minister has
expressed that the government is not inclined towards large increases in
transfers to the provinces. And that brings me to my second question: what do post-secondary education leaders
feel are the most appropriate levers for possible increased financial support
by the federal government?
Indeed, many of you come to Ottawa to express your
concerns and highlight your preferences. And you know better than I that, while
you may have the same take on what is needed, that is not true with regard to
demands and expectations. It would be more helpful to have a clearer
understanding of academic leaders' position on this issue. At the very least,
privately expressed opinions should be discussed and debated among themselves.
In terms of positions, there is currently a certain cloudiness that is making
it more difficult to implement a nevertheless growing consensus on the need to
invest more in post-secondary education in Canada.
3. There are many
stakeholders in post-secondary education, and they need to consult one another
as real partners.
The most cursory glance shows that post-secondary education straddles
numerous areas of responsibility and hence requires the engagement of equally
numerous actors. One cannot simultaneously be at the centre of major issues and
isolated in some sort of secret garden. Many groups and bodies have a perfectly
legitimate interest in post-secondary education. Indeed, the list seems to get
longer on a regular basis. There are the institutions themselves, first of all,
with their students, professors, researchers and all their staff; governments,
in accordance with their own jurisdictions; families and communities;
businesses; professional corporations, social and community groups, the general
public, and everything that falls under the heading of "civil
society." That is a lot of people!
It is rather encouraging, to see this coming together of all those with
excellent but different reasons who all have an interest in post-secondary
education.
The call for more concerted action is nothing new. It can even be said
to have inspired numerous meetings, forums, summits, and strategic meetings of
all kinds, where people have tried to understand and come closer to one
another, and sometimes also to position themselves in response to public
opinion or a stakeholder they have sought to influence. The desire is often
expressed for governments to lead by example and work together, rather than
indulging in endless squabbling. Such a desire addresses universities as well,
which it is hoped will work together rather than in competition or in a lack of
solidarity, especially when new resources are announced. Calls for
collaboration come from all sides.
For its part, the federal government is convinced that, to advance
post-secondary education, partnership approaches are a must, and it is fully
prepared to commit to them. This process is guided by the principles of
solidarity, flexibility, respect for jurisdictions and accountability of all
actors.
That being said, it is not obvious which path to take. Indeed, there is
still ambiguity and mistrust that needs to be eliminated, so that a basic
desire for consultation is no longer seen as intrusion, and a basic legitimate
affirmation of autonomy and jurisdiction is no longer seen as a refusal to
cooperate. More basically, we need to find together appropriate forums for
identifying common and convergent lines of action to develop post-secondary
education in Canada. Canadians naturally expect the efforts of institutions, governments
and other stakeholders to be geared in the same direction, and for us to reach
agreement on how to be accountable for our successes and failures.
I know the post-secondary education sector well enough to know that the
very expression of such a desire for cooperation and consultation may spark
concern or even suspicion among some stakeholders. Institutions fear the
intrusion of external stakeholders that they feel are burdensome or
distracting. Provincial and territorial authorities wonder whether this will
throw a wrench in the process and trivialize their own jurisdictions. Federal
authorities are discouraged to have to "sign blank cheques" without
being able to report to citizens on how the transferred funding is used.
Student or professional groups are wary of limitations and measures that may
threaten progress achieved. Businesses
are surprised by how academic collegiality works and find academic processes
rather "complicated." And this is far from an exhaustive list of
perceptions that end up cluttering the scene and paralyzing action.
This is the third question
I want to leave you with: would it not
be helpful for academic leaders to weight in as well on the best way of
promoting and achieving the consultations and partnerships that are needed?
They could express their opinions on the best way to use existing forums to help
us coordinate our activities; or, what new forum or new event should be created
to achieve better progress.
* * *
* * *
* * *
This is what I wanted to share with you today: convictions backed up by the broad consensus
throughout Canada. But also questions and considerations, on which your own thoughts
could surely help all of us, including my government, to find the most
effective means to provide post-secondary education with the resources it absolutely
needs to rise to present and future challenges.
I am sure you understand that the federal government is convinced
wholeheartedly that the key to our future to a very great extent lies in high-quality
post-secondary education that is accessible, solid and delivers results. And I am sure you understand that we want to
work with provincial and territorial governments, to support them and help them
fulfil their responsibilities in this field.
Canadians expect all of us to work together as partners, giving priority
to their needs and expectations.
I call on the AUCC to firmly commit to that path. Its informed, credible
contribution is essential, as it brings together leaders of institutions for
which learning and research are a daily reality, and where the front-line
troops of learning are engaged, namely students and everyone who accompanies
them and guides them in their endeavours.
Thank you for your warm welcome and your attention. I wish you every
success for the rest of your meeting.
|
