NOT A - PRIVELEGE

THE GREEN PAPER

This is a discussion paper penned by the Human Resources De- partment “designed to give Canadi- ans an opportunity to participate in the shaping of a crucial element of that agenda - the rebuilding of our social security system.” (Quote from Axworthy’s introduction.)

Axworthy’s discussion paper spells out more or less how the cuts are to be executed. The Federal Gov- ernment spends a total of $6.1 bil- lion on subsidizing education. $2.6 billion of that is from cash transfer payments to the provinces which each have jurisdiction over their re- spective systems. The remainder comes from $3.5 billion in tax points. Axworthy’s paper proposes that the transfer payments be cut entirely, probably in 1996. The gov- ernment puts forward the idea that the amount will be made up by the introduction of an Income Contin- gent Loan Repayment Plan as a re- placement for the current Canada Student Loan system. The problem with this is that, with the rise in tui- tion that such a plan will necessi- tate, this is money that will have to paid back rather than money that “the government currently doles out as a subsidy. Therefore, the onus falls on the individual student (per- haps soon they will refer to us as “education consumers”) to compen- sate for the missing federal subsidy. Expect the rise in tuition to be dras- tic, perhaps double or more.

UBC’s Alma Mater Society ap- plied to appear before the Standing Committee on Human Resources in Ottawa in November and never re-

ceived a response. Other student so-

cieties that were also denied include: Dalhousie, McGill, Queens, the Uni- versity of Alberta, and the BC branch of the Canadian Federation of Stu- dents (CFS). However, Caryn Duncan, researcher for the CFS, ap- plied as an individual and was ac- cepted.

In November, the BC compo- nent of the Federation received a grant from the provincial govern- ment to conduct a series of consul- tations designed to both educate stu- dents province wide on the pro- _ posed cuts, as well as receive and record their reactions, discussions, and ideas. The last of these hear- ings took place at Emily Carr on

Tuesday, December13. The results of these hearings will be compiled and presented to Dan Miller, the provincial government’s Minister of Skills, Training, and Labour. From here the provincial government will take the paper to the federal gov- ernment when discussing these cuts in January/February and present it as the official statement of the stu- dents of BC.

INCOME _CONTINGENT

The centre piece of the Green Paper’s education reform is a little gimmick called the Income Contin- gent Loan Repayment Plan (ICLRP). Under this scheme, after you gradu- ate from school, you would pay back your ioan based on your income af- ter you graduate. If you’re making not very much money, you pay back a smaller amount and if you make a lot of money, you can pay it off rela- tively quickly. Sounds pretty good...if you graduate into a high paying job. If you’re a single mother, how less likely are you to willingly incur such a debt? The gov- ernment cites the fact that “a number of countries, including Aus- tralia, New Zealand, Sweden [Swed- ish students pay no tuition], and the USA” have ICLRP’s. On a superficial glance, the ICLRP scheme is»attrac- tive to a student who faces the pros- pect of low income or no employ- ment after graduation, sort of like a shiny, colourful hook looks attrac- tive to a fish under water. Here are a few things that aren’t likely to leap to mind if you’re sold on the sheer novelty of such a plan:

On p. 63 of Axworthy’s Green Book, it’s stated that “replacing fed- eral cash transfers would put an up- ward pressure on tuition fees.” This is linked to the fact that part of the idea of this scheme is to allow broader autonomy for individual in- Stitutions to have greater control over setting tuition fees (fees will no

‘longer be regulated by provincial

governments) and on implementing specialized fees for individual pro- grams. We’ve already seen a bit of that here at Emily Carr with the in- troduction last year of “studio fees.” In Alberta, the Klein government took it upen themselves to introduce user fees to kindergarten with the result that one out of five children

dropped out.

JANUARY 25,

So with that in mind let’s say you aren’t an upper middle class white male and let’s estimate how likely you are to flourish under such a system. The New Brunswick pro- vincial government tried a proto- type of the ICLRP system and de- cided to scrap it. They found it im- practical based on the projection that a woman with an average in- come, with the rate of interest on the loan at 3%, would take 35 years or more to pay it back while a man with an average income would take 18 years or more. With the rate of interest between 4 and 10%, the av- erage woman would still take over 35 years to pay and the average man 24 years or more.

The basic motivation for the in- troduction of the ICLRP system is to take the onus of funding for post- secondary education off of govern- ment and onto students. The nec- essary byproduct of this, it stands to reason, is that financially less equipped students will not be able to receive an education at all. As it stands, there are enough barriers to the system.

Student opposition to the cut- backs has ranged in expression from the egg that hit Lloyd Axworthy’s suit on November 16 to lengthy and considered written responses by CFS research staff as well as resound- ingly negative response from all those pesky “special interest groups,” like women, non-whites, the disabled, the poor ... let’s just say 90% of Canadian citizens.

Workers, students, and people who care about this country’s social programs are taking part in a na- tional strike day on January 25. For our part, the ECIAD Student Union is planning a walkout here on Granville Island in solidarity. As well, you can get hold of informa- tion, such as Axworthy’s Green Book as well as information supplied by the Canadian Federation of Stu- dents, available from the Student Union office. While you’re at it, write to Lloyd Axworthy in Ottawa or to your local MP.

Article by Terry Dawes

1995

NOTA PRIVELEGE

This is a discussion paper penned by the Human Resources De- partment “designed to give Canadi- ans an opportunity to participate in the shaping of a crucial element of that agenda - the rebuilding of our social security system.” (Quote from Axworthy’s introduction.)

‘Axworthy’s discussion paper spells out more or less how the cuts are to be executed. The Federal Gov- ernment spends a total of $6.1 bil- lion on subsidizing education. $2.6 billion of that is from cash transfer payments to the provinces which each have jurisdiction over their re- spective systems. The remainder comes from $3.5 billion in tax points. Axworthy’s paper proposes that the transfer payments be cut entirely, probably in 1996. The gov- ernment puts forward the idea that the amount will be made up by the introduction of an Income Contin- gent Loan Repayment Plan as a re- placement for the current Canada Student Loan system. The problem with this is that, with the rise in tui- tion that such a plan will necessi- tate, this is money that will have to paid back rather than money that the government currently doies out as a subsidy. Therefore, the onus falls on the individual student (per- haps soon they will refer to us as “education consumers”) to compen- sate for the missing federal subsidy. Expect the rise in tuition to be dras- tic, perhaps double or more.

UBC’s Alma Mater Society ap- plied to appear before the Standing Committee on Human Resources in Ottawa in November and never re- ceived a response. Other student so- cieties that were aiso denied include: Dalhousie, McGill, Queens, the Uni- versity of Alberta, and the BC branch of the Canadian Federation of Stu- dents (CFS). However, Caryn Duncan, researcher for the CFS, ap- plied as an individual and was ac- cepted.

In November, the BC compo- nent of the Federation received a grant from the provincial govern- ment to conduct a series of consul- tations designed to both educate stu- dents province wide on the pro- posed cuts, as well as receive and record their reactions, discussions, and ideas. The last of these hear- ings took place at Emily Carr on

Tuesday, December13. The results of these hearings will be compiled and presented to Dan Miller, the provincial government’s Minister of Skills, Training, and Labour. From here the provincial government will take the paper to the federal gov- ernment when discussing these cuts in January/February and present it as the official statement of the stu- dents of BC.

INCOME CONTINGENT

‘The centre piece of the Green Paper's education reform is a little gimmick called the Income Contin- gent Loan Repayment Plan (ICLRP). Under this scheme, after you gradu- ate from school, you would pay back your ioan based on your income af- ter you graduate. If you're making not very much money, you pay back asmaller amount and if you make a lot of money, you can pay it off rela- tively quickly. Sounds pretty good...if you graduate into a high paying job. If you're a single mother, how less likely are you to willingly incur such a debt? The gov- ernment cites the fact that “a number of countries, including Aus- tralia, New Zealand, Sweden [Swed- ish students pay no tuition}yand the USA” have ICLRP’s. On a superficial glance, the ICLRP scheme is-attrac- tive toa student who faces the pros- pect of low income or no employ- ment after graduation, sort of like a shiny, colourful hook’ looks attrac- tive to a fish under water. Here are a few things that aren’t likely to leap to mind if you're sold on the sheer novelty of such a plan:

On p. 63 of Axworthy’s Green Book, it’s stated that “replacing fed- eral cash transfers would put an up- ward pressure on tuition fees.” This is linked to the fact that part of the idea of this scheme is to allow broader autonomy for individual in- stitutions to have greater control over setting tuition fees (fees will no longer be regulated by provincial governments) and on implementing specialized fees for individual pro- grams. We've already seen a bit of that here at Emily Carr with the in- troduction last year of “studio fees.” In Alberta, the Klein government took ituupon themselves to introduce user fees to kindergarten with the result that one out of five children dropped out.

JANUARY 25,

So with that in mind let’s say you aren't an upper middle class white male and let’s estimate how likely you are to flourish under such a system. The New Brunswick pro- vincial government tried a proto- type of the ICLRP system and de- cided to scrap it. They found it im- practical based on the projection that a woman with an average in- come, with the rate of interest on the loan at 3%, would take 35 years or more to pay it back while a man with an average income would take 18 years or more, With the rate of, interest between 4 and 10%, the av- erage woman would still take over 35 years to pay and the average man 24 years or more.

‘The basic motivation for the in- troduction of the ICLRP system is to, take the onus of funding for post- secondary education off of govern- ment and onto students. The nec- essary byproduct of this, it stands to reason, is that financially less equipped students will not be able to receive an education at all. As it stands, there are enough barriers to, ‘the system.

Student opposition to the cut- backs has ranged in expression from the egg that hit Lloyd Axworthy’s suit on November 16 to lengthy and considered writen responses by CFS research staff as well as resound- ingly negative response from all those pesky “special interest groups,” like women, non-whites, the disabled, the poor ... let’s just say 90% of Canadian citizens. Workers, students, and people who care about this country’s social programs are taking part in a na- tional strike day on January 25. For our part, the ECIAD Student Union is planning a walkout here on Granville Island in solidarity. As well, you can get hold of informa- tion, such as Axworthy’s Green Book as well as information supplied by the Canadian Federation of Stu- dents, available from the Student Union office. While you're at it, write to Lloyd Axworthy in Ottawa or to your local MP. Article by Terry Dawes

1995