et

STUDENTS ACT

against
HIGH FEES

By DAVE DENT

‘They have even helped to evedthhaw ihe
leaders of the land'—PHIL OCHS

ERHAPS it began with Mario
Savio and others on cam-
puses south of the border.

Perhaps it began on the edito-
rial pages of the Quartier Latin
at the University of Montreal.
Where is not important. What
is important-is that the attitudes
of students all across Canada
have changed in the past year
or two and passive acceptance
of whatever is ladled out has
been rejected. :

Inevitably, much of the change
which has taken place has been
channelled towards democracy
in and around education.

Bombing sparked off protests
against the war in- Vietnam.
Selma and the shooting of a
white clergyman sparked off
civil rights protests. Fee raises
often sparked off campaigns for
free education.

David Hunter, vice-president
of the Student Administrative
Council at the University of To-
ronto, commented: “Even if they
only go up $25 or $50, the stu-
dents want to know why they
are going up. They are asking
questions such as: Should there
be fees in the first place? Should
we be paying to go to univer-
sity?”

For a long time, students ac-
cepted the classical arguments
against free education and in-
creased subsidization of educa-
tion. These arguments were as
many as the occasion demand-

ed: “Government ‘subsidies will _

destroy academic freedom be-
cause the government will run
the universities to suit its poli-
. A

View of the march wh:

tical ends”; “Free education will
flood the campuses”; “Why
should the taxpayer foot the

pill?”; “It is good for the stu-.

dent to have to pay”; “Anybody
can go.to ‘university if they
want to go.”

Now the students are replying.

to these arguments. They have
noticed that the figures belie the
claim that anyone can go to uni-
versity. When they are told that
government financing would
mean government control and
the suppression of academic
freedom, they ask: who controls

the universities now? They are -

tired of seeing the children of
the working class being “‘sacri-
ficed on the altar of academic
freedom,” to quote from one
university newspaper.

In Lennoxville, Quebec, last
month, the Canadian Union of
Students (CUS) came out in
favor of a policy of freezing uni-
versity fees at last year’s level
as a first step on the road to
the abolition of all financial ob-
stacles to education.

This freeze-the-fees campaign
was the subject of a variety of
student actions at different uni-
versities across Canada during
the course of the 1964-65 school
year.

The University of British Col-
umbia and McGill, which have
taken some of the strongest po-
Sitions in the CUS, both organ-
ized student protests around
exam time in the spring of 1965.
At McGill, the protest took the
form of a march of 3,000 stu-

dents through downtown Mon-

~ the

treal followed by a sit-in of
1,500 in the Arts Building which
made the board of governors
step over students to get into a
meeting.

University of Manitoba stu-
dents staged a demonstration
and rally of 1,500 students in
February this year. In Frederic-
ton, last spring, all four univ ~-
sities converged on the centre
of the city. Students in Nova
Scotia protested fee raises at
the same time.

None of these demonstrations
were successful, but student ac-
tion in Alberta and Ontario did
stall fee raises — at least tem-
porarily — although residence
fees at the University of Toron-
to have taken a steep upward
swing.

In 1962, Mount Allison Uni-
versity, in Sackville, N.B., was
threatened with a fee increase
which was averted by a three-
day boycott of the university.

The spring of 1964 saw a
march of 2,500 Quebec students
on Quebec City to demand free
education and a social. orienta-
tion for government. policies.
McGill, then under different
leadership, refused to take part.
One year later, McGill fees went
up, those at the French-speak-
ing universities did not.

This year both McGill and the

University of British Columbia

have planned fee boycotts. Stu-
dents will refuse to pay a part
of their fees equal to the pro-
posed increase. At McGill the
boycott was announced in the
Student Handbook, a_ publica-
tion issued to all students at the
beginning of every year.

The role of university admi-
nistrations throughout all this
has been starkly negative. Dr.
H. H. Saunderson, president of
University of Manitoba,
claimed that the student demon-
stration there was a waste of
time, and absolved himself of all
responsibility for asking the
provincial government to con-
tribute.

McGill’s principal, Rocke Rob-
ertson, has defended the fee
raise and called the proposed
boycott an “unpleasant” and
“hazardous” affair. John B. Mac-
donald, president of the Univer-
sity. of British Columbia, has
also defended the raise at his
university.

Whereas almost all Canadian
student unions have come out

This is the second of three
articles on the problems of
university education in Can-
ada. It deals with the various
actions which students have
taken in the fight against the
high cost of education, as well
as some of the various posi-

_tions which have been put
forward by different institu-
tions and organizations.

The third article will try to
present solutions to some of.
the problems.

in favor of the abolition of all
financial obstacles to education,
their interpretations of this, and
the urgency with which they
view its implementation, varies.

The University of Saskatche-
wan’s delegates at the CUS con-
vention in Lennoxville even op-
posed free education. Their uni-
versity has the lowest fees in
Canada, which may be signi-
ficant.

The Union Générale des Etu-
diants du Québec is unequivo-
cally committed to salaries for
students and regards the stu-
dent as “a young intellectual
worker” fulfilling a role in so-
ciety and having the same rights
as any other worker.

David Hunter, of the Stu-
dent’s Administrative Council of
the University of Toronto, re-
gards this as snobbery and
claims it is the truck driver
who has to pay. Student bodies
have pointed out that the stu-
dent more than pays back the
cost of his education in in-
creased income tax during sub-
sequent years, and in the fact
that the whole society benefits
from improved educational faci-
lities.

_ At Lennoxville, a motion from

the Maritimes enumerating the
financial obstacles to education
as fees, the. cost. of books, ac-
commodation and living costs,
and demanding their abolition,
was narrowly defeated.

Within the universities them-
selves, radical student syndalist
organizations have been set up.
At McGill and the University of
British Columbia they contested

elections, in which they. were’
only narrowly defeated. Gene-

rally, all over the country there
is dissent on the campus, al-
though on some, such as the Re-

‘gina campus of the University

1 2,500 Quekec university students made on their provincial capital on April 1, 1964, to demand more money for education.

October 15, 1965—PACIFIC TRIBUN

“free education.

of Saskatchwan, it is mote i
question of relations W! 4)
administration and the struct
of university.

Opposition to means tests F
almost universal, and oppo! i‘
to forcing a student to cs
debts is fairly widespread.
exactly how higher educall
should be financed, is @ a
of debate. The University of ft
ronto, for instance, prought oA
a complicated proposal last na
ter, which would have ent!
every student to a grant of $1. i
for every $1 earned during
summer. In theory this was ie

posed to help the poor studen

ca
ee pe

jobs were available. ale
government has never beet of
to.do this, and it is easier 75
tain employment if one i8 Ba
the proposal would prove y
have exactly the reverse effec fa

The federal government “Ai
several provincial governmes:
have said they are in fi
Tisis 0 nd
Quebec, where both English
French student bodies hav |)
posed federal involveme? ott |i
education, as has the 8° —
ment itself.

The significance of 4
lost in light of fee increas’
five provinces this year, 4”
danger of further increase ai
least. two more, Albe
Ontario, in the future.

rovill

Grants by most P
y ly

governments have hard
up with the increase 1? ‘.

ment, and the federal gram |i
consistently declined in PP
tion to the total cost.

pas

The Quebec government i
demanded the right to levy
own. taxes for the financing
such things as. education AY
intends to make considera
creases in expenditure.
ernment of Ontario als | ji
sees increasing expendi
this field. In the Maritime’ el!
is a fair amount of pres
make the universitie
but increases have 10° 4
spectacular, and as a result™

is a parallel demand

creased federal funds.

No government in cans
however, is prepared 1
date for the establish’
free education, and only
foundland, which has m
facilities, has so far taken | 3
steps in this direction.

p—Pag? y