IRIS

Institut de recherche et dinformations socio-conomiques

Post-secondary Education: Should We Charge Tuition, or Have Free Education?

Eliminating education fees is economically viable and socially just

Philippe Hurteau, researcher Eric Martin, consultant

January 2007
Translated from French by

Kevin McLoughlin Free Education Montreal

Original version can be found at:

http://www.irisrecherche.qc.ca/publications/tarification_de_lducation_postsecondaire_ou_gratuit_scolaire

ABSTRACT
In this study, the IRIS reexamines the viability of charging fees for post-secondary education. This study explores the possibility of abolishing tuition as a means to eliminate financial obstacles in the pursuit of higher education. PRIMARY CONCLUSIONS - Charging tuition and other fees for postsecondary education leads to several economic and social problems related to student debt and access for the less well-off; - Increasing tuition only exacerbates these problems, without necessarily solving the crisis of institutional underfunding; - In Great Britain and Ontario, tuition increases have not solved the problems of underfunding, instead resulting in a significant increase in student debt. This deterrent has in turn caused a drop in admission applications and pushed students into more technical fields, as well as limited access for the less well-off; - Governments use the increase in fees levied on students as a substitute for public funding, which has been in freefall in recent decades; - The abolition of tuition appears to be economically viable and more socially just than charging fees; - Free education is an incentive to pursue higher education, and; - Abolishing tuition in Quebec and establishing free education at the postsecondary level would only cost $500 million, which constitutes a little less than one percent of the governments budget. As opposed to considering tuition increases that do not solve the problems they purport to solve, and furthermore involve major social costs, the government of Quebec should question the feasibility of charging tuition and consider arguments for eliminating education fees.

PART I: THE DECREASE IN PUBLIC FUNDING AND THE INCREASE OF FEES IMPOSED ON STUDENTS The Youth in Transition Survey, a longitudinal survey undertaken by Statistics Canada, indicates that 50% of Canadian youth identified financial reasons as the primary obstacle to the pursuit of higher education1.

The absence of public investment has forced Canadian establishments to increase the portion of their funding exacted from students. In 2005 this represented more than 34% of universities total operating income, compared with a financial participation of 13% in 1980. During this same time period, the percentage of university finances represented by subsidies dropped from 80% to 59%5.

In 2002, British Colombia lifted a tuition freeze, allowing tuition fees to rise by 76%. The students American researchers Michael Paulsen and Edward St. became the primary means through which the John recently demonstrated the prohibitive effect of financial universities are trying to handle their overwhelming obstacles on the pursuit of higher education in The Journal of budget crisis6. Higher Education. Their study revealed that for every $1,000 In Quebec, despite the introduction of many soincrease in tuition, the proportion of lower income students likely to continue and complete their studies dropped by called related fees, the portion of funding assumed by the students has not risen past 12% counting all 19%2. tuition fees7 (2001-2002). This tuition freeze has been Even middle class students feel financial pressure in in place since 1996. However, as Quebec universities anticipate a deficit for 2006-2007, a first in the history the case of professional programs, where costs are frequently higher. In Ontario, after the costs of medical of Quebec, there is significant pressure for an school rose from $5,000 to $14,500, the proportion of increase in tuition fees to offset the states financial disengagement. students from families with an income of less than $40,000 dropped from 23% to 10%. The number of While university administrations are aware that students who identified financial considerations as the whatever revenue they manage to gain will not help determining factor in their choice of program rose from them solve the structural deficit caused by decreased 13% to 32%3. public funding, they are in no position to refuse even Tuition increases exacerbate the discouraging the most meager financial input to fill in the budget effects of prohibitive education costs. In Nova Scotia, gap. for example, an individual from a lower income family Tuition increases have not solved the university wanting to attend university or send his or her children budget crisis in Ontario8 or in Great Britain9, there must spend more than 67% of his or her net income each year to pay off the provincial education because the governments pursued cuts in public fees4. This means, for all intents and purposes, that he funding instead of committing to the necessary or she has no choice but to take on a significant investments, substituting money exacted from the amount of debt or abandon his or her pursuit of higher students for that which previously came from the governments tax base. education. This trend towards shifting the financial burden onto Moreover, governments have been increasing tuition for decades, while simultaneously reducing public individuals has begun to exacerbate problems related to debt and restricted access for students coming from funding for educational institutions.

1. BOWLBY, Jeffrey W. and MCMULLEN, Kathryn, At a Crossroads: First Results for the 18-20-year-old Cohort of the Youth In Transition Survey, Statistics Canada, 23 January 2002. 2. ST. JOHN, Edward and PAULSEN, Michael B., Social Class and College Costs: Examining the Financial Nexus Between College Choice and Persistence, The Journal of Higher Education, vol. 73, n 2, March/April 2002, p. 189-236. 3. MACKENZIE, Hugh, The tuition trap, Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations (OCUFA), September 2005. 4. The Economics of Access: The Fiscal Reality of PSE Costs for Low-Income Families, The Education Review of the Canadian Association of University Teachers

(CAUT), vol. 8, n 2, June 2006. 5. Paying the Price: The case for lowering tuition fees in Canada, The Education Review of CAUT, vol. 7, n 1, February 2005. 6. MALCOMSON, John and LEE, Marc, Financing higher learning: PostSecondary education funding in BC, Canadian center for policy alternatives BC-Office, November 2004. 7. Consultations prbudgtaires 2006, Comit permanent des finances de la chambre des communes, Avis de la Fdration des cgeps, 2006, p. 11. (Prebudget Consultations 2006, Standing Committee on Finance of the House of Commons, Notice from the Fdration des cgeps) 8. MACKENZIE, Hugh, op. cit. 9. The British top-up fees model is discussed below.

Thus, an average diploma from a three year low-income families. It also marks a change program now costs 9 000 (C$20 580) in tuition fees characteristic of the states role in education, as it seems more concerned with economizing than alone. According to the Department for Education and Skills, the average student debt will increase from 9 ensuring access to education. 000 (C$20 580) to 15 000 (C$34 300). Student debt could ultimately reach an average of 22 000 (C$50 307). STUDY OF THE BRITISH MODEL The British model demonstrates how the introduction of tuition fees introduced numerous problems (such as the decrease in access for the less well-off, debt for a large number of students, discouragement of potential students, and financial difficulties for graduated students). The evidence so far indicates that that the recent tuition hikes have exacerbated these problems10. Moreover, certain emerging trends indicate that the tuition increases do not solve the universities structural deficits, and in fact reduce the number of admissions and push students into more technical fields. Some British studies have also revealed that it is lower-income and middle class students who pay the price for the new reforms. 1. The state of tuition fees in Great Britain 2. Debt reporting and aid policies for the less well-off In an attempt to soften the impact of such a hike on the less well-off, the government had to instate debt reporting policies and subsidies for families of modest means. The fees do not need to be paid immediately after registration. The amount is covered by an interest free loan to be repaid once the graduate begins earning over 15 000 (C$34 300). The minimum payments are set at a rate of 9% of all annual revenue earned above this threshold. An individual earning the average salary for a university graduate, 18 000 (C$41 160), would have to make payments of 5.20 (C$11.89) per week, a regressive tax that he or she would have to continue paying throughout the large part of his or her active life, as the repayment period is fixed at 25 years. If any balance should remain unpaid after this period, it would be cancelled.

Introduced by the Labour Party shortly after coming to power in 1997, university tuition fees in Great Britain were set at 1 175 per year, or about $C2 70011. This was the case until 2006, when the provisions of the Higher Education Act of 2004 came The decision to take out a mortgage of $34 000 to into effect, introducing top-up fees in response to the $50 000 can be quite difficult for students from the establishments financial crisis. poorest 17% of British families, who earn less than 12 This provision, effective in 2006-2007, allowed 10 088 per year (C$23 068) . This is true even universities to adjust a students financial though families who earn less than 17 500 (C$40 contribution on a local basis so that it corresponds 017) are eligible for 2 700 (C$6 174) of financial aid better with the real costs of his or her presence at from the government. This subsidy is modulated in inverse proportion to income until it reaches zero once the university. the family earns more than 37 425 (C$85 580). It would be more accurate to say that as public Universities whose fees reach the limit of 3 000 are funding becomes scarcer, establishments turn to also expected to provide scholarships of 300 students to assume their operating costs. The (C$686) to the least well-off students. However, these government has thus authorized universities to collect measures are not enough to eliminate the up to 3 000 per year (C$6 860) in tuition fees, a discouraging effects of debt and the financial pressure on graduates (see below). 255% increase.

10. This is in spite of the incomplete data available, as the cohorts subject to the new policy have not yet graduated. 11. $2 689 with an exchange rate of 1 GBP = 2.28671 CAD (11/01/07).

12. UK national statistics, Income: Gaps in income and wealth remain large, 7 December 2004, http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1005

3. Inter-university competition leads to an artificial inflation of tuition fees The governments 3 000 fee ceiling has done more than limit tuition hikes: it prompted universities to impose the maximum fees, with the knowledge that the majority of competitive universities will do the same.

British graduates5. The CIPD estimates that the recent tuition hike can only aggravate these problems. The level of accumulated debt is pushing an increasing number of students to take up residence in their parents homes after graduation. Graduates contributions to a mortgage or pension plan are also impaired. In 2005, 51% of students polled said they did not have the means to buy a home, compared to 39% in 2000. The study also notes a rise in the number of students who find that the cost of education had negative impacts on their financial health: 77% of these students shared this point of view in 2005, compared to 71 % in 2000.

This leads to the erroneous preconception that elevated fees reflect the quality of an establishment. According to this logic, more expensive must mean of higher quality, thus the more elevated the fees, the more reputable the establishment. In such an environment, even establishments catering to a clientele of modest means are encouraged to raise their fees as high as possible.13 6. The tuition hikes cause more students to be employed during their studies 4. The tuition fee increases are insufficient to solve universities structural deficits The growing financial burdens born by students encourage them to prioritize paid work over their Universities must allot a portion of the money earned studies, reducing the amount of time available for from tuition hikes to scholarships for lower-income school, delaying graduation, and discouraging students. Before the introduction of the increases, it students from pursuing higher education. was estimated that only 7% to 10% of additional income would be available for the universities, which Between 1996 and 2006 the number of fulltime is not enough to compensate for their structural deficit. students employed during their studies rose from 406 880 to 630 718, a 54% increase16. This scenario was confirmed on 14 December 2006 when, in spite of recent tuition hikes, universities Consequently, British researchers believe that a requested 1.3 billion (C$2.97 billion) more from the larger number of students will take a year off before treasury, claiming it was necessary for financial starting post-secondary studies in order to stability. The 2007-2008 budget had allocated 6.9 accumulate financial resources, thus delaying the billion ($C15.8 billion) to university funding. conferral of their degrees. Once they are out in the workforce, however, many are likely to stay there. Thus, tuition fee hikes were unable to close the gap Additionally, students will be less likely to pursue a caused by the structural deficits that stem from a lack masters program due to their accumulated debt. of public funding. They could also be forced to prolong their studies as they find themselves obligated to balance paid work 5. Problems associated with education fees for and their education17. graduates According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD)14, the introduction of tuition fees after the election of the Labour Party in 1997 caused a rise in financial problems experienced by
13. FOSKETT, Nick, MARINGE, Felix and ROBERTS, David, Changing Fee Regimes and their Impact on Student Attitudes to Higher Education, University of Southampton, June 2006. 14. The CIPD is a British organization that unites 127 000 management and human resources professionals.

The time spent at their jobs will also reduce the time students spend on campus, thus undermining the universitys role as a place for socialization as well as being detrimental to their learning.

15. CIPD, Graduates in the workplace: does a degree add value?, January 2007, h t t p : / / w w w. c i p d . c o . u k / N R / r d o n l y r e s / A B F 4 7 E 0 0 - 4 D D E - 4 0 E C - 9 F 2 0 B3C61574A110/0/gradwrkplsr.pdf. 16. Trades Union Congress/National Union of Students (NUS), All work and low pay, 2006. 17. FOSKETT et al., op. cit.

7. This reform places middle class and low income students at a disadvantage, both increasing debt and restricting access Students coming from low-income families take on more debt than their peers. The pressure to pay off this debt prompts them to accept the first employment available, which often does not require a degree of any sort. This serves as an incentive not to follow through with graduate studies; in 2005 barely 40% of graduates were employed in their field and barely 20% were guaranteed any sort of job security18. As for students from the middle class whose family income is just above the eligibility notch for government aid, they are ineligible for scholarships and subsidies, yet even so will have to pay the entire 3 000 in fees. 8. The increase in fees results in a drop in enrollment and a shift of students into more technical fields

(such as fine arts, philosophy, or classical education) and enter fields that will help them find more gainful employment. The selection criteria for fields of study thus becomes a cost/benefit calculation motivated by job market performance, as opposed to the academic interests of the student. The financial pressure exerted by the tuition increases and debt transforms the university institution into a place of technical training oriented towards the needs of the market. Conclusions on the British model Since the introduction of higher education fees in Great Britain, both students and graduates have encountered numerous problems related to access and debt. Since increases in tuition fees do not address the effects of public underfunding, hikes would exacerbate these problems.

From a structural standpoint, continuing to use students as a valve to relieve financial pressure caused by chronic public underfunding does not target Drawing on data taken from the governmental the source of the problem. Instead, it has serious Labour Survey, the student association National negative impacts on student debt and access to Union of Students (NUS) revealed that the tuition education for the less well-off. increase led to a 3.4 % drop in university enrollment. This general decrease in the number of enrolled IS THE QUEBEC MODEL DRIFTING students was accompanied by a tendency for students TOWARDS THE BRITISH MODEL? to prioritize technical courses directly applicable to different employment situations. In 2003-2004, the average tuition in Quebec was $1 86220. The average gross annual income of college Traditional history courses saw a 7.8% drop in students was $7 465, and that of university students enrollment, while art history and history of religion saw was $11 156. The average debt was $3 608 at the drops of 10.1%. Philosophy courses received 3.9% collegiate level and $6 308 at the university level. fewer students, and fine arts programs had an 11.4% Considering only financial aid recipients, these decrease in enrollment from the previous year. numbers climb to $5 815 and $9 65721. Students also tended to avoid long term courses because of the debt burden, assuming cost to be a As illustrated by the following graphics, the role of more important factor when compared with more public funding in university income was reduced in an affordable short term courses. almost continuous fashion, accelerating after the tuition fee thaw in 1990-1991. Student contributions The British Minister for Higher Education, Bill spiked noticeably after this thaw, and do not become Rammell acknowledged this trend, but does not relatively stabilized until after the freeze was enacted believe that it is necessarily a bad thing, as students in 1996. abandon fields where the potential payoff is lower
19. FOSKETT et al., op. cit. 20. Statistics Canada, the Center for Education Statistics. 21. Government of Quebec, Ministry of Education, Aide financire aux tudes, Survey of the Living Conditions of Students Pursuing Secondary Vocational Training or College or University Studies, 2003.

18. FURLONG, Andy and Cartmel, Fred, Graduates from disadvantaged families: Early labour market experiences, University of Glasgow - Joseph Rowntree Foundation, October 2005.

Graphic 1
Share of Public Investment in the Income of Quebec Universities and Colleges 1989-200622

Percentage

Indexing tuition to the cost of living will not be able to offset the structural deficit. A recent study from the Confdration des associations dtudiants et dtudiantes de lUniversit Laval (Laval University Student Association Confederation, or CADEUL) demonstrates that the possible indexing of tuition fees in 2007-2008 will only provide $4.6 million for the same year, a paltry sum considering the $400 million universities have been deprived of due to underfunding24. The examples from Britain and Ontario also demonstrate that a hike in absolute terms, subsequently limited and indexed, would not compensate for the systematic reduction of public funding. Additionally, it would exacerbate problems linked to charging fees for education. There is no way around this: the problem of public funding must be confronted head on. This will not happen without a major public debate questioning the assumptions currently used to justify the counterproductive policies that have been adopted. Considering their inability to solve the current situation and their detrimental social effects, raising and maintaining education fees are not viable solutions to this problem. Implementing socially and economical viable education policies requires us to question the feasibility of new programs. The second half of this study examines the socioeconomic viability of free education, one option that could potentially eliminate the majority of the financial obstacles and social problems linked to education fees in Quebec.

Years

Graphic 2
Share of Public Investment in the Income of Quebec Universities and Colleges 1989-2006

Percentage

Years

This demonstrates an unmistakable trend towards the inverse variation of public and student funding. After the situations in Britain and Ontario23, is it any wonder people are speaking out to affirm the inevitability of the withdrawal of public funding and the necessity of increased tuition fees? This is how some parties are trying to raise tuition fees under the pretext of solving the institutional crisis, though at most these efforts will relieve some of the pressure caused by sustained budget cuts. In fact, neither indexation nor a simple tuition increase will curb the problems of chronic government underfunding. Instead, they will lead to debt, restricted access, and other associated problems.

22. This data includes both universities and colleges, according to the data from CANSIM, which explains certain disparities in the numbers limited to the university level.

23. MACKENZIE, op. cit 24. RATEL, Jean-Luc and VERREAULT-JULIEN, Philippe, Quen est-il de l'indexation des droits de scolarit?, (What about the indexation of tuition fees?) January 2007, http://impactcampus.qc.ca/actualites/20070116/002542.html.

PART II: STUDY OF THE ELIMINATION OF EDUCATION FEES The cost of free education As we have seen, raising tuition fees is not a solution to the problem of underfunding in the higher education system. Furthermore, pursuing this tendency will only aggravate ongoing problems associated with debt and access to education. It is the states responsibility to see to the proper funding of the education system, in order to ensure high quality post-secondary education and fair and equal access for everyone. From this point of view, instating a free education policy at the post-secondary level while abolishing tuition fees at the collegiate and university levels seems to be the best option for solving the problems linked to education fees.

Table 1
University and Cegep Operating Income and Budget Distribution28
Academic Year 2003-2004 CEGEPS Total Income $1, 496 M Government of Quebec 86 % Government of Canada 0% Tuition and fees 3% Other revenue 11 % Total 100 % Universities $4, 203 M 53 % 13 % 12 % 22 % 100%

We obtained this figure by adding the revenue earned from tuition and fees presented in Table 1. The result is a sum of $504.4 million for the complete elimination of education fees at the university level and $44.8 million at the collegiate (note that the amount for the collegiate level is the same as the first calculation).

Far from being an unquantifiable policy or an Although this $550 million figure represents the unrealistic measure that would send the Quebec assumed cost of free post-secondary education, it is government into an inflationary spiral, the cost of free once again possible to adjust this amount by taking education can be meticulously quantified. into account that the government would not have to This calculation will consist of two stages: we will pay the entire sum should it decide to eliminate postbegin by evaluating the cost of eliminating tuition, secondary education fees. In fact, two variables would before addressing the cost of eliminating all fees that influence the gross cost of free education: the students must pay to their institute of higher elimination of scholarships set aside to pay tuition education. By examining on the portion of collegiate fees and maintaining education fees for international and university income represented by these fees, we students. can deduce the costs of their elimination. Based on the data from the 2003-2004 academic year25, we conclude that the elimination of tuition at the collegiate and university levels would cost Quebecs government a total of $477 million ($432.1 million at the university level26 and $44.8 million at the collegiate27). This evaluation remains incomplete because it does not take into account all education fees. More accurately, a complete and total elimination of education fees leading to a policy of free postsecondary education would cost the Quebec government an annual total of $550 million. Assessing the sums that could be saved in different financial aid programs involves numerous intangibles. To simplify the process, we estimated the amount of financial aid allocated to tuition fees and subtracted this amount from currently available scholarships to demonstrate the opportunities for economizing. In 2004, some $282 million29 were distributed in the form of scholarships for Quebec students. It is easy to see the potential savings in eliminating the portion of scholarships used to offset the cost of tuition fees. By eliminating an estimated 25% of the currently allotted amount, a percentage generally granted by financial aid for the payment of tuition fees, the government could save $70.5 million.
27. Consultations prbudgtaires (Pre-Budget Consultations) 2006, op. cit, 2006, p. 11. 28. Ibid. 29. Aide financire aux tudes: rapport annuel 2004-2005, La gestion par rsultats (Annual Report, Results-Based Management), Government of Quebec, Ministre de lducation, du Loisir et du Sport, 2005, p. 5.

25. The 2003-2004 academic year is the most recent available reference year from which we can obtain all the data necessary to establish the cost of free education. 26. Parliamentary Committee on Education for the Quality, Accessibility and Funding of Universities, Government of Quebec, Ministre de lducation, 2003, p. 20

By maintaining fees specifically for international students and Canadian non-residents of Quebec, it is possible to subtract some $122.9 million from the cost of free education ($86.8 million for tuition fees for international students and $36.1 million for Canadian non-residents of Quebec).

implementing such a policy is in fact equal to the average annual increase in the education budget. Since the Charest government came to power, the budget allocated to education has increased 16.4% 34.

Continuing to contextualize the costs of free education helps to understand what these amounts mean from a strictly fiscal standpoint. As we have see, We can subtract these two amounts, $70.5 million it would represent a relatively negligible percentage of from scholarship programs and $122.9 million30 from general government spending, as well as a standard tuition fees for international students and Canadian annual increase in the funds allotted for the education non-residents, from the initial cost of free education. system. This brings the final cost for the Government of Let us look more closely at the situation of the postQuebec of eliminating post-secondary education fees secondary system by considering the increase of the for Quebec students to $356 million. portion of income in institutes of higher education coming from provincial funding. In the case of the The Fiscal Sustainability of Free Education Cegeps, eliminating education fees and replacing them with government funds constitutes a 3.5%35 For the sake of clarity, and for practical purposes, increase in funds already provided by Quebec. we will stick with the initial cost of free education ($550 million) to demonstrate its fiscal sustainability. At the university level, this same switch constitutes a This is a more conservative estimate and eliminates 22.6% increase in government funding of the system. intangibles related to adjusting the scholarship If we combine the two levels of education, free program and maintaining education fees for foreign education would constitute a 15.6% increase in students and non-resident Canadians. governmental financial contribution. Let us start by considering the $550 million dollar Even in a case-by-case analysis, implementing cost of free education. This figure only represents free education at the post-secondary level would 0.91% of the total expenses of the Government of not have a destabilizing effect on the institutions Quebec31. Free Education thus represents only a 1% revenue sources. raise in government spending, which is currently at $59.8 million. If we take the UQAM as an example, we can see an increase of 22.4%36, or $45.6 million, in Along the same lines, we should mention that the government subsidies granted by the Ministry of entire budget for the education system in Quebec is Education. If we also consider the case of the $13 billion32. Thus, the added $550 million constitutes Universit de Montral, we find a slightly lower a 4.2% increase of the current budget. variation with a rate of 18.2%37, corresponding to $61 million. Such a hike is hardly extraordinary. For the 20062007 academic year, the government invested $660 One of the most instructive exercises for million in education, an increase of 5.4% from its prior demonstrating the fiscal sustainability of free budget33. education is to measure the variation in postsecondary education funding required for free Thus, the argument that the government is currently education. A progressive increase in government in a critical budgetary situation that prevents it from contributions to the operating budgets of institutes of pursuing a free education policy is insufficient to higher education is conceivable without necessarily prevent a debate on the matter. The costs of engendering a budget crisis.
30. Budgetary Rules and Operating Grants for Quebec Universities for the 2006-2007 Academic Year, Ministre de l'ducation, du Loisir et du Sport, 2006. Data taken from table E. 31. Budget 2006-2007, Government of Quebec, 2006, p. 4. 32. Budget 2006-2007, Budget in Brief, Government of Quebec, 2006, p. 7. 33. Ibid. 34. Analysis of the progression of funds allotted to education in the budgets of the Government of Quebec between 2003 and 2006. 35. Consultations prbudgtaires (Pre-Budget Consultations) 2006, op. cit., 2006, p. 11. 36. Rapport d'activits Universit du Qubec Montral 2004-2005, (Activity Report) UQM, 2006, p.

10

There is another interesting point of comparison that illustrates the fiscal sustainability of free education. By comparing the cost to the government of eliminating all post-secondary education fees with the cost of aid granted to businesses by the state, we will be better able to grasp how this is financially sustainable. For the year 2007, the Quebec government plans to spend $1.9 million dollars in direct aid to businesses38. With the budgetary restraints enacted in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005, the government managed to save $1.4 billion in aid to businesses between 2003 and 200539.

To begin, the university system has seen an expansion of access at all levels since the declaration of the tuition freeze in 1996. Starting from the 19971998 academic year, when the freeze started to have a noticeable effect, one can easily see a significant increase in the number of university enrollments.

During the period leading up to the 1997-1998 academic year to 2005-2006 bachelors degree programs reported a 22.1% increase in enrollment44. This rose to 35.6% for Masters programs and 63.2% for Doctorate programs. As a comparative example, during the preliminary period between 1992 and 1997, that is to say before the freeze could have an effect, It is therefore possible for the government to enrollment in bachelor degree programs saw a 14.6% determine to which budgetary item these new funds drop45. can be allocated. This is especially true as the It is easy to see the positive effects of limiting tuition governments savings from the budgetary restraints fees on access to education, a conclusion that leads passed on business aid continue to increase, from $309 million in 2003, to $461 million in 2004 and us to believe this phenomenon would be amplified should these same fees be eliminated entirely. finally $662 million in 200540. From another point of view, the current freeze of post-secondary education fees could provide equally useful insights on the question of student debt. Here, we can see a much lower rate of debt amongst university students in Quebec compared with that incurred by their Canadian counterparts.

More generally, the current budget for Quebec anticipates tax expenditures to the benefit of corporate enterprises will rise to $2.6 billion in 200741. This amount is composed primarily of tax credits and tax holidays ($1.7 billion42) as well as various exemptions concerning tax on paid-up capital ($624 million43). Only considering these two aspects, we have $2.3 billion dollars in tax revenue that the government manages to go without. Our goal here is not to try to equate the price of free education with the aid given to businesses, but rather to demonstrate the governments financial capacities. The Impacts of Free Education on Student Debt and Access to Education Without pretending to draw up an exhaustive report on the impacts of eliminating post-secondary education fees, it is possible to enumerate certain conclusions by more closely studying the current situation that prevails at the university and collegiate levels.
37. 38. 39. 40. 41. Annual Report 2005, Universit de Montral, 2006, p. 16. Tax Expenditures 2006 Edition, Government of Quebec, 2006, p. 30. Ibid. Ibid, p. 31. Ibid, p. 29.

42. Ibid. 43. Ibid, p. 28. 44. Education Indicators 2006 Edition, Ministre de l'ducation, du Loisir et du Sport, 2006, p. 73. 45. Ibid.

11

costs of such a measure. And yet, by studying the data from the collegiate level, which however has Average debt of a student who has decided to pay his or the reputation of producing professional loafers, her loan at the end of his or her first cycle, 2001-200246 one can see that this cost would quite probably be nothing. In fact, the average length of a degree for Quebec $13 100 cegep students in a pre-university program is 2.4 $22 700 Ontario year49, barely 0.4 of a year more than the anticipated Western Provinces $20 300 duration. We would like to add that this average Atlantic Provinces $22 400 length of a degree at the collegiate level is within an order of magnitude comparable to the average The prevailing situation in the collegiate system is length of a Bachelors degree program. just as enlightening when considering the potential impact of free education. As indicated in Graph 3, the As we have demonstrated, instating a free education level of access to collegiate education has risen from policy is both attainable and fiscally sustainable. It 40% to 60% over the past 30 years, which means a would thus seem that the primary obstacles are ot 50% increase in three decades. This growth explains financial considerations but rather a lack of political in part the fact that Quebec holds the highest rank in will, as well as the neoliberal policies adopted by the Canada for obtaining a post-secondary diploma Government of Quebec over the past few decades. No doubt the between the ages of 25-2947. practically nonexistent cost of education at this level has something to do with this phenomenon. Table 2 Graph 3
Rate of Access to College Education, Mainstream Education, Full or Part Time, Public or Private System, According to Sex (in %)48

As this is a level of education where the fees are only perceived to be marginal to access the postsecondary level (quasi-free education), one can assume that the observable increase in attendance over the last thirty years will also apply to the university level, in the event of tuition fees being eliminated. One could object that a policy eliminating education fees could uselessly prolong the average time to obtain a diploma, thus exponentially increasing the
46. Parliamentary Committee on Education for the Quality, Accessibility and Funding of Universities, op. cit., 2003, p. 18. 47. Consultations prbudgtaires (Pre-Budget Consultations) 2006, op.-cit., 2006, p. 9. 48. Education Indicators, op. cit, 2006, p. 69. 49. Ibid, p.85.

12

Faced with the withdrawal of the state, a trend most often presented as inevitable, the institutions of Post-secondary education faces two very distinct higher education find themselves forced to transfer problems: a debate over education fees (most often costs onto individuals. discussed only in relation to fee hikes) and that of chronic underfunding. More often than not, this movement is justified by utilitarian rhetoric portraying education as a pragmatic The concise objective of this study was to examine the investment in exclusively functional knowledge, or even feasibility and the consequences of implementing a free merchandise for which the consumer should assume education policy in Quebec. a majority of the cost. It demonstrates a direct link between governmental underfunding and pressures leading to increased tuition fees, which occurs despite the failure of these increases to provide a solution to the problem and their numerous negative social impacts. It also demonstrates that eliminating education fees altogether is preferable to raising tuition fees, in order to expand access to education for everyone and to confront the financial obstacles and pressures caused by debt. Thus, we conclude the following: - Implementing free education would cost the Government of Quebec $550 M For the student consumer, long term economic profitability has supplanted the ultimate goal and purpose of education: to mold enlightened citizens capable of engaging critically with the world and contributing towards the greater social good. Furthermore, this perspective reduces the issue to purely economic terms, ignoring the social impacts of education fees on the less fortunate and the middle class. For an individual coming from a low-income family, the prospect of thousands upon thousands of dollars in debt is a strong incentive to join the workforce as quickly as possible, or to choose a short and profitable academic program.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that universal access to education is both possible and realistic. It is also the only way to - This policy is more socially sustainable than tuition ensure the democratic nature of education and to hikes and it is also realistic from a financial standpoint. preserve the integrity of institutions of higher education, as well as their mission to disseminate knowledge and - Free education would encourage higher participation culture for all. and persistence in post-secondary studies. - Increasing tuition fees is not a solution to the underfunding of the university system. They only serve to transfer a fraction of the cost onto individuals without questioning the systematic decline of government funding of education. - Education fees and debt adversely affect access to education and the quality of life of students and graduates. - Increases in tuition fees exacerbate these problems. - Implementing free education is the first step towards a truly progressive education policy, a policy that must be accompanied by an upward revision of public funding.

The Institute of Socioeconomic Research and Information (LInstitut de recherche et dinformations socio-conomiques, or IRIS), an independent, progressive research institute, was founded in Fall 2000. Our mission is twofold. On the one hand, the institute produces studies, brochures and leaflets on the most important socio-economic causes of the moment (taxation, poverty, globalization, privatization, etc.) in order to offer an alternative discourse to the Neo-Liberal perspective. On the other hand, the researchers offer their services to community groups, ecological groups, and syndicates for specific research projects or for drafting memoirs. The studies and other IRIS documents are available for free on our website, in order to make them accessible to the widest number of people possible. IRIS researchers are available to hold conferences and workshops. TO JOIN THE IRIS secretariat@iris-recherche.qc.ca www.iris-recherche.qc.ca (514) 206-6733

13