The UPEI Sun, Thursday, Oct. 27, 1977, page 11

when making 9 year r under

i year {recom- ments increase itutionslforzthis t. in itspresen- ne commission ncem that “the upport for post ns between the

st of Canada is

nts ant itutions -

UL

er increases in oubtedlyy result post-secondary itime provmces the educational Maritime stu-

remiers could se to the com- n per cent in- ts, adding they to not increase per cent, “a restraint."

w is shared by Id last year the crease the year than any other : and that fees for three years. ncerned about overnment: 80 p- t year with their er cent funding q the premiers listening to the

the MPHEC ith a three year n increases in e requirements

equested in the ear, of $145.5 e commission on and left with mg once again will most likely

c

° ;

ojections were '

fall far short of the requests made

by the institutions. The administra- tion's obvious concern that .the MPHEC is a government red herring being used to cover up govern- ment's inability or outright unwill- ingness to increase funding to post secondary education is shared manifold. by students and faculty.

Much of the workings and deci- sion making processes of the MPHEC are secret with close ties

1 between the administrations, the

commissuin and the governments.

“The funding decisions are kept

secret from start to finish. Both the Atlantic Federation of tudents (AFS) and the Atlantic Conference the Canadian Association of Univer‘ sity Teachers have in public sub- missions to the commission deplored the lack of either student or faculty representation on the MPHEC through their respective federations. Both groups have called for more public information

on the final allocation criteria and the funding decisions throughout the process, and condemned the fact that the entire university com- munity is not consulted or represented by the MPH EC.

Policy

The need for faculty and student representation on the commission is more pressing when the MPHEC is becoming established to the point where it 'further expands itsscope to initiate policy studies and subsequent recommendations to the council. The commission compiled a m,aj0r report last spring outliningthe results of policy deci- sions and studies made during the two years of'its existence to that

point. Major concerns of the com- mission until that point were con- nected- with developing a regional information base on post-secondary institutions, completing inventories on available course programmes and space in the region, finalizing the funding decision making pro- cess, and arriving at a number of

50% mono monoiyi no cutbaan .

policy statements for submission to the CMP.

The commission reported policy recommendations in three major areas in the report, which \was

cessibility, Funding, . and Student Aid. The major policy statements

. of released in'th'e'late summer,"Ac- ‘

Whether the MPHEC will become the real policy group in the post- secondarylpolitical relationship in the maritimes, perhaps even the Atlantic, will depend on what type

stance the commission ' is prepared to take on crucial issues. Asit now stands the body is little more than a political fish-pond from

rs it ie 51g ‘0 fi 5 hi n g

tions in lieu of a straight face to face handout.

Unless the student regional group, AFS finds some way to radically infiltrate the organization within a relatively short time, the ex- istence of the MPHEC will matter

little to students on campuses

throughout the maritimes. Govern-

The Atlantic Federation of Students and the Atlantic Conference of the Canadian Associa- . tion of University Teachers have deplored the ’l‘a‘ék'of “either student or faculty representa-

. tion-onthe MPHEC.

ments' unwillingness to accept the commission‘s recommendations that tuition fees be frozen, and a refusal to recognize the need for

cial bind for some time to come, and will undoubtedly look to the perennial “last resort", the students, for more money.

dealt with the accessibility ques- tion where the commission as- serted the principle of accessibility by merit. if only in' vague terms, and left the premiers with the option for introducing differential fees for

foreign students in the region at - some point in future. The policy states. “post secondary education is to be accessible to all Canadian Students who qualify and for whom there are places available: however funding related to such students may be on a reduced basis.” The commission pointed to the differen- tial fees recently implemented in Ontario and Alberta and suggested the CMP would have to monitor the effects of these moves to gauge the. need for action in the Maritimes.

The statements on funding are largely concerned with how the MPHEC is going to use its allo-

cations.and how the institutions can relate to items not necessarily under the control of the commis- sion. ’

The commission also recommended the CMP establish a uniform student policy for the region in conjunction with the development of a truly national stu- dent aid plan. The recommenda- tions include a regional committee to monitor and eventually ad- miniSter a program that would be consistent throughout the region.

The'report said the Maritime prov- inces were not offering uniform pro- grams of student aid and had ig- nored MPHEC recommendations made a year earlier that were intend- ed to somewhat unify the provincial programs.

The MPHEC has its hands tied in many areas of concern. As far as telling government who needs how much money and when, the govern- ments politely listen and, acutely aware of the electorate and their own precarious position, reply to MPHEC with grants that more often reflect their own position much more than that of those involved in education. On the other hand the commission has to walk the line

with the institutions to the govern»

ments modifying the position from either side ultimately playing a give and take game with both.

Though its real effectiveness is questionable, the commission is entrenching itself in-_ the bureaucracy, decision-making processes, that are being used and recognized by the key groups in the university community. »

which the governments annually continual funding increases will toss cut grab bags to the 'institu. mean the universities are in a finan-

Meinclze: Mon lieu be dam UPEI’A' mung

and establishing

Thh Page

,is TypeSef

VOA. That 1/.) the newton thus page. ioolazs dififiens ent. 'So doe/s page 8. ' - '

Both stair/r1223 WULQ, type/set 60a Canadian Univ- entity Pact/3’ Atiantic Banana and tent to papa/us. Not only does the end pnoduct 05 type/setting tooh neate/L but is a gneat time save/L fion the papm’t ttafifi. The UPEI SUN 1A the one and oniy new/5- pape/i tn CUP that ain't type/set. Thus meant ’we have to do tot/5 06 time—commng, boning thit- wonh typing Aton/ie/s in tong, nan/Low cotumn/s that no one we has to do. It that gain? ‘

‘Cwmentiy we’ne getting estimate/s finom type: betting shop/s. Who/tetra the fligune/s, tpr/SQ/CLLVLQ wit/i the/Lease can costs. But the and no,th will be mono pno4etMonai—ioohtng, cation to head and mote flan to ionoduce in {2.5.5 time.

it“ 4' "’ " ‘ioii amen/s.