Profs call Ford government bill 'political inference' on campus
Some Ontario academics are waging a campaign against new legislation from Premier Doug Ford's government that they say would pave the way for po‐ litical interference on cam‐ pus.
Bill 166, called the Strengthening Accountability and Student Supports Act, would give the minister of colleges and universities sweeping powers over cam‐ pus anti-racism and mental health policies.
While the government says the intent of the legisla‐ tion is to ensure safety and support for post-secondary students, a growing group of professors says the bill un‐ dermines the independence of Ontario's universities.
"Bill 166 fundamentally changes the way universities in this province are governed, moving us away from democ‐ ratic principles of university autonomy," said Sue Fergu‐ son, an associate professor emerita at Wilfrid Laurier University.
"We need to ensure that the safeguards from political interference in our institu‐ tions of higher learning are strengthened, not weak‐ ened," Ferguson told a leg‐ islative committee hearing at Queen's Park this week.
Ferguson is part of a newly formed group called the Coalition Against Political Interference in Public Re‐ search and Education in On‐ tario. The group has moun‐ ted a letter-writing campaign directed at Colleges and Uni‐ versities Minister Jill Dunlop, calling for the bill to be quashed.
"Instead of advancing stu‐ dent mental health and antiracism on campuses, this bill stymies both and opens to the door to a degree of politi‐ cal interference that would shatter the integrity of Ontar‐ io's post-secondary institu‐ tions," says the group's letter.
The Council of Ontario Universities, the umbrella group representing the province's 23 universities, has also raised concerns about the powers that the bill gives to the minister and the risk that it would undermine their autonomy.
Universities already have mental health and antiracism policies in place, but provincial funding for those programs is inadequate, the council says in its response to the bill.
"Ontario's universities op‐ pose unnecessary and du‐ plicative legislative interven‐ tion without the associated funding," says the council's submission. "A new directive will only duplicate existing ef‐ forts, while increasing red tape, costs and administra‐ tion."
Rise in racist incidents on campus: Dunlop
Dunlop defended Bill 166 during the committee hear‐ ing this week, saying that it follows a rise in racist inci‐ dents on campuses since last October's attack by Hamas against Israel.
"While post-secondary in‐ stitutions have taken action to address these incidents, it's clear that a broader, more proactive approach is needed so that all incidents are dealt with in an appropriate man‐ ner," Dunlop said.
"This does not detract from the fact that colleges and universities should be a place where students feel free to exchange ideas and have open and respectful de‐ bate," she added.
Dunlop said the bill would also result in a standard policy for mental health sup‐ ports and services for stu‐ dents no matter which insti‐ tution they attend.
If the government truly wants to tackle racism on campus, it should reverse the cuts it made to the provincial anti-racism directorate in 2018, says Honor Brabazon, an associate professor at St. Jerome's University, part of the University of Waterloo.
The government disban‐ ded four of the directorate's advisory committees - on an‐ tisemitism, Islamophobia, an‐ ti-Black racism and anti-In‐ digenous racism - that were designed to make recom‐ mendations on anti-racism policies.
"We haven't seen from this government the kind of strong case that we would expect them to make to jus‐ tify weakening the funda‐ mental democratic principle of institutional autonomy," Brabazon said during the public hearing.
The bill would give Dunlop the power to issue "ministeri‐ al directives" specifying what elements must be included in a college or university's antiracism or mental health policy.
"It allows us to act faster, to be more flexible and re‐ sponsive to what's actually happening on campus," Dun‐ lop said.
That makes NDP post-sec‐ ondary critic Peggy Sattler leery.
"I have some major con‐ cerns about the lack of trans‐ parency," Sattler told the committee. "There are legiti‐ mate questions about what these ministerial directives are going to include."
Consequences for noncompliance unclear
The bill would also give the minister the power to take steps against colleges or universities that don't com‐ ply, but does not indicate what those steps could be.
During the hearing, Sattler asked what consequences the schools could face for failing to meet her directives, but Dunlop did not provide a direct answer.
While Ontario's colleges have since their inception op‐ erated under the direct au‐ thority of cabinet, the bill is the latest move by the Ford government to establish greater provincial control over universities:
The government an‐ nounced in February a $1.2 billion increase to colleges and universities over the next three years. That's half the increase that was recom‐ mended by the province's own advisory panel before Ottawa moved to cap inter‐ national student intake this year.