The beginning of 1,000 cuts to Memorial University

Robin Whitaker, Tom Hawco, Russell Wangersky and Morley Hodder have described Memorial University of Newfoundland’s recent predicament quite eloquently. As a graduate of MUN and as a former sessional professor at MUN, I am disappointed, also, in the provincial government’s recent action, but not surprised.

Firstly, numerous provincial governments underfunded the school system for years, including abolishing public provincial examinations, extending the school year without adding more advanced courses in proportion, and increasing the student/teacher ratio.

The net result of such decisions was to increase the average marks, make parents happier, reduce the high unemployment rate and gradually reduce the overall costs of school education.

Secondly, numerous provincial governments underfunded postsecondary colleges for years. Work loads of faculty and staff increased substantially, including years where there were wage freezes. At the same time pension funding was increased from six per cent (employee and employer) in the 1970s to over 11 per cent currently.

Thirdly, it is MUN’S turn for being underfunded. Making small changes to MUN’S pension administration may or may not help. If the decision to retire is 65, then that retiree will have an actuarial life span of about 20 more years and have a pension for about 20 years. If that same retiree retires at 75, then the retiree will have a pension for about 10 years, admittedly with a higher pension. In that latter case the retiree will have paid into the pension fund for an extra 10 years.

I suspect the net result to the pension fund will be somewhat negative for the retiree to retire beyond 65 than at 65.

On the other hand, there will be those who will retire or resign before age 65. Whatever the difference in costs, we are not supposed to age discriminate!

Politicians are not experts in education and training.

Senior administration has the correct approach. Promote quality education. Increase first-year student fees to average Atlantic Canada university fees. The anticipated result will be a reduction in enrolment in first year. This will not be a calamity as the current dropout rate for many first-year courses has been up to 30 per cent, which will lessen as parents and students will place a greater value on education. There will also be savings on space and not renewing the faculty and staff positions of retirees.

Fewer dropouts mean the young people affected will enter the workforce earlier or go to college and not have been “spinning their wheels” at MUN.

After MUN refunding the government for student-fee increases, there should still be savings.

When employers from private industry and potential individual donors realize that MUN’S senior administration is acting responsibly, I suspect they will seriously consider investing more in MUN.

One has to look at the small universities in the Maritimes (Acadia University, St. Francis Xavier and Mount Allison), that each has survived 150 years and see how private industry has supported them compared to government support.

It would be interesting to note what the dropout rate is for first-year courses at those universities.

There are ways of funding students other than an arbitrarily low tuition fee. How about a preuniversity qualifying examination? If a student passes, government would cover the cost of tuition fees, subject to a means test of the student’s parent(s).

Or how about considering the CEGEP system that Quebec uses? There are alternatives for financially supporting students without putting MUN in a straitjacket.

Ian Mcmaster St. John’s