Analyze this, with Richard Shillington
Business lobbyists constantly calling for a "level playing field" have demanded - and received - federal and provincial budgets that have tilted the field of life in favour of kids from families with money while hurting the chances of low-income students.
It's strange how those business voices who call for a 'level playing field' consider 'equality of opportunity' for children an unrealistic ideal not worth pursuing.
Most people agree education contributes to future income. And everyone says they believe in equal educational opportunities. Despite the rhetoric, equal access to education is a distant ideal.
 |
|
A choice of options: Ontario could eliminate post-secondary tuition for the cost of the $200 rebate to taxpayers |
Who has a university degree? Only 9% of those whose parents were without high school graduation, but 44% of the children of graduates. While some of this result is likely due to cultural factors - better educated parents may value formal education - the pattern is strong. Higher family income and education generally lead to higher achievement in school for the children.
Each level of education has its barriers. At the primary level it's the cost of supplies for art and music. For secondary school it's things like 'educational' field trips (to watch a baseball game), which can cost hundreds. At the post-secondary level there's living costs, books, opportunity cost (the forgone income) and, finally, tuition.
Let's have a closer look at university tuition. Overall government contributions to university finance are down 13% over the last five years. The biggest expenditure item for universities is salaries, so recent cuts in federal and provincial government contributions would need to be made up by increased tuition or cuts to salaries. This explains why tuition has increased by 30% over the last five years and 10% in the last year alone.
|
|
Due to years of federal and provincial tax and program cuts, student debt problems have increased by 65% in five years |
At the national level, student fees are about $2.4 billion. Thus, it would cost about $1.2 billion to cut tuition in half, small potatoes compared with the recent $58 billion-over-five-years federal tax cuts.
Total tuition in Ontario is about $1 billion - about the same amount as the $200 per taxpayer refund the provincial government just announced. Reduced tuition fees were clearly an affordable option but was not chosen.
Consider the debt levels. One in three students who left school in 1995/96 had repayment difficulties compared to one in five for students in the 1990/91 group. In percentage terms, that's a 65% increase in five years.
Imagine if we funded Medicare like we do post-secondary education. If you need expensive surgery you would pay about 25% of the cost. If you can't afford to write a cheque immediately the government will lend you the funds - with interest. A short hospital stay could easily burden you with Medicare debts of $25,000 and more. It happens to American families frequently.
|
|
Access to university based on ability rather than finances may lead to the prospect of some dull children of wealthy Canadians being replaced by the brighter children of average Canadians |
Would this interfere with the equal access to health care? It would certainly be seen as a major departure from accessibility as we now know it. Doesn't the same conclusion apply to education?
Admittedly, access to university based on ability rather than finances may lead to the prospect of some dull children of wealthy Canadians being replaced by the brighter children of average Canadians. Ahem.
Those who want a "level playing field" for Canadian children are not satisfied with the current unequal access to universities. They recognize increasing tuition fees tilt the field and widen the gap between those who can afford education and those who can't. Give-away budgets from Ottawa and the provinces do nothing to narrow the gap.
Maybe 100% equal opportunity, like truth, is an ideal and not fully attainable. But regardless don't we want as much equality as possible?
Richard Shillington, Ph.D., is a statistician who specializes in the quantitative analysis of health, social and economic policy. He appears regularly before committees of the House of Commons and the Senate, and frequently provides commentaries for television, radio and newspapers on issues of taxation, human rights and social policy. Richard's Straight Goods column appears weekly.
Other articles from Analyze this...
[ Front Page ]
