Debates of April 14th, 2021

Laurentian University in Sudbury

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, I truly believe in the equality of access for education to all. That is in both official languages. That is for the indigenous education piece that is part of our reconciliation promise.

No matter where one is—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. There seems to be a technical issue.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Madam Speaker, the interpretation is not working.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The interpretation is working now.

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, just as in this House we have equal access to languages, which we need, as it is equal, balanced and fair, that has to exist in our education system as well.

I really thank the hon. member for that question about equity and the provision of French language services to all students across Canada.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would say to my friend from London—Fanshawe that I agree that the federal government needs to do more.

There are billions of dollars transferred under the Canada social transfer that are supposed to go to post-secondary. What suggestions does the member have about how that money could be tied to actual results to protect post-secondary institutions?

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, the answer, and something that New Democrats have been pushing for for a long time, is a post-secondary education bill. It would ensure that the monies that are transferred get to where they need to in terms of educational access, the programs and the institutions that provide incredible services to Canadians in that post-secondary education sector.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to mention that I will be splitting my time with the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands. I have not seen her in a long time and I have missed her. I hope to soon be able to sit with her in the House.

I am the member of Parliament for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell. I like to tell my Ontario colleagues that I represent the riding where the sun rises in Ontario.

Madam Speaker, I love these exchanges. As long as it is French, we can understand each other. I get interrupted from time to time, but it is not a big deal.

As I was saying, I am a proud Franco-Ontarian. More than 60% of my constituents are francophone. Although I am a Franco-Ontarian, I do not have the same day-to-day experiences as my Franco-Ontarian colleagues elsewhere in the province. It is very easy to find francophone schools in my riding. It is very easy to access an education in French within 100 kilometres. Although we do have our share of problems and there are some gaps, I know that my reality is completely different from the reality of my francophone colleagues in York Region, for example, who may not have access to the kinds of francophone institutions or community centres I have access to here. This is why we need an action plan on official languages, which we presented in 2018.

There is another thing I want to mention. Since 2015, I have had a very good working relationship and friendship with the member for Sudbury, who will not be running in the next election. All of us Franco-Ontarians get along well, including the member for Nickel Belt. We are a small group, each with our own accents. People from Kapuskasing have an accent, francophones from Orléans have an accent. The francophone accents in Hawkesbury and Embrun may be different, but that is okay. We celebrate our accents when we speak French. We make a good team.

On that dark Monday back in 2018, we all stood in solidarity with the member for Orléans and the member for Ottawa—Vanier. We worked together to inform the minister responsible for official languages. I know that she even hired some Franco-Ontarians, including a francophone from Casselman who is very familiar with the challenges our community faces.

I am a graduate of the University of Ottawa and the Cité collégiale. I was fortunate enough to sit on the board of directors of the Cité collégiale, but I also studied at Laurentian University, where I did a personal finance course. It has been quite some time since I have had any interaction with Laurentian University, but today I am thinking of Dr. Yves Robichaud. I remember my conversation with him. I do not know if he is still at the university or if he was a victim of what happened recently, but I want to thank him, because he had an impact on my career and my education.

Before I studied at Laurentian University, I knew there was a partnership between the Cité collégiale and Laurentian University for the personal finance course. I had called Laurentian University, and Dr. Yves Robichaud called me back right away to tell me that I could take an online course, no problem. Funnily enough, I often meet people from Sudbury who move here. It is often older people who move for family reasons. I was just a guy from eastern Ontario taking classes at a university with connections to northern Ontario. I know people from northern Ontario often come east to study or work, but I thought it was a rare for a student from eastern Ontario to go north. This is important, and it shows how connected our francophone community is.

Getting back to Dr. Robichaud, if he is still at the university, has lost colleagues or has lost his own job, I would like him to know that my thoughts are with him, with all of his colleagues and with the entire student community at the university.

I hear some members say that we must find a solution, that we should have done so over 24 hours ago. The fact of the matter is that it will not be so simple. The federal government is not responsible for finding a solution. Yes, we will be partners, as we always have been, whether through official languages programs or funding provided by Canadian Heritage. However, it is the Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities that must find a solution, in collaboration with Laurentian University. This we know very well, having heard my colleagues' speeches during this debate. The federal government will be there, represented by the Minister of Official Languages. The Prime Minister has said that the government would absolutely be there.

Right now, there is no plan. I do not say this to point the finger at the provincial government, but it will take some time. It is important to take the time to prepare a solid business plan to ensure the viability of Laurentian University. We must not find ourselves in another emergency debate in the House of Commons in five years, rehashing the same arguments and accusing one government of not having done this and another of not having done that. This means we must take the time. I heard one of my Conservative colleagues say that it is really a dark day for our community, but we must roll up our sleeves and get to work. We can find a solution, as we did for the Université de l'Ontario français.

I disagree that the federal government should fully finance Laurentian University or any other Canadian university. The federal government must be a partner but it should not finance universities 100% because they fall under provincial jurisdiction. I would hate for the federal government to encourage provinces to stop investing in post-secondary education for our minority communities, which is what would happen.

It is true that, for the Université de l'Ontario français, we said we would pay for the first four years as long as the provincial government committed to paying for the next four years. We have a solid agreement that will last at least eight years under which the Université de l'Ontario français will get $40 million from the provincial government and $40 million from the federal government. This will make the institution viable and give our community access to programs in French.

In closing, let me say that I know exactly what our francophone community is going through. I myself was raised in a Franco-Ontarian family. My father was a founding member of the Association française des municipalités de l'Ontario. He was not as lucky as me for his high school studies. I lost track of how many times he told me about how, when he was in school, the minute there was one anglophone in a class, that class was taught in English even if the other 30 students were francophone. In the 1960s and 1970s, that generation fought for its rights. It fought for access to education in French.

I know that all of us, the NDP, the Conservative Party and even the Bloc Québécois, will work together. I am pleased to hear Quebec speaking today about francophone communities outside Quebec because that is really important. I heard my Bloc Québécois colleagues say that we francophones represent only 3% of the population of North America. It is true that we are very much in the minority. It is true that we must act. It is true that French does not have the same status as English because we are a minority throughout North America.

Despite everything, I am confident. I am confident because our government includes people like the Prime Minister, who recognized that the official languages action plan and the budgets were not enough and increased this funding. Our government recognized that for francophones to have access to French institutions and French-language education, it had to recognize the issue of—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. I have to interrupt the hon. member because his time is up. He can say more during questions and comments.

The hon. member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague. As a francophone from eastern Ontario, near Quebec, these issues are obviously important to him.

I have asked my question many times during this debate this evening. What are the real measures the Liberal government has been able to take in light of these problems? His colleague from northern Ontario said earlier that the financial problems at Laurentian University had been on the horizon since 2015. Today we are 2021. This has been floating around for five or six years. It was clear that there were potential problems. In February the university ends up in bankruptcy protection. Between 2015 and the bankruptcy protection, a lot happened.

Does the federal Liberal government—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have to allow others to ask questions.

The hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I was surprised when this happened in February. Perhaps it is because of geographic proximity, but I have a lot more ties with the Cité collégiale and the University of Ottawa.

That being said, I know that there are recurring programs in the memorandum of understanding. Laurentian University is allegedly having major financial difficulties and administration problems. I think that we all read the same newspaper articles. I do not know exactly what happened, but what I can say is that it is not right for the university to seek protection under the Bankruptcy Act. I am pleased to know that the member for Sudbury is going to introduce a bill to prevent that, because it is not right.

We will have to see if it is possible to negotiate an increase in Laurentian University's share of federal funding. To date, I have not seen a funding plan. I could not say—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Questions and comments.

The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have a somewhat convoluted question.

Earlier, the member for Langley—Aldergrove in British Columbia talked about his commitment to the principle of Canada's two founding peoples to explain why he feels the French fact is important. That is not how I see history, but it is an honourable view that I can respect. In 1982, former Prime Minister Trudeau reprogrammed the founding myths upon which Canada is built.

Does the member not agree that the introduction of official bilingualism and state multiculturalism has created old habits that prevent many people here in the House from seeing the real solutions that could be proposed to ensure the full development of French in Canada?

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question, but I am scratching my head because I do not know what quarrels from 1982 have to do with anything. I was not even born then. I was born in 1983. I do not see the connection to this situation or how this will help Laurentian University.

What I can say is that when the time came to create Ontario's French-language university, the federal government came through with its 50% share to ensure the long-term survival of this university, which was established in 2018. Today, Ontario's francophones have access to this university as a result of equal federal and provincial funding.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to join in on this debate this evening. I want to thank my colleagues in the New Democratic Party for bringing this forward as an emergency debate. I completely agree, this is an emergency. I am speaking to members from the traditional territories W_SÁNEC first nations and raise my hands to them.

[Member spoke in SENCOTEN]

[English]

It is important tonight that we remember we are talking about a university that offers programs for anglophones, francophones and in indigenous languages.

I want to start at a broader analytical level of post-secondary education in Canada in general in crisis and then focus in on Laurentian. I hope to be able to offer some useful suggestions.

Back in 2005, the last book written by Jane Jacobs, one of Canada's great minds, was Dark Age Ahead. She spoke of the threats to five major pillars of civilization and culture, and she said they were all under assault. The pillars were family, community, science, proper taxation and education.

She said that post-secondary education was under assault because it was becoming “transactionalized”. We were trading in education for the purposes of broadening our minds and exploring what we could be internally, finding out talents. We were trading education for something she described as” certification”. We pay our money and we get our ticket, so that young people were increasingly consumers, as Jane Jacobs explained, of a decreasing and impoverished intellectual experience with larger and larger classroom sizes, and less and less contact between students and their professors.

It led to more insecurity around the finances of universities. We have seen a real trend where universities have to be beholden to large corporations, some foreign, some Canadian, with chairs in this and that.

When I was teaching at Dalhousie University, it was very hard to see that the professors working on the threats to marine mammals from seismic testing would get far when Shell gave a lot of money to the university to run a chair in offshore oil and gas development. The money also tended to flow in ways that meant that the research that was produced by universities became proprietary. The information that was gleaned from academic pursuits had suddenly become the property of the corporations funding the universities. These trends are dangerous.

We have also had an increasingly large bureaucracy in universities, often focused on fundraising. There are these trends toward raising money. What do wealthy people want? They want to give money so that the building is in their name. We do not see tenure-track positions created with a big plaque with the name of the professor that says the wealthy person who gave them money so that professor has a tenure-track position. The trends are not good and these apply right across Canada.

As I mentioned in an earlier question to the hon. member for London—Fanshawe, the federal government provides billions of dollars in federal and provincial transfers to provinces for universities and post-secondary, but we do not track where those dollars actually go. The trend lines are not good and, as I said, Jane Jacobs pointed this all out in 2005.

We see some of those poorly paid workers in Canada or the exploited group of recent Ph.D.s who do not ever really get a tenure-track position, but teach part-time and are sessional lecturers. We see increasingly reduced opportunities for students, and increased tuition and increased student debt. I suggest that the whole pile of financial mistakes and failure to support post-secondary education adequately is a national crisis.

I want to turn now to Laurentian University, which is tonight's focus. Laurentian is in Sudbury, a wonderful community. I have been very honoured to have given lectures at Laurentian University over the years. The community of Sudbury went from being described as a moonscape to being a green and sustainable place. Laurentian University and the research done there in places like the co-operative freshwater ecology unit are part of that story, so too is what has been happening with a francophone education and indigenous education. I want to speak of the students tonight, because we have not heard their voices.

My daughter's friend Kristen Lavallee, a student at Laurentian, wrote this letter, which was published in the local newspaper, saying the people who made the financial mistakes that led to Laurentian being in bankruptcy protection need to be held accountable. These are Kristen's words, because the students have been going through a terribly stressful time. She wrote:

We, as students, deserve to have clarity about our choices in order to continue our education. Laurentian University is a publicly funded institution which should be receiving the support of the provincial and federal governments. Instead staff, faculty and students are experiencing the brunt of the irresponsibility of a select few in administration.

It is important that we hold the people who are responsible for having caused the current fiscal chaos at Laurentian University accountable.

I also note that Senator Moncion has made it very clear that what we are talking about here are constitutionally enshrined rights and must be protected. She states, “Upholding these rights requires strong institutions. Canadian courts have long recognized the importance of maintaining strong institutions, protecting language and the culture of official language minority communities. Substantive equality requires it.”

Laurentian University's situation is not unique. It reflects the continuing underfunding of post-secondary institutions that wholly or partially serve official-language minority communities across Canada. The case of Laurentian University is sounding the alarm, as is this underfunding that threatens the constitutional rights of communities. It is a very important point that we are not just talking about one small problem; this requires really creative out-of-the-box thinking for the federal government to take control of this and say it is sorry it applied corporate commercial insolvency protection in the case of a publicly funded university.

I also want to say in French that we now have a crisis affecting francophone minority communities in Ontario, but also across Canada. The elimination of education programs at Laurentian University, and in particular the treatment of francophone programs, is an attack against the vitality of the French language in minority communities. I want to say clearly that we must now do something and do it in a different way.

To protect this university, the federal government must say it is sorry to the province. It is provincial jurisdiction usually, but constitutionally protected rights are at risk.

Mismanagement of this university includes a mania for building. A spending spree is the proximate cause of its financial disaster of the moment. I agree with the students and the faculty association. I say to the students and faculty, the 110 fired professors of Laurentian University, that this is a wrong that members of Parliament understand is wrong and we want to fight for them.

We will demand that there be a special new paragraph drafted right now for the budget we will see on Monday to ensure the midwifery, indigenous language, environmental studies, philosophy and theatre programs at Laurentian University be resurrected and that it not go under. It is the canary in our educational coal mine. We will fight for it.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I similarly have not seen my colleague in person in a very long time. This is how we see each other now. I was very moved by some of the comments she made.

She will know that in Edmonton Strathcona the University of Alberta is under incredible attack by our provincial government and we risk losing an awful lot, not just the Campus Saint-Jean but the university itself. I am curious as to what she would say we can do at the federal level. What are those concrete things we can do to protect our universities? Luckily, she has an NDP government in British Columbia, but in Alberta we do not. We have a Conservative government. What would she suggest we could do, despite our government, because we know we cannot do it in collaboration with it?

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have never applied the adverb “luckily” to having an NDP government that is cutting through our old growth, fracking and ignoring its commitment to shut down Site C, but moving on to the point of what to do about better provincial-federal co-operation, we have to make sure that money transferred to provinces for post-secondary education is tied to spending on post-secondary education. I agree with her wonderful colleague for London—Fanshawe: We need a post-secondary education act in Canada that would ensure that we hold to standards.

We are looking at a slippery slope when we will have students who emerge from universities with, as Jane Jacobs said, “You pay your money and you get your ticket,” but they are not really getting the educational experience I was very fortunate to get 40 years ago when I went to law school. I think we need to pay attention, because—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have to go to another question.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Langley—Aldergrove.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands talked about universities having to think outside of the box. I wonder what her comments would be about universities partnering with responsible, Canadian-controlled corporations that have a good track record of social responsibility to fund research chairs and to partner with the intellectual property assets that would come out of that very valuable research.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, obviously any place that universities can partner is welcome, as long as it does not restrict or transactionalize the intellectual process of research.

Publicly funded universities and the work in academia should remain publicly accessible. Information should not be privatized and knowledge should be shared, but in that kind of partnership, absolutely.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her speech and for quoting an urban planner I like very much, Jane Jacobs, who was in favour of Quebec independence, in fact, because it would be good for the Montreal area.

Does the member believe there is a problem in bilingual universities? Where the vast majority of students are anglophones, should the governance of programs in French be transferred to francophone universities? I know that is what some people want.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot for his question.

It is extremely important to protect the rights of students living in minority francophone communities. The member may be right, but it is the first time I hear that English-speaking students are a threat in a bilingual context.

I think everyone benefits when anglophones, francophones and indigenous students can work together. The best thing that could happen is that students will share values and an understanding of life in French.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, we are switching to the mountain time zone shift, and with that I will be sharing my time with the member for Edmonton Strathcona.

This is a really great debate, and I want to congratulate the NDP for putting this forward, because it is something we actually have not really talked about in Parliament. We are debating the specific issue with the specific university and its insolvency, its funding model and how we proceed forward, but it is really a flashpoint of a larger issue that has been brewing for several years, which was really disrupted this year by the pandemic. What is really interesting about this debate is that I am not sure there is necessarily a partisan line on this. I actually think we have an opportunity here, as parliamentarians, to really think about workforce development in Canada in the context of what our post-secondary education system looks like writ large.

Since we are on the late show here tonight and this sitting is remarkably well attended by my dozen or so colleagues who are here tonight, I will give a bit of information about myself and my interest in this topic. Prior to entering politics, I spent close to a decade in senior roles in academic administration at two of Canada's top universities, the University of Manitoba and the University of Calgary, so I did see first-hand both the challenges that universities face and the opportunities they bring to the Canadian economy.

We really cannot talk about post-COVID recovery without talking about the role of post-secondary institutions and what the role of the federal government is in supporting that vision, without really looking at post-secondary education writ large. Many of the issues that my colleagues have raised tonight are with regard to the need to ensure that every Canadian has viable and tangible access to post-secondary education. This is something I do not think we have ever achieved in Canada. When I think about Laurentian University and many universities that service rural and remote communities in Canada, they are providing services to students in a language of choice, which is very important, but also to indigenous communities that have been traditionally underserved, pigeonholed and forced into learning in a certain way that might not align with their context.

It is really important that we talk about these issues, but we also need to talk about the broader challenges that post-secondary education is facing right now. I read a really interesting article from RBC Human Capital. I think it really outlined the inflection point that Canadian post-secondary education is facing right now. In March of last year, in both colleges and universities in Canada, about two million students were moved from the classroom onto online learning in a matter of weeks, and that was remarkable, but it really did create a disruptive force in how post-secondary education was delivered.

I am not necessarily saying that in a bad way, but here is the reality, the stats that are in this article: “Nearly 1.6 billion learners have been affected by national school closures” globally, and “91% of the world's students were displaced from the classroom” during the pandemic. “In Canada, more than 7 million students had to shift their learning style”.

Some of the challenges that have been highlighted here are these: “Canadian institutions historically lacked the resources or expertise to fully develop online learning”; “Canada's advantage in international student attraction is at risk”, and I want to talk about international students in a second; “Digital spending comprised only 2.5% of global education expenditures pre-lockdown”.

Some of the key questions this report asked were these: “Will the explosion of remote-based learning lead to more options for students?”; “Which learners are most vulnerable to disruption [that is, which students or people whom we want to reach would be most negatively affected by these changes]?”; “Will online learning in Canada still appeal to international students?”; “Can job-ready skills [for example trades] be cultivated through online learning?”; “Can learning on a massive scale become more personalized?”; “Are post-secondary institutions at an inflection point for their business model?”

That is where I want to start. When I worked at both the University of Manitoba and the University of Calgary, I did a lot of work in sponsored research and tech transfer. A lot of the operation of universities is focused on research and commercialization. That is great. We want to have research-intensive universities in Canada, but what does the shift mean? What does it mean for universities that may not be research-intensive? Are we now seeing perhaps a delineation between research-intensive universities and teaching-intensive universities? Is that happening? Does our funding model need to change to support that?

One of the things in the report that I mentioned that is critical for us to address as parliamentarians is whether we can reach every student in Canada in a meaningful way. Infrastructure issues, such as rural broadband and wireless, have been a barrier to accessing education not just for people in rural and remote communities or on reserves, but also in urban centres. The Internet in Canada is now in crisis mode, and this is affecting our post-secondary education system as well. These are questions that nobody really wants to ask.

I want to underscore that I certainly support the services that Laurentian University provides. Given the tax dollars that go into post-secondary education, we have to be asking what business model best serves the needs of Canadians. That is something people of every political stripe have an opportunity to talk about. My argument in this debate tonight would be that we should avoid necessarily being attached to one form of rigid dogma on what works. We have to start with the student or learner as the focus of the services delivered and the funding models we are supporting, but we must also tie that to the vision for Canada's future workforce to ensure that we have platforms that are nimble and provide services to train that workforce.

I said that I wanted to talk about international students. International students provide a lot of revenue to Canadian universities right now. Many universities have reached out to me during the pandemic to talk about the fact that they have lost revenue. We have to talk about the elephant in the room: Should we be relying on international students to bolster a business model for universities? Many people say that the shift to online learning is here to stay in some way, shape or form, and that universities are going to have to be more competitive to get top students and teachers. However, universities also have to think about how they allow universal access to students. A well-educated population means that we have better economic growth, more innovation, better social determinants, less discrimination and more opportunities for marginalized communities. There are all sorts of questions that we could be asking in Parliament.

I understand that this university is in a crisis right now and we have to deal with that for a variety of reasons, but that has to be done in a broader context. Many of my constituents say they are paying tuition for in-class learning now, but they have been online for a year and ask if that is fair. That is something we should ask. We should be asking if it is fair to be demanding online learning if somebody does not have a safe place to learn online. There are privileged assumptions that go into the capacity to have online learning as well.

I would encourage my colleagues to look at this from a broader perspective. I hope we can come together as a Parliament and really be a world leader as a country in the shift of post-secondary education post-COVID.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, when we talk about education, there are a lot of conversations we have to have. I think of myself. I represent a more rural and remote riding that has international students. One of the biggest challenges is that the international students are really interested in staying, but there are no systems in place to allow them to look at the opportunities in my region. There are a lot of important things to talk about.

When I think of this particular issue, I can relate it to the experience in my riding. I have heard again and again from educators in my region from North Island College and Vancouver Island University, which is in Powell River, that we need education to be provided closer to home. That is how we support people staying in our region. That is really important for rural and remote communities across the country.

Could the member talk about whether she thinks the federal government has an important role to play in ensuring that access to post-secondary education is there, especially in these kinds of communities? In this particular case, the francophone supports and indigenous—