Posts tagged with government.

Should universities hire lobbyists?

Joey Coleman, October 5, 2010 at 2:42 PM


Ontario's NDP party revealed today that the province's publicly funded universities have spent close to $1-million to hire outside lobbyists to press their case to the Ontario government - in addition to the money they spend for membership in their provincial lobbying organization, the Council of Ontario Universities.

They include Laurentian University, which had a contract worth $102,000, and Toronto's York University, which had three contracts totalling close to $500,000, as well as the University of Ontario Institute of Technology, which had a lobbyist contract worth up to $130,000, according to documents obtained by the NDP under freedom-of-information laws.

Ontario's Minister of Training, Colleges, and Universities John Milloy told The Canadian Press that universities hiring lobbyists - with bills in the hundreds of thousands of dollars - is unacceptable and unnecessary.

"There's no need for them to be spending public money on lobbyists and my ministry will be working to make sure that message is sent loud and clear to the college sector," Mr. Milloy said.

The question is not whether he's going to do anything about it ... now that this spending is widely known.  It's why he's tolerated the practice for so long?

The lobbyist registry for Ontario shows these outside lobbyists were lobbying Mr. Milloy's Ministry and the Office of the Premier for a while - it's hard to believe that Mr. Milloy was not aware that well connected members of his party were meeting with his officials and those in Premier Dalton McGuinty's office.

For the Minister to turn around and say it was unacceptable is hypocritical at best - universities spent the money with at least the impression that hiring people connected to the governing party would result in their projects receiving funding from the Minister or his boss, the Premier.

By allowing these lobbyists to meet with officials in his Ministry (and the Premier allowing the same in his office and the Cabinet office), the government sent the message that hiring outside lobbyists was an acceptable practice for public institutions.

The practice of universities spending their limited funds on well-paid outside lobbyists is not limited to lobbying provincial governments. A quick search of the federal Registry of Lobbyists shows a variety of lobbying firms representing universities on Parliament Hill.

Expect opposition parties in other provinces to follow up with their own freedom-of-information requests and media outlets to localize this story with coverage of the specific lobbying activities conducted on behalf of individual universities.

The big question is why, despite spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on their lobbying organizations (COU, AUCC, ACCC, etc.), combined with their well-paid presidents, vice-presidents, and associate vice-presidents, universities are not able to effectively lobby without hiring lobbying firms. Is it because their lobbying organizations and internal staff are ineffective or is it because our political system is such that the only way to gain access to politicians and their staff is to pay a political insider?

I'm putting my money on the latter.



Tagged with government, lobby | Comments (7) |

Deteriorating standards at colleges?

Joey Coleman, September 15, 2009 at 11:23 AM

Two recent stories illustrate the continuing deterioration of standards in higher education as institutions focus more on how much money they bring in than the quality of the graduates they put out. The stories concern two public colleges offering dubious courses which don't lead to employment; Ontario's Cambrian and British Columbia's Langara College.

 

In Cambrian's case, the college marketed a diploma program that it knew to be not formally recognized by the professional association that controls entry into the profession. Despite this, the promotional material said students would find work in the "high demand" hospital records sector, according to the Ontario ombudsman investigating the case.

 

In Langara's case, the college offers non-credit courses in so-called alternative medicines such as iridodiagnosis and bone breathing. While the college makes no claims about the legitimacy of these practices, these programs do call into question the quality of education a publicly funded college offers.

 

Each case is very different but raises the question: What standards should public colleges be held to when creating courses?

 

To answer this question, one must decide how much autonomy a public college should have to operate and if public funding of a specific course should be a factor in determining this autonomy.

 

A public college should be operated as an arms-length government agency, meaning it has autonomy in day-to-day operations but is held to a high standard and should pursue a mandate set by the government.

 

Cambrian created its "Health Information Management" program with the specific goal of recruiting students and accessing public funds. The college was diligent in applying to receive public funds for this program and created marketing materials in a timely manner to recruit tuition paying students.

 

The College was not as diligent in fulfilling the academic requirements for the program. It took them over a year to apply for accreditation and even then, they failed the accreditation process. Seven months later, the college replied for certification and did not even meet half the "learning outcomes" required for accreditation.

 

Without the accreditation, as noted by Ontario's ombudsman in his report, the diplomas being issued by Cambrian are not worth the paper they are printed on.

 

Cambrian cannot blame a lack of funding for its failure to deliver a proper education. Its tuition rate of $5,600 over four terms is significantly more than a similar program at St. Lawrence College. The SLC program costs $3,000 for three terms and includes a placement. More importantly, SLC's program is accredited, meaning graduates receive a diploma that grants them career opportunities.

 

Cambrian was able to properly complete the paperwork to collect public dollars and dutifully took students' tuition for the program; so it fulfilled its basic requirements to the government.

 

However, it must be noted, Ontario's Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities  does not take an active role to ensure taxpayer supported programs deliver quality education.

 

Cambrian continues to offer the program and the Ministry continues to fund it. The only change is, after the Ombudsman investigated the College, marketing materials no longer claim the program is "based on national guidelines."

 

Dozens of former Cambrian students have been left with student debts and worthless diplomas after falsely believing government funding meant they were getting a quality education. This should be concerning enough on its own. The fact that taxpayer money was squandered while the college generated revenue is unacceptable.

 

There is clearly a government interest in regulating taxpayer funded programs, but is there a need for regulation of non-subsidized programs?

 

Langara's case is not as clear cut. While a publicly-funded college, the pseudoscience programs it teaches receive no government funding and do not result in diplomas. There is a three-year certification offered in these pseudo sciences, but certificates have no legal significance.

 

Does this let Langara off-the-hook?

 

No, not when the reputation of the College is on the line. Reputation is a key component to any post-secondary diploma or degree. While this is more prevalent with university degrees, reputation remains important to the college diploma as well. A diploma in Animation Arts and Design from Sheridan College has more value than a similar degree from another college. Both colleges may teach the exact same skills, but Sheridan's reputation in the field greatly increases the value of its diploma.

 

For this reason, there is a public interest in protecting the reputation of Langara College as a place of higher learning. This is especially true because Langara is not just a college; it is a university college granted the power to issue degrees. How can an institution offer a respected degree in Health Sciences while actively legitimizing discredited theories such as bone breathing?

 

Governments should not allow arms-length agencies to engage in activities that undermine the policy goals they were created to fulfill. Langara is funded as a university college to produce a skilled, knowledgeable work force to compete in the global economy.

 

Langara cannot achieve this goal if the quality of the institution is called into question by its extracurricular activities. 

 

Langara officials say the college is only meeting public demand.

 

Fine, let people create their own colleges to teach about mystical energy fields; don't pimp the reputation of a public college for a few bucks.

 

I'm surprised Langara doesn't offer a course teaching Intelligent Design. After all, there is a constituency that believes in the theory and they'll pay to get a piece of paper validating this belief. The intelligent design courses should fit nicely in the course calendar alongside the degree requirements for biology and ecology.

Tagged with government, standards, taxpayers, langara, oversight, cambrian | Comments (14) |