The cancellation of Ann Coulter's speech at the University of Ottawa was not a victory for her opponents, who celebrated shutting her event down last night; it is a victory for the organizers who paid for Coulter's (non)appearance.

The organizers of Ms. Coulter's Canadian tour have hit the public relations jackpot: Their tour is the lead story across America's right-wing media establishment. All the money in the world could not buy advertising with the same level of impact they are receiving from the earned media stemming from the U of Ottawa cancellation.

The American conservative non-profit organization, the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, is likely going to make a fortune as donations pour in from their American right-wing base - significantly more than the $10,000 or so dollars it cost them to bring Coulter to Ottawa. (In American politics, whipping up the right wing base always results in donations.)

Conservative activist Ezra Levant benefits from making a further mockery of Canada's human rights commissions by pursuing a human-rights complaint on behalf of Ms. Coulter. (He has in the past referred to the "human rights racket" and has written a book critical of Canada's human rights commissions.)

He also stands to make a fair amount of coin from his association with Ms. Coulter. This controversy positions him to embark on an American speaking tour talking about yesterday's event, collecting a substantial speaking fee and selling his book to a new-found American audience.

Unlike the Fenians, the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute is unlikely to quietly return to their side of the border after decisively defeating their Canadian opponents. Within conservative movements, CBLPI has developed a strong brand from this event. This brand - combined with the war-chest they're in a position to be building from the Coulter cancellation - will enable them to form campus clubs at universities across Canada. These chapters could serve as front organizations to add Canadian universities to the right-wing speakers circuit. 

The culture wars have come to Canada.

Michael Ignatieff is on a cross-country tour this week and the Conservatives are howling "Ignatieff Prorogues Himself.” Ignatieff’s absence from Parliament is of little interest to students, but what he’s saying during his latest cross-country tour is.

Ignatieff told a group of high school students in Newfoundland that he will be proposing changes to the Canada Student Loans Program during the next election. He says he will lower the interest rate on federal student loans and will propose a loan-forgiveness program for graduates working in the public service.

CSLP is in serious need of reform, especially the interest costs placed on students in repayment. The federal government charges a 2.5 per cent above the prime interest rate for student loans. Most provinces charge 1 per cent above prime with a few charging only the prime rate.

A lot of borrowers who are in collection are there as the result of a punishing payment schedule that fails to account for the economic situation facing recent graduates.

Ignatieff states that the federal government needs to take a leadership role in post secondary education by creating a dedicated transfer payment for post secondary education.

To encourage universities to recruit, enroll, and graduate students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, Ignatieff proposes the federal government create financial incentives for schools.

These ideas represent good public policy. For many years, post secondary education policy has been driven by political desires to funnel money into schemes that will deliver votes from upper-middle to upper class families.

During the 2008 federal election campaign, the Liberals proposed replacing current federal tax credits with in-study grants, to provide significant relief for student loan borrowers in their repayment phase, to create more needs-based grants, and to guarantee every student a loan of $5,000.

Ignatieff’s appears to be making post secondary education a major part of his pre-campaign speeches. If he continues, Canada may finally have a serious debate about higher education.

The First Nations University of Canada's latest series of financial mismanagement scandals - incredibly frustrating to all who want to see successful models of aboriginal higher education - are much the same as previous ones: alleged mismanagement of funds, questions about the diligence of FNUC's board of governors, and a former senior administrator suing the university for alleged wrongdoing. This time, as well, the FNUC has admitted that money has been misused from the scholarship fund.

After years of scandal and inaction, both the provincial and federal governments have cut funding to the troubled university.

Now, with funding cut, the university is being forced to make substantive changes. Having started to make the changes to governance structure demanded over the last five years - and ignored despite scandal after scandal - the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations is demanding both levels of government reinstate funding to the institution so that it will continue to operate independently and remain wholly owned by FSIN. The demands are being backed by both the federal NDP and the federal Liberal Party.

Yet, no one is asking the big question - is a separate university for aboriginals located in Regina the best model to address social mobility for Canada's First Nations?

Having seen a better model, I say no. 

The First Nations University of Canada needs to be more than a building in Regina. The fact is - surprisingly - more aboriginal students in Saskatchewan are attending the Universities of Saskatchewan and Regina than FNUC, according to the Regina Leader-Post. But the people who are not necessarily being served are those on reserves and in communities outside Regina. It is time for the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations to look for a new model. I suggest they look at the First Nations Technical Institute on the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory in Ontario.

FNTI offers a wide range of post-secondary options to members and non-members of the Mohawk nation, including reputable college diplomas, undergraduate degrees, and Masters degrees. Instead of reinventing the wheel, FNTI partners with established institutions to bring post-secondary education to its people. Students can earn a diploma from three of Ontario's public colleges, an undergraduate degree from Ryerson University, or complete a master's from Queen's or Wilfrid Laurier. 

Beyond degrees and diplomas, FNTI offers a wide range of certificate and "university diploma" programs that meet the needs of the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory.

With over 2,000 graduates, FNTI is a First Nations success story. Research shows that students from lower-socio-economical backgrounds are less likely to travel far to attend higher education as living at home keeps their costs down, and research also shows that having post-secondary options within a community increases the percentage of the population which obtains post-secondary education. It is for these reasons that FNUC needs to be revamped and given a strong outreach mandate.

The federal and provincial governments should step up and offer funding for FNUC to have a leading role in spreading the FNTI model to First Nations across Canada.

The Alberta government unveiled its long-promised provincial post-secondary application website last week to great fanfare.

ApplyAlberta.ca  allows potential students to complete one application for admission to any of the province's publicly funded colleges and universities. Alberta follows British Columbia in combining applications for both colleges and universities on one website. (Ontario has one site for universities and another site for colleges.)

The one-stop application service should prove to be convenient for anyone applying to more than one Alberta institution and will attract more out-of-province applicants by streamlining the process. 

ApplyAlberta.ca does have one fundamental flaw: It followed the British Columbia model too closely. It took the good part - combining college and university applications. But it kept the bad part - allowing institutions to charge their own fees. 

What does this mean for potential students?

If they decide to apply to the three largest universities in Alberta, it will cost them the following: $115 for the University of Alberta, $115 for the University of Calgary, and $75 for the University of Lethbridge - a total of $305. A student applying to three Ontario universities will pay the grand sum of $115. A student applying to British Columbia's big three will pay $165.  (UBC - $60, SFU - $45, and UVic - $60)

Applying to university in Alberta remains more expensive than applying in any other province - not a distinction any government looking to encourage people to apply for post-secondary education should be proud of.

As a political studies student, I cannot help but think of this as another example of why the Alberta provincial Conservatives are on their way to opposition status - they've abandoned middle-class families by allowing institutions to continue lining their pockets. The new streamlined website will save universities money - they no longer have to run their own application websites - but those savings are not being passed on to Alberta families.

Considering those same families are already facing massive fee increases for such things as "common space security and sustainability" (yes, hallways) at the province's flagship university, ApplyAlberta is just another example of a government unwilling to confront an out-of-control university sector.

ApplyAlberta is a step in the right direction. Now that the government has cut excessive red tape, it needs to stomp out excessive fees and bring its universities back under true public control.

(GlobeCampus editor: You may also be interested in Eye on Higher Ed on how students in need got stiffed in the Alberta budget.)