Balanced and fair.
Curious why government would expect fifty percent of board members with only a third of the investment.
Capital investment in various university buildings doesn’t seem to be included. Why?
Is all the money for new buildings federal?
Having attended three universities (Saint Mary’s Engineering, McGill Psychology, and Dalhousie premed, graduated 1975 honours Psychobiology) and a visiting lecturer at a dozen more, here’s what disturbs me:
1/ Tenured professors who refuse to retire after fifty years when they haven’t done anything useful for thirty years.
2/ Canadian PhDs who are forced to work on temporary contracts while the aforementioned tenured professors refuse to leave.
3/ Universities who are permitted to devalue other university transfer credits, within Nova Scotia, and even between Dalhousie and McGill…. the only top 300 world ranked universities in Eastern Canada!
When I got A+ in Psychology at McGill under D.O. Hebb, Dalhousie tried to reduce my mark to A minus. This is nonsense. McGill outranks Dalhousie!
Tabernacle!
Hebb was a Nova Scotian!
And so am I.
Thanks, Bill. Accountability is much needed from all institutions but especially from governments because of the ease with which money from grants is disbursed. There should be many questions raised about the hiring of “consultants” to do the work of public servants. The selection of those public servants in the first place should be the priority.
Bill, you have put together an excellent analysis of the financial challenges in the university sector. The first three accountability elements under Bill 12 are not unreasonable. The fourth, government appointing half the members of the governing boards would be a disaster. It would place all the responsibility for the sector right in the lap of government and it would dry up millions of dollars of donations which would lead to inevitable decline and failure. My suggestion would be to allow each university the option of phasing out its government support, perhaps over ten years, which would make it possible to modernize its business for the information age, survive and thrive, or die under its own weight.
Balanced and fair.
Curious why government would expect fifty percent of board members with only a third of the investment.
Capital investment in various university buildings doesn’t seem to be included. Why?
Is all the money for new buildings federal?
Having attended three universities (Saint Mary’s Engineering, McGill Psychology, and Dalhousie premed, graduated 1975 honours Psychobiology) and a visiting lecturer at a dozen more, here’s what disturbs me:
1/ Tenured professors who refuse to retire after fifty years when they haven’t done anything useful for thirty years.
2/ Canadian PhDs who are forced to work on temporary contracts while the aforementioned tenured professors refuse to leave.
3/ Universities who are permitted to devalue other university transfer credits, within Nova Scotia, and even between Dalhousie and McGill…. the only top 300 world ranked universities in Eastern Canada!
When I got A+ in Psychology at McGill under D.O. Hebb, Dalhousie tried to reduce my mark to A minus. This is nonsense. McGill outranks Dalhousie!
Tabernacle!
Hebb was a Nova Scotian!
And so am I.
Philip Thompson | April 14, 2025 |
Thanks, Bill. Accountability is much needed from all institutions but especially from governments because of the ease with which money from grants is disbursed. There should be many questions raised about the hiring of “consultants” to do the work of public servants. The selection of those public servants in the first place should be the priority.
Wayne Armitstead | April 12, 2025 |
Bill, you have put together an excellent analysis of the financial challenges in the university sector. The first three accountability elements under Bill 12 are not unreasonable. The fourth, government appointing half the members of the governing boards would be a disaster. It would place all the responsibility for the sector right in the lap of government and it would dry up millions of dollars of donations which would lead to inevitable decline and failure. My suggestion would be to allow each university the option of phasing out its government support, perhaps over ten years, which would make it possible to modernize its business for the information age, survive and thrive, or die under its own weight.
Ron Smith | April 11, 2025 |