On Dec. 6, the Parti Québécois (PQ) announced that it expects Quebec universities to cut $124 million from their cumulative operating budgets by April 2013. According to McGill Principal Heather Munroe-Blum, the cuts amount to 5.2 per cent of universities’ operating grants, but their introduction, two-thirds of the way through the fiscal year, makes them equivalent to 15 per cent.

Members of the McGill administration say they will lobby the Quebec government to reverse the government’s decision to retroactively cut $19.1 million from McGill’s operating budget, before making any decisions as to which university services could be affected by the cuts.

The McGill Board of Governors (BoG) approved the university’s 2012-2013 budget last March. This budget included a $7 million deficit. According to Munroe-Blum, the additional cuts could push this year’s deficit to over $30 million.

The PQ claims the previous Liberal government had planned similar cuts, and that universities should have been made aware of them earlier in the fiscal year. University leaders across the province have denied receiving such notice.

“The effect of taking such a cut would be to transfer a portion of the government’s deficit to the university system, while undermining dramatically the important educational, economic, research, and social contributions of the University,” Munroe-Blum wrote in an email to the McGill community on Dec. 14.

The BoG passed a resolution on Dec. 13 that condemned the cuts as “excessive” and “injurious” for both universities and Quebec society, and insisting that the government reverse the decision.

“We will take every measure necessary to persuade the government to withdraw these harmful and ill-timed cuts, and to give us the degrees of freedom we need to fulfill our mission—to serve Quebec and Quebeckers at the highest level,” Munroe-Blum wrote.

Last Thursday, Provost Anthony Masi told the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) Legislative Council that Munroe-Blum and Vice-Principal (External Relations) Olivier Marcil are working with other universities to prepare a proposal for the government.

“We’ve made no plans because we want to have the conversation first,” Masi said. “We’re not going to the government with a plan saying ‘here’s how we’re going to make the cuts.’ We’re going to the government saying … ‘can we convince you that this is not a good thing to do?’”

Reactions across campus

Although more than a month has passed since the PQ’s announcement, groups and individuals across campus continue to react to the proposed cuts.

Shortly after the announcement, the McGill Association of University Teachers (MAUT) passed a council motion condemning the cuts. MAUT President Alvin Shrier emphasized the need for coordinated efforts to pressure the government into reversing their decision.

“Everybody’s going to pay the price, because at the end of the day, these kind of cutbacks are not going to help the quality of our education,” he said.

Jonathan Mooney, secretary-general of the Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) pointed to the budget cuts as a direct contradiction of the PQ’s support for education when they were elected in September 2012.

“They were elected on the platform that they wanted to protect students, make sure that they have a good experience, and that they valued education,” he said. “[The decision is] really bad for the government because it undermines their credibility.”

Mooney also said that groups may withdraw from the Quebec summit on higher education planned for February.

“The whole idea of the summit was that we were going to have a conversation with all the stakeholders—staff, professors, students, administrators, people from the community, business leaders,” he said. “Now it’s like [the PQ has] already made their decision.”

Other students showed their opposition to the cuts by protesting at the Dec. 13 BoG meeting. According to one protestor, the demonstration also intended to “propose and enforce an unlimited general strike of the McGill administration” against the government.

“In the printemps érable, we saw that an unlimited general strike is the only avenue for creating an effective power relation with the government, and we want to share that lesson with the administration in its time of need,” the protestor, who asked to remain anonymous, said.

The protestors attempted to enter the BoG meeting to deliver their motion, but were denied access by McGill Security. SSMU President Josh Redel, a member of the BoG, said he disagreed with the tactics of the protestors, whose presence delayed the start of the meeting and caused the board to relocate to a different room. He expressed concerns over the initial joke-like manner of the protest.

“My frustration is that the initial framing of the protest as a joke or ironic is childish, especially at a time when we’re facing something so real,” Redel said. “$20 million isn’t a joke. Today’s discussion was crucial and has a direct impact on students … You can be very powerful in protest but still show respect.”

Approximately 1,500 people gathered in front of the Palais des Congrès last Friday to show their solidarity with Canadian First Nations and Chief Theresa Spence, who has been on a hunger strike for the past month in protest of the federal government’s stance on Indigenous rights. Following a traditional round dance, the crowd marched through downtown Montreal.

This event was part of Idle No More, a growing grassroots movement advocating for Indigenous rights in Canada. The movement began last November, when four women in Saskatchewan used Facebook and the title “Idle No More” to draw attention to the ways in which Bill C-45—commonly known as the second omnibus budget bill—erodes Indigenous communities’ control over their land.

Bill C-45 changes legislation for more than 60 government acts. The main concerns of the Idle No More movement are the changes made to the Indian Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, and the replacement of the Navigable Waters Act with the Navigation Protection Act.

These legislation changes speed up the approval process for leasing Indigenous land, and remove protection from the majority of Canada’s rivers so that pipeline and power-line installation firms no longer need to prove that their activity will not damage a navigable waterway.

Friday’s protest attracted a diverse, multi-generational crowd. A group of elderly women were among the demonstrators, wearing brightly coloured hats and holding signs demanding that Prime Minister Stephen Harper listen to Indigenous Peoples’ concerns.

“[This movement has] been a long time coming,” a senior participant, who would only be identified as Marguerite, said. “The government and private corporations have a duty to always consult with First Nations.”

In front of Palais des Congrès on Friday, the crowd joined hands and formed a series of circles where participants turned and stamped in time to the beat of hand drums.

Two students from Dawson College handed out red felt feathers to protestors. Jeffrey Graham, an executive of Dawson’s student union, explained that he had found the ideafor the feathers online.

“We just converted a few of our red squares in our office into red feathers,” Graham said.

“[Idle No More] is kind of like a continuum to the Occupy movement and the student movement,” a student in the Concordia School of Community and Public Affairs, who would only be identified as Crystal, said. “[But it is] different because it is in response to a direct attack on First Nations people.”

Crystal also explained that she wanted to take part in the Idle No More movement because she is of Métis descent.

“My family doesn’t practice Aboriginal [customs], but I feel really connected to the land, like all Canadians I guess,” she said.

For many supporters of Idle No More, Indigenous people’s concerns are integrally linked to Canadian environmental concerns.

“We really feel strongly that our resources need to be protected, and [First Nations] peoples have always been advocates for our land,” Graham said.

The Facebook event for Friday’s protest emphasized the importance of seeing Idle No More as an inclusively Canadian movement, rather than one aimed only at Indigenous populations.

“[This is] a movement that is ready to demand an end to Harper’s relentless legislations that amount to nothing less than an outright assault on the fabric of this country,” the Facebook event page said.

Over the past two months, Idle No More protests, rallies, and teach-ins have taken place nation-wide. One of the movement’s more controversial tactics has been blockades of railway lines.

Reactions to Idle No More’s protest tactics have been mixed. U3 environmental science student Maida Hadziosmanovic’s VIA Rail train was delayed for four hours on her way back to Montreal from her home in Oakville, Ontario after Christmas.

“Though I support the cause, I did not support the protesters as they were affecting people who have nothing to do with Harper’s decisions,” Hadziosmanovic said.

“There are many other ways of getting the government’s attention,” she continued. “In my opinion, they probably ticked off a lot more people than they would have if they approached the movement differently.”

SSMU Vice-President External Robin-Reid Fraser attended Friday’s protest. She said SSMU does not have an official position on the Idle No More movement, but students will have the opportunity to learn about and discuss the issues during the “Intro to Quebec” week SSMU has planned for Jan. 21-25.

Photos by Simon Poitrimolt

During the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) first Legislative Council meeting of the semester, Council called for the Quebec Student Roundtable (La Table de concertation étudiante du Québec, or TaCEQ), of which SSMU is a member association, to organize an États Généraux on the role of education in Quebec society, separate from the Education Summit scheduled by the provincial government for February.

An États Généraux is a broad consultation about a specific issue commissioned by the government.

SSMU Vice-President External Robin Reid-Fraser presented the motion to Council.

“I’ve reached the conclusion—and I think there are a lot of groups who feel similarly—that the process of the Education Summit that we have going on right now is not as big as it could be,” Reid-Fraser said.

She also expressed disappointment with how little time the Parti Québécois (PQ) has given student associations and other groups to prepare for the Summit by announcing it in November. Reid-Fraser further expressed frustration with the Summit’s apparent lack of structure at this point–despite the many meetings that have been held by the PQ with various student associations, and other members of the education community to create a framework.

“I feel like we are at this really important time in a lot of ways, and the conversations we are having [in these meetings hosted by the government] are just not enough,” Reid-Fraser continued.

Reid-Fraser originally wanted Council to call on TaCEQ to hold an alternative education summit, but came up with the idea of organizing an États Généraux, after talking with  Simon Charonneau, a SSMU political attache and press secretary.

She explained that the États Généraux would be put on by the National Assembly, and would be a much longer process—one that could take up to twelve to eighteen months, or as long as the consultations need to be completed. According to Reid-Fraser, consultations would occur across the province with many different groups from the university community.

A few councillors expressed concerns about calling an États Généraux at this time.

“[An] États Généraux may make sense. But I think we ought to be far more prepared before we call on the government to conduct one,” he said. “We ought to think carefully about what we would like to get out of it, who we would like to be heard, and what areas we would like the États to focus on.”

SSMU Vice-President Clubs and Services Allison Cooper said she would like more information on what an États Généraux would entail. She motioned to send the original motion back to the External Affairs Committee to be re-examined. Cooper’s motion did not pass.

Music Representative Katie Larson supported both the original motion and the idea of an États Généraux.

“I think this is the most moderate, logical … way of going about the education issue,” Larson said. “I don’t see what the problem is, honestly. If you are going to represent students on Council, I think we should easily be passing this.”

Reid-Fraser also brought forth a motion that would call on TaCEQ to demand an audit of spending for all universities in Quebec at the government’s Summit in February.

“The idea with this [motion] is that there would be a process to fully see where universities use money, where they are spending the money that they have right now, does that make sense, and comparing universities across Quebec,” Reid-Fraser said.

Science Senator Moe Nasr pointed out that the university already undergoes an audit, and that a better alternative might be to look into government university funding.

“Why don’t you add [to the motion] to request the government to have an impartial third party audit on its university funding management because … the issue isn’t where university spending is going—it’s how funding is being mismanaged,” Nasr said.

After a discussion of whether or not an audit is the appropriate measure to be called for, Reid-Fraser proposed that the motion be tabled indefinitely, so that she could conduct further research and consultations.