Opinion: Another CAQ decision, another blow to McGill

Article content

Last week, McGill revealed it must severely cut its spending on construction and renovation projects in response to funding changes imposed by the Quebec government. The news represents yet another blow to the university after Quebec announced last year it was significantly raising tuition fees for out-of-province students, complicating recruitment efforts in the process.

Article content

Both measures will have a disproportionate impact on McGill, Quebec’s leading institution of higher learning and research. They will drag other universities in the system down as well. Short-sighted revenue rules and fewer dollars for maintenance and renovations at universities should be of concern to all Quebecers.

In dealing with past cuts, McGill found creative solutions. These new policy measures undercut those previously adopted correctives, making them qualitatively different and dangerous for precisely that reason — they severely limit the autonomy of universities to find ways of improving their chronic underfunding.

McGill evolved specific strategies, such as the deregulation of interprovincial Canadian and international students, to overcome deficits created by archaic funding formulas and the discriminatory allocation of discretionary monies. The university reviewed the efficiency of its operations, thus allowing it to continue to hire new researchers, and it increased research-intensity by means of partnerships.

Now the Quebec government has taken away these hard-fought gains of tuition deregulation and has announced that it will reduce transfers to deal with maintenance and construction. While not specifically targeted at McGill, the first measure will hit this university hardest due to the diverse geographic composition of its student body — roughly half from Quebec equally divided among francophones and anglophones, one-quarter from the rest of Canada, and one-quarter from foreign lands. The second policy on renovations and maintenance hurts McGill more than the other universities because of its large stock of older facilities, a sizable number of heritage properties, and its concentration of students in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) disciplines.

Article content

Article content

Cuts in operating and capital budgets reduce research capacity. Initially, the impact will be most dramatic on those disciplines that require specialized infrastructure — engineering, medicine and the sciences. Operating budget cuts decrease McGill’s competitiveness in attracting and retaining top-tier researchers, making it difficult to secure the current stream of external research funding, and creating a downward spiral. A fall in research output inevitably has a snowball effect on maintaining or improving infrastructure, enhancing that vicious cycle.

The lack of funding threatens to stifle innovation just when there is a need to encourage it. Experimentation is likely to be limited, and it will be more difficult to adopt new technologies, just as advances in artificial intelligence require new investments for its application in many areas of research. Further, fewer resources limit opportunities for collaboration, both internally among departments and externally with other institutions and industries, which are vital for advancing knowledge and the health of our society and economy.

Article content

Educational quality will likely suffer as instruction will continue to take place in increasingly outdated and unrenovated classrooms and labs. As they now stand, these facilities are insufficient to effectively support modern teaching methodologies or technological integrations even in the humanities, management and social sciences. Austerity measures lead to larger class sizes and reduced contact hours, directly affecting the quality of education and student satisfaction.

As the educational experience becomes less satisfactory, enrolments can be expected to decrease as out of province and out of country students choose to attend other institutions that offer better resources, more favourable learning environments and lower costs. Simultaneously, the scope of programs and offerings will have to be scaled back, particularly in specialized areas that require high overhead costs for facilities and equipment.

Over the last 15 years, there have been studies by SECOR, KPMG and the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal demonstrating the positive economic impact that McGill has on the Montreal and Quebec economies. Fewer interprovincial Canadian and international students will hurt more than just McGill’s financial situation; the city’s competitiveness and reputation will suffer, as Mayor Valérie Plante pointed out last fall.

Article content

Budgetary constraints already led McGill to an increased reliance on alternative funding sources like private donations or the issuing of long-term bonds. Philanthropic gifts are rarely if ever substitutes for public funding and so cannot be counted upon to make up shortfalls in operations budgets or to undertake building projects for which maintenance monies are not forthcoming from governmental sources. If not carefully managed both can place additional burdens on the university, affecting its overall financial health and social balance.

Switching to short-term loans for capital projects, as the government has suggested, will make it harder to secure funding from the private sector. Another danger is that in trying to deal with burgeoning annual budget deficits, the university may engage in a tactical shift to those programs and research areas that require less overhead. Unfortunately, the prioritization of those disciplines could alter the long-term strategic direction of the institution, further diminishing competitiveness.

Facing cuts to both operating and capital projects simultaneously threatens McGill’s academic standing among the world’s leading research-intensive universities. Long-term underinvestment hurts the university’s reputation among prospective students, faculty and researchers. Deferred maintenance has already had severe consequences on McGill’s aging infrastructure. Having to postpone needed renovations and upgrades yet again will make such efforts more costly in the future and divert funds from forward progress to treading water.

Article content

In some cases, having to do more with less can drive efficiencies and innovations, such as more effective use of existing spaces and the adoption of virtual labs and online teaching tools. Unfortunately, this means putting already reduced funds into those activities, exacerbating the effects of such budget cuts on STEM disciplines.

Of course, financial challenges may spur new types of partnerships and collaborations — finding new funding avenues or creating interdisciplinary opportunities that might not have been pursued otherwise. McGill has already done several of these with positive effects, but now this new round of cuts will erase those gains and make new efforts more difficult.

It is time for the Quebec government to value instead of undermine McGill and other universities in the provincial system, or it will be too late to reverse the damage that will be felt well beyond the campus.

Anthony C. Masi is a professor of industrial relations and organizational behaviour at McGill’s Desautels Faculty of Management and a former provost of the university. This commentary represents his opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of the current university administration. 

Article content

Article content