Faculty members, students pan Houston government's university restructuring plans
Faculty members and students are concerned changes being proposed by the Houston government could have severe consequences for Nova Scotia's 10 universities.
Six of the seven people who appeared Tuesday before the Nova Scotia legislature's new public bills committee worried the changes proposed in Bill 12 would give the province too much control over what universities teach and what research they do.
The proposed law would give the province — a key funding partner — greater control over university governance, the power to force universities deemed to be in financial trouble to come up with a revitalization plan, and the option of withholding funding if it were not happy with those plans.
Peter McInnis, the president of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, which represents 75,000 members across Canada, warned committee members the process could result in fundamental changes.
"Revitalization sounds perhaps innocuous or anodyne," McInnis said. "Like a trip to a day spa. But in reality, this revitalization could be severe for several reasons, including closing or amalgamating programs or the abrogation of existing collective agreements."
McInnis said the Nova Scotia government was granting itself "unique" powers over universities.
"This is a power accorded to no other province and would force universities to restructure according to government directions," he said.
Cathy Conrad, president of the Saint Mary's University Faculty Union, said the proposal was already creating turmoil within her university.
"Just yesterday, I was in a meeting with senior administrators at my university who have put pause on operations that are critical to engaging with equity, diversity and inclusion on our board and on search committees for senior academic members," Conrad told the committee.
"Because in their opinion, we can't talk about anything until we see what's happening with Bill 12, because it's going to turn us upside down and inside out."
Darryl Whetter, speaking on behalf of the association of university professors and librarians at Université Sainte Anne, called the bill an attempt "to create Soviet-style political control of research and teaching."
Student leaders also sounded the alarm, suggesting provisions in the bill giving cabinet greater control over research grants were an attack on academic freedom, a concept Dalhousie University student Maren Mealy called "a cornerstone of higher education."
"The bill gives the minister of advanced education the sole power to set provincial research priorities, requiring Research Nova Scotia to align its work with those priorities or risk losing funding," said Mealy. "This risks stifling academic freedom and devaluing research that doesn't align with whatever the government decides are its interests."
Nova Scotia's auditor general recently issued a report critical of the lack of control over public funding to universities.
A former senior bureaucrat was the lone voice Tuesday in support of the government's attempt to gain greater control over the money it gives universities.
Former deputy minister Rick Williams told the committee of his frustrations dealing with the universities during his time in the senior government post between 2009 and 2013.
"One issue that took a lot of my time over the four years was the state of the university system," said Williams. "As in 2010, we today confront a difficult reality — every one of our universities is too big to fail in its local community.
"I support the government's intention to improve accountability and exercise more direct influence over decision-making in individual schools."
But rather than current plans, Williams urged the government to establish a "planning process" similar to the 2014 Ivany commission on revitalizing Nova Scotia's economy. The aim would be to develop "a shared vision for a financially sustainable higher education system."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
3 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
South Korea has endured 6 months of political turmoil. What can we expect in Lee's presidency?
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — Images from the election of South Korea's new president, liberal Lee Jae-myung, are everything you'd expect to see in one of the world's most vibrant democracies. Peaceful. Orderly. And, because this is South Korea, compulsively eye-catching, with crowds singing raucously along to blaring K-pop, dancers bouncing in closely choreographed sequences, and color-coordinated outfits for the two front-runners and their supporters — blue for Lee, who was inaugurated Wednesday for a single, five-year term, red for the distant runner-up, conservative Kim Moon Soo. What the pictures don't capture is the absolute turmoil of the past six months, making Tuesday one of the strangest — and, possibly, most momentous — election days since the country emerged in the late 1980s from decades of dictatorship. Since Dec. 3, South Koreans have watched, stunned, as an extraordinary sequence of events unfolded: Then-South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law, a first since the dictatorship. In response, lawmakers, leaping fences and jostling with heavily armed soldiers, elbowed their way into a besieged parliament to vote the declaration down. Yoon was then impeached and removed from office and now, just two months after his fall, another president has taken office. Here is a look at Lee's victory, the startling events that set up the election, and the challenges Lee faces to heal a nation split along a host of political and social fault lines. Where do these divisions come from? They are, in a way, older than the nation. The Korean Peninsula was initially divided into a Soviet-backed north and U.S.-backed south after World War II. The states formalized the division in 1948, and the 1950-53 Korean War made it permanent, dividing the rivals along the Demilitarized Zone, one of the most heavily armed borders in the world. But the tensions go beyond geography. During the long fight for democracy during South Korea's dictatorships, several fractures arose that persist today: the contentions between liberals and conservatives, but also gaps between rich and poor, old and young and men and women. Since the end of dictatorship, over and over the country has seen its democracy tested. By its own leaders. By its antagonistic neighbor to the north. By each new generation's reaction to a tumultuous history of forced geographic division, war, dictatorship, and one of the most breakneck economic turnarounds in world history. Preceding Tuesday's election, thousands of protesters took to the streets, both supporting the deposed Yoon and denouncing him. 'Above all, the president must bring unity among a divided and confused public, which was caused by the martial law declaration,' Park Soo Hyun, a 22-year-old student, said Wednesday. What can we expect from a Lee administration? Lee's party has a majority in parliament that will presumably allow the new president a freer hand in pushing through liberal legislation, including more funding for welfare programs and policies to address high living costs, joblessness and corruption. Typically, liberals like Lee have been more wary of South Korea's traditional allies, the United States and Japan, than conservatives. They have also often looked for reconciliation with North Korea. The United States sees South Korea as a crucial buttress against China and Russia and North Korea's growing nuclear capabilitie s. The South hosts nearly 30,000 U.S. troops. Lee, however, will have to find a way to keep his liberal base happy while managing the relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump, who has threatened Seoul with tariffs and has generally been lukewarm about the importance of the alliance. Lee has also been dogged by a raft of corruption cases, and it's not yet clear how much of a drag those will be on his presidency. 'I will make sure there is no more military coup d'état, in which the power entrusted by the people would never be used to intimidate people,' Lee said in his victory speech early Wednesday morning, referring to the martial law decree. So is South Korea past the worst or can we expect more turmoil? Experts say it's a little of both. The last half-year has worsened already raw divisions, even as it highlighted the underlying strength of a rough-and-tumble democratic process. 'Fierce ideological divisions still infuse politics, which could impede South Korea's chances to grow into a truly mature democracy,' Duyeon Kim, a visiting professor at Yonsei University in Seoul, wrote recently for the Council on Foreign Relations. But Tuesday's vote and Wednesday's inauguration signaled a return to a more normal democracy. And even the crisis itself showed the resiliency of South Korea's institutions. A crowd helped lawmakers get past troops and into parliament to overturn the martial law decree. The soldiers who carried out Yoon's orders did so without enthusiasm and didn't use force against the people, John Delury, a Korea expert and visiting professor at John Cabot University, said Tuesday. Korean democracy is in the people's hands, he said, not any one person's, even the new president's. Lee 'enters office with a strong mandate. But he is not the savior of democracy,' said Delury. 'Korean people saved it themselves. Now they are entrusting him not to do any more damage to it for the next five years.'
Calgary Herald
4 days ago
- Calgary Herald
Breakenridge: Alberta should not squander opportunity to remove own trade barriers
We are now less than a month from what was supposed to be the ushering in of a new era of free trade in Canada. However, that may turn out to be somewhat less than advertised. Article content Article content Prime Minister Mark Carney had previously pledged to dismantle trade barriers within Canada by July 1. Now, the pledge is more modest: Ottawa intends to introduce legislation before Canada Day that will aim to eliminate federal trade barriers. Article content Article content In fairness, there is an inherent limit on federal ambition on this issue. The federal government can address its own trade barriers, but can't force the provinces to do so. The good news is that there's nothing stopping the provinces from taking action. Article content Article content The tariff threat from U.S. President Donald Trump has underscored the urgency of making trade within Canada as free as possible. There should be added incentive for Alberta to make this work and demonstrate the economic value of remaining a part of Canada. Article content Premier Danielle Smith has previously boasted — not without justification — that 'Alberta is the national leader in interprovincial trade.' Article content On the eve of Monday's first ministers' meeting in Saskatoon, for example, Alberta and Ontario announced (as did Ontario and Saskatchewan) a non-binding memorandum of understanding intended to 'improve the free flow of goods and services between the two provinces' and 'simplify requirements for regulated professions.' These are positive steps, to be sure. Article content Article content However, we're still playing catch-up to another province. Article content Article content Earlier this year, Nova Scotia introduced legislation to remove trade barriers and ensure the mutual recognition of goods, services, regulations and credentials across all sectors of the Canadian economy. A new analysis shows just how valuable and beneficial it would be for the rest of the country to follow suit. Article content In a report for the Montreal Economic Institute, University of Calgary economics professor Trevor Tombe looks at the benefits of implementing Nova Scotia-style reforms more broadly, and then quantifies the economic spinoff effect.
Winnipeg Free Press
5 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Ukraine's drone attack on Russian warplanes was a serious blow to the Kremlin's strategic arsenal
A surprise Ukrainian drone attack that targeted several Russian air bases hosting nuclear-capable strategic bombers was unprecedented in its scope and sophistication for the first time reached as far as Siberia in a heavy blow to the Russian military. Ukraine said over 40 bombers, or about a third of Russia's strategic bomber fleet, were damaged or destroyed Sunday, although Moscow said only several planes were struck. The conflicting claims couldn't be independently verified and video of the assault posted on social media showed only a couple of bombers hit. But the bold attack demonstrated Ukraine's capability to hit high-value targets anywhere in Russia, dealing a humiliating blow to the Kremlin and inflicting significant losses to Moscow's war machine. While some Russian military bloggers compared it to another infamous Sunday surprise attack — that of Japan's strike on the U.S. base at Pearl Harbor in 1941 — others rejected the analogy, arguing the actual damage was far less significant than Ukraine claimed A look at what warplanes were reported hit: Russia's bomber assets For decades, long-range bombers have been part of the Soviet and Russian nuclear triad that also includes land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles and atomic-powered submarines carrying ICBMs. The strategic bombers have flown regular patrols around the globe showcasing Moscow's nuclear might. During the 3-year-old war i n Ukraine, Russia has used the heavy planes to launch waves of cruise missile strikes across the country. The Tupolev Tu-95, which was code named Bear by NATO, is a four-engine turboprop plane designed in the 1950s to rival the U.S. B-52 bomber. The aircraft has an intercontinental range and carries eight long-range cruise missiles that can be equipped with conventional or nuclear warheads. Before Sunday, Russia was estimated to have a fleet of about 60 such aircraft. The Tupolev Tu-22M is a twin-engine supersonic bomber designed in the 1970s that was code named Backfire by NATO. It has a shorter range compared with the Tu-95, but during U.S.-Soviet arms control talks in the 1970s, Washington insisted on counting them as part of the Soviet strategic nuclear arsenal because of their capability to reach the U.S. if refueled in flight. The latest version of the plane, the Tu-22M3, carries Kh-22 cruise missiles that fly at more than three times the speed of sound. It dates to the 1970s, when it was designed by the Soviet Union to strike U.S. aircraft carriers. It packs a big punch, thanks to its supersonic speed and ability to carry 630 kilograms (nearly 1,400 pounds) of explosives, but its outdated guidance system could make it highly inaccurate against ground targets, raising the possibility of collateral damage. Some Tu-22Ms were lost in previous Ukrainian attacks, and Russia was estimated to have between 50 and 60 Tu-22M3s in service before Sunday's drone strike. The production of the Tu-95 and the Tu-22M ended after the 1991 collapse of the USSR, meaning that any of them lost Sunday can't be replaced. Russia also has another type of strategic nuclear capable bomber, the supersonic Tu-160. Fewer than 20 of them are in service, and Russia has just begun production of its modernized version equipped with new engines and avionics. Russia lost a significant part of its heavy bomber fleet in the attack 'with no immediate ability to replace it,' said Douglas Barrie of the International Institute of Strategic Studies, noting that Moscow's announced plan to develop the next generation strategic bomber is still in its early phase. 'Ironically this might give impetus to that program, because if if you want to keep your bomber fleet up to size, then you're going to have to do something at some point,' he said. The A-50, which Ukrainian officials also said was hit in the strikes, is an early warning and control aircraft similar to the U.S. AWACS planes used to coordinate aerial attacks. Only few such planes are in service with the Russian military, and any loss badly dents Russia's military capability. Relocating bombers and impromptu protection Repeated Ukrainian strikes on the Engels air base, the main base for Russian nuclear capable strategic bombers near the Volga River city of Saratov, prompted Moscow to relocate the bombers to other bases farther from the conflict. One of them was Olenya on the Arctic Kola Peninsula, from where Tu-95s have flown multiple missions to launch cruise missiles at Ukraine. Several bombers at Olenya apparently were hit by the Ukrainian drones Sunday, according to analysts studying satellite images before and after the strike. Other drones targeted the Belaya air base in the Irkutsk region in eastern Siberia, destroying a few Tu-22M bombers, according to analysts. Ukraine said 41 aircraft — Tu-95s, Tu-22Ms and A-50s — were damaged or destroyed Sunday. in the attack that it said was in the works for 18 months in which swarms of drones popped out of containers carried on trucks that were parked near four air bases. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was briefed on the attack, which represented a level of sophistication that Washington had not seen before, a senior defense official said on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. The Russian Defense Ministry said the attack set several warplanes ablaze at air bases in the Irkutsk region in eastern Siberia and the Murmansk region in the north, but the fires were extinguished. It said Ukraine also tried to strike two air bases in western Russia, as well as another one in the Amur region of Russia's Far East, but those attacks were repelled. The drone strikes produced an outcry from Russian military bloggers, who criticized the Defense Ministry for failing to learn from previous strikes and protect the bombers. Building shelters or hangars for such large planes is a daunting task, and the military has tried some impromptu solutions that were criticized as window dressing. Satellite images have shown Tu-95s at various air bases covered by layers of old tires – a measure of dubious efficiency that has drawn mockery on social media. —- Associated Press Pentagon correspondent Tara Copp and Emma Burrows in London contributed.
