Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • Help us build a better Ontario September 14, 2017
    If you live in Ontario, you may have recently been selected to receive our 2017 grassroots poll on vital issues affecting the province. Your answers to these and other essential questions will help us decide what issues to focus on as we head towards the June 2018 election in Ontario. For decades, the CCPA has […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Does the Site C dam make economic sense for BC? August 31, 2017
    Today CCPC-BC senior economist Marc Lee submitted an analysis to the BC Utilities Commission in response to their consultation on the economics of the Site C dam. You can read it here. In short, the submission discussses how the economic case for Site C assumes that industrial demand for electricity—in particular for natural gas extraction […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Ontario's middle and working class families are losing ground August 15, 2017
    Ontario is becoming more polarized as middle and working class families see their share of the income pie shrinking while upper middle and rich families take home even more. New research from CCPA-Ontario Senior Economist Sheila Block reveals a staggering divide between two labour markets in the province: the top half of families continue to pile […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Join us in October for the CCPA-BC fundraising gala, featuring Senator Murray Sinclair August 14, 2017
    We are incredibly honoured to announce that Senator Murray Sinclair will address our 2017 Annual Gala as keynote speaker, on Thursday, October 19 in Vancouver. Tickets are now on sale. Will you join us? Senator Sinclair has served as chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), was the first Indigenous judge appointed in Manitoba, […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • How to make NAFTA sustainable, equitable July 19, 2017
    Global Affairs Canada is consulting Canadians on their priorities for, and concerns about, the planned renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In CCPA’s submission to this process, Scott Sinclair, Stuart Trew and Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood point out how NAFTA has failed to live up to its promise with respect to job and productivity […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

Sask Party Tuition Math

In Saskatchewan’s provincial election campaign, the incumbent Saskatchewan Party is promising a scholarship of up to $500 per year for new high-school graduates who undertake post-secondary studies.

It claims that this scholarship is worth “THREE TIMES” the annual increase in university tuition fees, which has averaged $146.50 over the past four years.

What the Sask Party seems to miss is that these annual tuition increases have been cumulative. So, a full-time undergraduate student is now paying annual tuition $586 higher than four years ago.

When the Sask Party took office in 2007, the average full-time undergraduate student in the province paid annual tuition fees of $5,015.

Under another Sask Party government, new high-school graduates who enter full-time university studies would face average tuition of $5,601 per year plus further tuition increases minus a provincial scholarship of up to $500 per year.

In other words, even those students eligible for the proposed scholarship will pay more than they would have under the previous NDP government’s tuition freeze.

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Clint Fyke
Time: October 17, 2011, 2:40 pm

I am not sure of the exact wording of the proposed program, but from their political commercial it seemed to me that only new high school grads would be eligible. That would mean only first years next fall would receive the scholarship and only two years of students the next year, three the next and only cover four years of students after four years. It also raises questions about what happens for those who can’t afford to attend for four consecutive years. Do they lose eligibility? Truly progressive countries, France, Norway, Finland, Argentina, Netherlands, Brazil, to name a few, all provide free University education. The Human Development Index rating for countries had Netherlands at #1 in 2009 and Norway #1 in 2010. We in Canada dropped from 4th to 8th in the same period. Half of the rating has to do with literacy and education. Investing in education makes more sense than tax breaks hoping for trickle down jobs. Education should bring higher pay checks which feeds back into more tax dollars. And, as the Human Development Index ratings show people experience a higher standard of living and better quality of life. Who is against that? If Sri Lanka, Chile, Cuba, Scotland, Denmark, Greece and Libya can do it, why not resource rich Saskatchewan? We have to stop thinking of these programs as investments, not expenses. I would rather offer the opportunity to share the responsibility of investing in my province/community to people I have invested in to increase their quality of life and who want to pass on that legacy, than simply provide an uneducated mass as an underpaid labor pool for multinational corporations with jobs by incentivizing those same companies with the same dollars. People first, please.

Write a comment





Related articles