All Posts Tagged With: "Federal Government"

After leading the charge against FNU’s governance problems, CAUT is upset the feds are doing something about it

The most recent Bulletin from the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) slams the federal government for refusing to restore funding to First Nations University of Canada (FNUC).

Here’s Randy Lundy, from FNUC, quoted approvingly  in the article:

We cannot understand the federal government’s decision, coming after the longstanding governance and administrative concerns at the university have been fixed.

Well, first of all, this is incorrect. The decision to cut funding came after years of problems which were never fixed. What Lundy and the CAUT bosses object to is that the government won’t restore the funding, now that the fixes have finally, supposedly, been made. But that’s like a philandering husband who’s been thrown out by his wife asking “why won’t you take me back, now? I’m not cheating any more!” Sorry. Too late.

Now, I sympathize with Lundy. He stands to lose his job through the incompetence of his governors. Everything should be done to find him and faculty members like him new positions. But what galls me is that CAUT has the audacity to pretend that the Federal Government is arbitrarily trying to destroy FNUC for no reason, when it was CAUT itself that led the charge against FNUC’s mismanagement in the first place. It was CAUT who censured FNUC, telling its members that the place was so messed up, no self-respecting academic should have anything to do with it. And now they have the nerve to act like they’ve been on FNUC’s side the whole time?

Remember, it was less than two years ago that CAUT said:

Censure is a measure of last resort used only when we are faced with violations of principles that are fundamental to higher education [...] In most cases, university and college administrations recognize the serious consequences censure will have on the reputation of the institution and its ability to recruit staff and students, and they look for ways to resolve problems before censure is imposed. Unfortunately, while the FNUniv administration and board were given every opportunity, they refused to show any serious willingness to address the concerns.

Today, they call, with a straight face, the federal funding cut “a surprise announcement.” How could CAUT be surprised that funding would be cut to a university that they themselves said violated the fundamental principles of higher education?

I am rarely on the side of Stephen Harper’s conservatives, but I applaud them for taking a stand on quality education. Even if the Canadian Association of University Teachers won’t.

Fed’s latest choice for CIHR governing council in conflict of interest

Guess the feds were a little loopy when they made this call.

The vice-president and medical director of Pfizer Canada has been appointed to the governing council of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR).

It was announced Oct. 5 that Dr. Bernard Prigent was appointed to the publicly funded CIHR, which sponsors medical research across the country. The rest of the governing council is primarily made of medical practitioners, scientists and health administrators.

“He’s the VP of the largest drug company in the world, and he says he’ll keep that separate,” NDP health critic Judy Wasylycia-Leis told CBC. “How effective will that be?”

Well, you or I can’t really answer that. The decision is up for review in the House of Commons. But in the meantime, seeing as we’re already playing, “Screwing up Government Integrity,” why not throw a few more social scenarios into the mix?

Take, for example:

• The Molson family running various nationwide AA chapters
• Robert Friedland, founder and chairman of Ivanhoe Mines Ltd., joining Canada’s consultation board on the Kyoto Protocol
• Jean Lafleur assisting Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter in his investigation of the eHealth spending scandal
• Rick Smith, CEO of Taser International, serving as RCMP watchdog

Which one would you prefer? Something to think about while trying to ignore that nagging federal disdain.

Ottawa to announce one-year timetable for accepting foreign qualifications

Foreign-trained workers will soon learn within one year whether or not their qualifications match Canadian standards. The federal Conservatives are expected to announce the change in a Toronto press conference later today. The expedited licensing process will apply to 14 different fields.

By the end of 2010, the one-year timetable will be in place for foreign-trained architects, engineers, pharmacists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, registered nurses, medical laboratory technologists, and financial auditors and accountants.

The changes will be expanded to include six more fields by the end of December 2012: teachers, dentists, physicians, engineering technicians, licensed practical nurses, and medical radiation technologists.

The federal government is touting the changes — otherwise known as the Pan-Canadian Framework for the Assessment and Recognition of Foreign Qualifications — as a way to attract international talent to Canada and allow immigrants to reach their full potential.

There are signs that potential isn’t being tapped into: a Statistics Canada study released earlier this month comparing foreign-born and Canadian-born workers found that immigrants were more likely to be overqualified for their jobs.

Forty-two per cent of immigrant workers between 25 and 54 had a higher level of education than their jobs required, compared to 28 per cent of Canadian-born employees, the study said.  Average hourly wages for immigrant workers in that same age group were also $2.28 lower than for Canadian-born workers.

“I see a lot of qualified immigrants working in restaurants as dishwashers or as waiters, waitresses . . . it’s mainly manual work, not (work using) skills that they have,” said Sang-Hee Park, the board president of the Korean Canadian Women’s Association.

A social worker in her native South Korea, Park immigrated to Canada nine years ago. She said she spent two years working in a Toronto clothing store and had to take extra classes before being accredited here.

Park said the governments proposal is “very positive” but wanted to know more about how Ottawa plans to work with organizations that accredit and license certain professions, like architects or engineers.

“This has been an issue for a long time, and there’s always conflict or there’s always argument (with those regulatory bodies),” she said. “I’m so glad the government is recognizing (foreign training) but how are they going to work with them in bridging those gaps in implementing this policy?”

The new framework also pledges that federal, provincial, and territorial governments will strive to create better services for immigrants before they arrive in Canada and once they’re in the workforce. The governments will work with regulatory bodies, colleges and universities, and other “key partners” to make the changes happen.

The Canadian Press