Breaking barriers

Could the Quebec student triumph become a reality for Nova Scotia? (Photo via Flickr)

Batons, tear gas, mass arrests and even government legislation were not enough to quell the surging power of Quebec student solidarity.

Hundreds of thousands of students took to the streets in an inspiring act of personal sacrifice. They believed accessible education was worthwhile. They risked their entire school year and their own safety in the fight.

And they won.

One day after the Parti Quebecois was elected as the new minority government of Quebec, premier-elect Pauline Marois announced her intention to repeal Bill 78 and cancel the tuition hike.

For the rest of Canadian students, as we sign up for another year of classes and another year of record-high student debt, the question begs to be asked: what are we willing to risk for our future?

In April 2010 the Liberal premier of Quebec, Jean Charest, revealed a budget that would increase tuition by 75 per cent over five years. There was immediate opposition that drew unprecedented mass support from students. Demonstrations were staged throughout the province over the next year. Standing together with community groups in opposition to austerity, the students called bullshit to the government’s claim that increasing fees and privatizing public services is necessary in the name of fiscal responsibility.

Despite the widespread public discontent for the budget, the Charest government refused to budge, ignoring and dismissing the voices of the people.

So the students united and rose up, stronger than ever.

In February 2012, they democratically decided, through rigorous debate and discussion at the general assemblies of their individual student associations, that the only viable option to ensure education remained accessible was to cause economic disruption. They called for an indefinite strike—a decision that eventually evolved into the longest strike in Quebec history, with 150,000 students at its peak.

The strike brought together students, professors, families and community members. It turned the Montreal streets into a hub for ideas of a better society: one based on principles of social justice and equality and in which all members would have access to resources to develop to their full capacities.

The government responded with violence.

Peaceful demonstrations were met with batons, tear gas, and mass arrests. Bill 78 stripped away the right to free speech and assembly by rendering protests on university campuses effectively illegal, and restricting any gathering of 50 people or more at a public place.

Yet, ironically, it is the students who are the ones portrayed as militant, violent, self-interested, and undemocratic. This smear campaign, perpetuated by slanted media coverage and government press relations, attempted to create an environment of fear. In doing so, the government and its police force asserted its power and tried to suppress dissent. Students became the enemy.

In reality, student associations and the movement are opposed to violence against individuals and publicly denounce it. Their campaign brings to public attention the structural violence that accompanies the government’s austerity cuts. Attacks on public services, such as raising tuition and charging fees for healthcare, create a society of inequity—one in which only the wealthy can afford to participate in and the rest are forced into debt just to survive.

The Quebec student movement confronts more than student issues—it is a struggle for a more just and equitable future.

In this light, the strike can be understood not as an end in and of itself, but as a tactic of a broader movement that confronted a government that viewed its citizens as a commodity and refused to recognize the importance of investing in the education of future generations.

Here in Nova Scotia the Darrell Dexter government has also moved to cut education. By the end of its first term, average fees will have increased 13 per cent. In February for the last two years, thousands of students flooded the streets of Halifax to demand accessible education.

In Quebec and Nova Scotia, the struggle is the same. It’s about opposing the same agenda that places corporate profit above the well-being of its citizens. It’s about fighting for a more just future.

Organizers from the Quebec student movement will be at Dalhousie this month to share ideas, skills and tactics with us. Let us first acknowledge that we too have the power to shape our future—we have the power to demand an affordable education. Let us be prepared to ask the hard questions to advance our movement.

This is a cause worth fighting for.

By Paul Pritchard, Opinions Contributor
On September 14, 2012 At 11:59 am

Category : Opinions
Tags : , , ,

Responses : 2 Comments

Related Posts


  • Pingback: Breaking barriers? Entitlement wins out.

  • Sean

    The reader will have to absorb the above article as well as its contra: Mr. Holgate’s Breaking Barriers? Entitlement Wins Out, published in the Sextant, to fully appreciate the paragraphs that follow. As is typical of options such as Mr. Holgate’s, in a “I’ll have the last word” type debate, the Sextant has no space for comments, as clearly, the Dal Gazette does.
    What is refreshing are the comments of Mr. Pritchard. The protest and subsequent victory in Quebec is a great message to us all, not simply as students, but as individuals as part of a greater whole. Indeed, the eight-hour workday and women having the right to vote (to name only a few) are both issues that took protest—often instigating and receiving violent actions—to see their ends met. To use the trite instances of the Montreal “police officers [being] injured” with a tone of disbelief, is utterly obtuse to the facts surrounding police brutality in this country.
    Now, tuition. This is not a race to the bottom. It matters not how much tuition costs per province, it matters that we act in solidarity to significantly decrease the figure. It is not difficult to find plenty of counties where high school is nothing but preparation for the nearly or completely subsidized post –secondary institutions that those countries want their citizens to enter. This is a good thing, be it a vocational or academic establishment.
    The students in Quebec aren’t fighting for better adaptability to the workforce, as Mr. Holgate insinuates. A “Bachelor of Painting”, Really? Graduates “owning corporations ” is certainly not on the agenda or even the radar of anyone wearing a red square on their lapel. The students “risked their entire school year” for, as Pierre Martin, professor of political science at the Université de Montréal points out, getting their government to live up to a promise that was made during the Quiet Revolution: That university should not be an individual investment made for the increased possibility of future income gains, but a collective educational undertaking, done for the good of society as a whole.
    While this may make Mr. Holgate puke on yet another meal, it’s as true a statement as this: that despite what your neoliberal thinking my consist of, in the resource hungry commodifying economy that is the expanding balloon of corporatism, there are some of us who study those “[un] appreciable skills” not because we want to cut ourselves a larger piece of the pie, but because we want to bake a new one.
    University “paying off”, is that why you go to school, so you can get rich?
    Understanding deeply, the nuances of society in order to better it, far exceeds the overpaid wages that are squandered on the ultra-consumerism that permeates the global north.
    I gather this is what Mr. Pritchard seems to understand. And it is clearly what Mr. Holgate fails to realize. The frame with which the latter gazes through is narrow and economically focused. We come to school to widen the gaze. We come to school to better ourselves.
    I thank Mr. Pritchard and the Dal Gazette for hosting these comments.

    Sean Allingham
    Undergraduate
    University of Toronto
    (one of the highest tuitions in the country)