Bishop’s’ international students, professors’ federation voice concerns
By William Crooks
Local Journalism Initiative
Bishop’s University students and faculty are facing uncertainty as Bill 74, aimed at restricting the number of international students in Quebec’s schools and universities, casts doubt over the institution’s autonomy and future diversity. The recently proposed legislation has prompted mixed reactions, with student leaders and professors’ groups warning of its potential impact on university independence, program viability, and Quebec’s appeal as a study destination.
In an interview with Drew Henkel, President of Bishop’s University’s Student Representative Council (SRC), and third-year international student Fiona Gaombalet, both expressed concerns over the restrictive nature of Bill 74. The bill, which would grant the Quebec government new powers to regulate international admissions by program and institution, could limit educational options for students from around the world, they argue. This move has raised apprehensions among both students and faculty members across the province.
Henkel highlighted the apprehension felt among students, especially as international students already face high tuition fees and the pressure to finance their studies while adjusting to life in Quebec. “It’s always kind of on people’s minds… it’s an uncertainty towards the future,” Henkel shared. The SRC has yet to take direct action but aligns with the university’s stance against the bill, with Henkel stating that the bill “isn’t a positive function for us in any way.”
Gaombalet echoed the concerns, reflecting on her own experience coming from France to study in Quebec. “In France, we cannot have proper access to the studies that we want to do. Here in Quebec, you actually have the ability to learn and be in corporate situations to acquire more knowledge,” she said. Gaombalet emphasized that many international students, like her, are driven by Quebec’s unique bilingual environment and the chance to integrate into both anglophone and francophone cultures.
In the context of these motivations, Bill 74 has created an atmosphere of insecurity among students about their long-term prospects in Quebec. Gaombalet noted that the bill could deter future students from considering Bishop’s, an institution known for its international inclusivity. “With [a hypothetical future] increase [in tuition], we know that there are bursaries and awards available on campus,” she added, but she worries these resources may no longer be enough to attract students if the regulatory environment becomes more restrictive.
The Fédération québécoise des professeures et professeurs d’université (FQPPU), Quebec’s university professors’ federation, has also voiced strong opposition to Bill 74. In a recent brief, the FQPPU warned that the bill undermines the autonomy of Quebec’s universities by centralizing decision-making powers within the government. Madeleine Pastinelli, president of the FQPPU, stated in the release, “This power transfer could deprive institutions of their autonomy, indirectly preventing them from defining their educational offerings.”
The FQPPU outlined three primary concerns. First, the group sees the bill as a threat to institutional autonomy, as it allows government intervention in academic decision-making traditionally managed by universities. Second, the federation worries that program viability, especially in universities outside major urban centers, will be compromised. Some programs rely heavily on international enrollment for financial stability, and restrictions could jeopardize their existence. Finally, the FQPPU argued that Quebec risks damaging its reputation as a leading educational destination, as increasingly restrictive policies may signal exclusion rather than inclusivity.
For Henkel, the bill represents yet another challenge in what he described as a recurring trend of provincial “non-welcoming” attitudes. He and the SRC view the current situation as symptomatic of a broader issue. “It’s not bringing in anything that’s going to… make better education [or] make further investments,” he remarked. Henkel’s recent conversations at the Quebec Student Union Caucus revealed a united front among student representatives across Quebec’s universities, with both students and faculty generally opposing the bill.
The FQPPU has recommended several amendments to Bill 74 to mitigate its potential negative effects. They propose that the government consult the university community before implementing restrictions and conduct impact assessments to understand the implications of any proposed changes. Additionally, they urge transparency in the selection criteria used to restrict admissions, to ensure Quebec’s reputation remains intact.
Gaombalet further highlighted the financial challenges international students face, particularly as the cost of living rises. She expressed concern that some international students may struggle if they are restricted from working longer hours. “Most of the students that are coming here… have bursaries, but their countries are not willing to give more money,” she said. Allowing international students to work additional hours could help ease these financial burdens and contribute to Quebec’s economy, she argued. Gaombalet views this as a necessary consideration for Quebec to continue attracting students from diverse backgrounds.
As the SRC and Bishop’s administration weigh their responses, Henkel noted that the SRC has been assured by the university’s executive team that planned budget cuts, intended to address deficits, will not directly affect students. The administration has involved the SRC in discussions, and while the specific cuts remain unclear, Henkel said the university is committed to avoid “student-facing actions” and minimize the impact on the campus community.
As Quebec’s National Assembly considers amendments, the debate surrounding Bill 74 highlights the complexities of balancing government policy with institutional autonomy and the realities faced by international students. For now, Bishop’s University remains hopeful that open dialogue and student engagement will help address these concerns and safeguard the diverse and inclusive campus environment it has worked to cultivate.