The purpose of a university is clear: to serve students and communities and generate critical thinking, operating independently of political interference. The province’s proposed Bill 33 threatens that role.
The Ontario legislation, first put forth in May, would grant the provincial government expanded oversight over how universities operate. This shifts power from students, faculty and university bodies to Queen’s Park.
Its detrimental impacts would certainly be felt at Carleton University.
Carleton’s student levy system funds essential student-run services and community spaces. CUSA and GSA supported organizations like Foot Patrol, the Women’s Centre, the Food Centre, Mawandoseg Indigenous Student Centre, RISE and the Unified Support Centre only exist because students fund them. These services feed students, support survivors, provide emergency groceries, offer safe walks and create community programming.
As Carleton’s independent student-run publication, the Charlatan has also used student levy funds to provide news and entertainment to the university community for decades — breaking crucial stories, capturing campus life and holding powerful institutions to account.
Bill 33 introduces the possibility of provincial regulation over these student fee structures. Even if details have not yet been finalized, there is a very real risk.
Once fee decisions are subject to provincial rules, student-run services could face funding constraints and new pressures. When decision-making shifts away from students, campus life inevitably becomes less reflective of student needs.
The bill also requires universities to adopt publicly accessible and “merit-based” admissions standards set or guided by government regulation. While merit is essential, equity is too.
Carleton’s admissions pathways, including those supporting Indigenous learners, first-generation students, students with disabilities and others facing systemic barriers, recognize that merit includes lived experience and opportunity gaps.
If regulations narrow what counts as merit, equity initiatives could be constricted or challenged, too. That risks making higher education less inclusive and reflective of the diverse communities Carleton serves.
Research freedom matters as well. Carleton researchers study everything from technology and democracy to the environment and global conflict. Under Bill 33, universities will need new research security plans. Security cannot come at the cost of academic freedom. If the rules become heavy-handed or political, faculty may think twice about what they study, partnerships may suffer and progress could slow down.
When a university is second-guessing what it can research, can it still do its job?
To protect our student services, equity-informed access, independent research and student-led governance, Carleton must speak up and oppose the measures that undermine university autonomy.
