en - notice on youth regional mobility

8/4/2019 En - notice on Youth regional mobility

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/en-notice-on-youth-regional-mobility 1/21

Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec

Notice on Youth Regional Mobility

Presented for the 148th regular meeting of the Board of Directors(CAO-14810)

November 13-14, 2010In Lévis



The Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec (FEUQ) is an organization that brings

together 15 student associations with more than 125,000 students from all levels of and every

region of Quebec. Established since 1989, its main mandate has been to defend the rights and

interests of students with governments and education stakeholders. Throughout its twenty years

of existence, it has endeavored to defend a humanistic education as a societal choice. It focuses

particularly on defending its members before, during and after their passage in university by

demanding, above all, an accessible and quality education.

Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec

15 Marie-Anne Ouest2e étageMontréal (Québec)H2W 1B6Telephone: (514) 396-3380Fax: (514) 396-7140

Supervision Mathieu Oligny, vice-president of sociopolitical affairs (2010-2011)

Analysis and writing Mathieu Oligny, vice-president of sociopolitical affairs (2010-2011)Lysiane Boucher, coordinator of federal and international affairs (2009-2010)Louis-Philippe Savoie, vice-president of university affairs (2009-2010)Laurent Viau, university affairs attaché (2009-2010)

Linguistic revision Mathieu Oligny, vice-president of sociopolitical affairs (2010-2011)

Page formatting Mathieu Oligny, vice-president of sociopolitical affairs (2010-2011)

All rights reserved – FEUQ 2010



Notice on youth regional mobilityFédération étudiante universitaire du Québec - 2010

i

Summary

The interest of the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec (FEUQ) in the regionalcomponents of the Université du Québec does not date back to yesterday. Since its beginnings in 1989, the Federation has given itself the objective of sensitizing thegovernment and regional decision-makers to the importance of supporting universityinstitutions situated in remote regions.

Firstly, there are regional studies. A limited offering of education that leads youngpeople to leave their region of birth, the limits of the local job market, a strongparticipation in the student financial assistance program and a high percentage of first-generation students are all particularities that make less probable the participation of regional students in university studies.

In this sense, the FEUQ recommends that the government of Québec ensure stablefinancing for regional universities and that it ensure a large offering of education,

diversified and specialized with a view to ensuring geographical accessibility touniversity studies.

On the other hand, there is the establishment of students in remote regions followingtheir studies. To this effect, a provincial tax credit has existed since 2003 as an incentivefor the establishment of youth in the regions. During the provincial elections of 2008, theQuebec Liberal Party promised to improve the tax credit. This promise has still not beenfulfilled two years later. The FEUQ thus recommends that the government of Quebechonor its electoral promise of improving tax measures to encourage youth to return tothe regions.

Next, we will present the data on the regional mobility of university students collected

by the FEUQ in its study on the sources and modes of funding undergraduate students.We should note that 28% of students changed their region to pursue their studies. Out of this number, 73% did it for reasons of proximity to a university, availability of studyprograms. In addition, 29% of students hope to return to their region after their studiesand 37% are still undecided.

Finally, for the last two years the federal parliament, on the initiative of the BlocQuébécois and with the support of the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party of Canada, has been debating a project to introduce a federal tax credit, similar to the oneexisting in Québec, for the establishment of young graduates in the resource regions.The FEUQ recommends that the federal government introduce a tax credit for newgraduates working in the regions by finding inspiration from the model developed in

Quebec.




ii

List of recommendations

Recommendation 1.That the government of Quebec ensure stable and viable funding for regionaluniversities, and that it ensures a wide offering of education, diversifies and specialized,

with a view to ensuring geographical accessibility to university studies. (CAU-667(6.4.1)).

Recommendation 2.That the government of Quebec pay particular attention to accessibility to studies forstudents coming from the regions, more specifically in regard to the singular financialdifficulties they experience and the high number of first-generation students. (CAU-668(6.4.1)).

Recommendation 3.That the government of Quebec fulfill its electoral promise to improve the tax measuresencouraging youth to return to the regions. (CASP-469 (12.1)).

Recommendation 4.That the government of Quebec publicize taxation measures encouraging the return of youth to the regions (CASP-472 (12.1)).

Recommendation 5.

That the federal government introduce a tax credit for new graduates working in theregions by seeking inspiration from the model developed in Quebec. (CASP-470 (12.1)).

Recommendation 6.

That the federal government publicize its future taxation measures encouraging thereturn of youth to the regions (CASP-473 (12.1)).




iii

List of acronyms SFA Student Financial AssistanceCCAFE Comité consultatif sur l’accessibilité financière aux étudesCNCS-FEUQ Conseil national des cycles supérieurs de la Fédération étudiante

universitaire du QuébecCSF Conseil du statut de la femmeCSQ Certificat de sélection du QuébecCMSF Canada Millennium Scholarship FoundationFEUQ Fédération étudiante universitaire du QuébecMIF Mandatory Institutional FeesMDEIE Ministère du Développement économique, de l’Innovation et de

l’ExportationMELS Ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du SportMEQ Ministère de l’Éducation du QuébecMESS Ministère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité socialeMICC Ministère de l’Immigration et des Communautés culturelles

QPIP Quebec Parental Insurance Plan

List of tables

Table1:Percentageofstudentshavingchangedregionofstudiesatthebeginningofundergraduatestudies____6 Table2:Motiveforchangingregionofresidence(%) _________________________________________________________________6Table3:Percentageofstudentswishingtoreturntotheircityoforigin(%)_________________________________________7 Table4:Motiveforthereturntotheregion(%)_______________________________________________________________________7 Table5:Motiffortheabsenceofthereturntotheregionoforigin___________________________________________________8 Table6:-Distributionofbachelor'sgraduatesaccordingtotheirregionoforiginandtheirregionofgraduation(2003)____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________10Table7:Statusofstudentsaccordingtothegenerationofgraduationandtheregionofstudy____________________12Table8:Statisticsonthetaxcreditfornewgraduatesinremoteresourceregionsaccordingtotheyearof

taxation__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________13




iv

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 52. REGIONAL MOBILITY .................................................................................................................................... 63. STUDIES IN THE REGIONS ........................................................................................................................... 94. PROVINCIAL TAX CREDIT FOR NEW GRADUATES WORKING IN A RESOURCE REGION 135. FEDERAL TAX CREDIT FOR NEW GRADUATES WORKING IN A RESOURCE REGION ........ 156. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................. 17BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................................... 18




5

1. Introduction

This notice has the objective of presenting the results concerning the regional mobility of students based on our Study on the sources and modes of financing undergraduate students inQuebec.1 The targeted population of the study corresponds to all students enrolled in theundergraduate level in Quebec and apt to answer a questionnaire distributed online inEnglish or French. Thirteen institutions are represented by this study: McGill University,HEC Montréal and the Faculty of Continuing Education at the Université de Montréalwere not included.2 The study includes 12,619 valid answers, which makes itrepresentative of all the population and, at the same time, makes it the vastest studyever conducted on the living conditions of undergraduate students in Quebec (FEUQ, to be published).

Secondly, we reiterate the importance of regional universities for the development of theregions in Quebec and for accessibility to studies. To this effect, we are issuingrecommendations to continue in time the financing of the regional universities. We will

also focus on the accessibility to studies in the regions where nearly 66% of students arefirst-generation students.

Thirdly, we are presenting what we consider are important incentive measures for theestablishment of young graduates in the resource regions of Quebec. In 2007, 15,991youths benefited from the tax credit for new graduates working in remote resourceregions. Now, the improvement promised for the tax credit is still awaited.

Finally, the FEUQ is focusing on the question of the file concerning the introduction of afederal tax credit for new graduates settling down in the resource regions. This file has been dragging for more than two years while a bill aiming at this measure lives at therhythm of the ups and down of the Canadian parliament.

1 For a detailed description of the questionnaire and the methodology used for the realization of the survey see: FEUQ. (To be published). Study on the living and study conditions of undergraduatestudents. Montréal: Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec.2 For different motives, the people in charge of the administrations of these institutions or thestudent associations representing them did not contribute to the FEUQ’s study.




6

2. Regional mobility

The negative migratory balance has been a stark reality for years in Quebec regions. In

2005, a colloquium of the Centre interuniversitaire d’études démographiques (CIED) notedthis phenomenon, which is nonetheless not new. According to the data presented by theresearchers of the Institut de la statistique du Québec3 the remote regions of Quebec are orwill be in a period of falling demographics during the coming decades. One of the waysof maintaining youth in these regions is to provide them with an adequate and proximalcourse of studies so as not to uproot them.

Our study focuses on this situation (Table 1). Among our respondents, 28% mentionthey changed regions at the beginning of their undergraduate studies while 72% saidthey did not have to move.

Table 1: Percentage of students changing their region of residence at the beginning of their undergraduate studies

Total

Yes 28%

No 72%

I prefer not to answer 0 %

Total 100%

The reasons for this move are a bit clearer: 73% of students left their region forproximity to the university institution. This is either because to be closer to theuniversity of their choice or because there were none in their region of origin or again because the program of their choice was not offered at the closest university to theirlocation of residency. This shows the importance of the presence of a regional universityin order to stem the exodus of youth from their region of origin.

Table 2: Motive for change of region of residence (%)

Montréal QuébecCentralregions

Remoteregions*

Overall

To get closer to your university 40 % 23 % * 32 % * 23 % ** 33 %Because there was no university near your region

of origin15 % 29 % * 22 % * 25 % ** 20 %

Because the program in which you wanted tostudy was not offered in your region of origin

18 % 28 % * 18 % * 16 % ** 20 %

Because the reputation of the university in whichyou wanted to study was better than the closest

9 % 11 % * 19 % * 7 % ** 11 %

3 GIRARD, Chantal, Dominique ANDRÉ, Normand THIBAULT et Esther LÉTOUNREAU. Évolution démographiqueprojetée des régions du Québec et influence de la migration interrégionale. Centre interuniversitaire d’étudesdémographiques, Montréal, 11 mai 2005, adresse web :http://www.cied.umontreal.ca/documents/CGirard_ACFAS_2005.pdf. En ligne,[http://www.cied.umontreal.ca/documents/CGirard_ACFAS_2005.pdf ] (Consulté le 17 octobre 2010).




7

universityFamily consideration (purchase of a house,

mobility of a spouse, etc.)5 % 2 % * 2 % * 5 % ** 4 %

Professional considerations (new job, better jobin the region, etc.)

2 % 1 % * 1 % * 3 % ** 2 %

Other, specify: 7 % 4 % * 5 % * 17 % ** 7 %I prefer not to answer 4 % 2 % * 1 % * 5 % ** 3 %

Table 3 establishes a certain balance between respondents that wish to return to theircity of origin (29%) and those that do not wish to make this choice (33%). On the otherhand, our study emphasizes that a good number of students have not yet made theirdecision (37%). Certain situations will then modify their decision.

Table 3: Percentage of students wishing to return to their city of origin (%)

Total(n=3771)

Yes 29 %

No 33 %

I do not know 37 %

I prefer not to answer 1 %

Total 100 %

Two reasons stand out when the respondents evoke certain motives regarding theirreturn to the region (table 4). Firstly, there is quality of life that is a reason mentioned by38% of respondents. Next, 35% of students say they wish to return to their region to beclose to their loved ones. Subsequently, the percentage of respondents drops a lot andattains 14% for those considering the presence of available jobs as a motive to return.

Table 4: Motive to return to the region (%)

TotalFor quality of life 38 %

To be close to loved ones 35 %For presence of available jobs 14 %

To start a family 8 %To start a business 1 %

Other, specify: 3 %I prefer not to answer 1 %

Total 100%The first reason that pushes students to not return to their city of origin is not oneuniquely based on the fact of loving or not the place from which they come. On thecontrary, 37% of respondents say it consists of material constraint by invoking the lack of available jobs. For others, 34% do not wish to return to it, since they appreciate thequality of life of another region. Subsequently, other reasons are evoked, for example,starting a family (7%) or getting closer to loved ones (4%) in the region of adoption.




8

Table 5: Motive of absence of return to the region of origin

TotalFor the quality of life of another region 34 %

For the lack of available jobs 37 %To be close to loved ones 4 %

To start a family in another region 7 %To start a business in another region 2 %I am well where I am 3 %

I have a job here/ because of work 2 %Other, specify: 5 %

I prefer not to answer 6 %Total 100 %




9

3. Studies in the region

Youth from the regions experience particular situations in regard to access to universitystudies. In fact, during the course of the last years, the FEUQ has underlined on severaloccasions the importance of geographical accessibility to studies (FEUQ 2006; 2007b;2008c; 2009d). We will address some elements relative to this particular facet of theproblem of accessibility to studies. The particularities of students in the regions can besummarized into four points: a limited offering of education, a greater dependency onthe student financial assistance program, a limited job market, and a greater number of first-generation students.

Firstly, in regard to geographic accessibility to studies, Marc Frenette stated “thatremoteness also plays a factor in university attendance” (Frenette, 2003, p. 1). Thus, a studentwho must travel great distances will have to assume additional expenses whether interms of transportation if he is within an acceptable driving distance– possession of an

automobile and related expenses – or in terms of housing expenses if he has to liveoutside the family home. Furthermore, Frenette mentions that

[…] up to one student in five at the secondary level has to travel more than 80 km in astraight line to attend university. In this case, the probability of attending university are only58% of those of students who can easily shuttle between home and school, namely that haveless than 40 km to travel (here we take into account differences in family income, instructionof parents, gender and province). We should add that the negative effect of distance is feltmore in students from less well off families in terms of income, which would accredit theidea that the expenses incurred can to a large extent explain that remoteness is a disincentiveto university attendance (Frenette 2003, p. 1).

Frenette is undoubtedly the only one to have studied the question in an empirical

manner for specific Canadian examples. It is thus difficult to determine in a specific waywhat is the case for Quebec. The author also tells us that CEGEPS and universities in theregions “have positive benefits for students from the fact that they allow them to informthemselves on postsecondary studies and that they provide positive identificationmodels for youth” (Frenette 2007, 8). Thus, universities in the regions not only reducephysical distances with the university world, but also psychological distance. This isnotably due to the fact of knowing people in their entourage who went to the localuniversity, to go to the university premises before access to university studies forcultural or sports activities, etc. Once again, the immediate environment plays a crucialrole in the pursuit of university studies.

Having said this, Quebec society having understood the issue during the Quiet

Revolution, the opening of the institution of the Université du Québec in the said remoteregions allowed for the reduction of geographic obstacles to studies. With time, theregional universities were not just content to offer university education on their maincampus, but also opened sub-branches in a great number of cities throughout theregions of Quebec. However, the FEUQ recently reproached the lack of coordination in




10

the development of this parallel university network, in the sense that the basic objectivewas less often to increase accessibility to studies than to engage in an unlimited race for“student clientele” (FEUQ, 2008c). There is thus a justification to revise the way of developing the university network in the regions to promote geographic accessibility tostudies, whether it be through the creation of university sub-branches or throughdistance education, which involves better empirical knowledge of this reality The studyDelocalization of university campuses: response to a need or race for clientele? (FEUQ, 2009x)explores the question of the delocalization of the campus while the Notice on DistanceEducation (FEUQ 2009x) sketches a comprehensive assessment of this mode of educationin Quebec.

Now, for the particularities that belong to regional students, we have firstly cited thereduced offer of education. To this effect, a recent study of the FEUQ (2009d) has shownthe relative poverty of the offering of education in the components of the Université duQuébec in the regions (UQAC, UQAR, UQAT, UQO, UQTR). It pushes in most cases amajority of students in these regions to travel to other regions – generally Montréal,Québec or Sherbrooke – to study there, as the following table illustrates:

Table 6 - Distribution of bachelor’s graduates according to their region of origin and their region of graduation(2003)

Region of originGraduated in

Montréal, Québecand Sherbrooke

Graduated outsideregion of origin

Graduated in regionof origin

Gaspésie- les-de-la-Madeleine 82,1 % 100,0 % 0,0 %Côte-Nord 76,6 % 100,0 % 0,0 %

Bas-Saint-Laurent 69,8 % 73,8 % 26,2 %Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean 49,6 % 55,8 % 44,2 %Chaudière-Appalaches 86,9 % 100,0 % 0,0 %

Mauricie 48,1 % 49,1 % 50,9 %

Centre-du-Québec 80,5 % 100,0 % 0,0 %Outaouais 48,3 % 50,0 % 50,0 %Abitibi-Témiscamingue 60,2 % 71,5 % 28,5 %

Nord-du-Québec 60,6 % 100,0 % 0,0 %Capitale-Nationale 92,7 % 30,3 % 69,7 %

Estrie 95,0 % 39,6 % 60,4 %Montérégie 96,4 % 100,0 % 0,0 %

Montréal 99,2 % 5,0 % 95,0 %Laval 97,4 % 100,0 % 0,0 %

Lanaudière 87,9 % 100,0 % 0,0 %Laurentides 94,4 % 100,0 % 0,0 %

Note : Les données présentées ne tiennent pas compte des campus et antennes régionales des universités.Source : MELS, 2007, p. 9.

As we mentioned earlier, the fact of traveling to study in another region leads toadditional costs, which risks reducing accessibility to studies. Let us remember that




11

according to table 1, 28% of students changed regions to do their university studies,while 72% did not have to do it.

Thus, we have a situation where one of the keys to success is geographic proximity to

location of studies. We therefore have to ensure stable financing to regional universitiesthat takes into account the reality of these institutions. One of the levers is present in theform of budgetary envelopes Mission of regional institutions and Support for research (MELS 2009), which allows these institutions to compensate for the loss of students andthe often higher operating costs given the reduced size of these universities. We alsohave to ensure a large and diversified education that includes specialized programs andof a more general nature, which is a guarantee of accessibility and attractiveness forstudies in the regions.

Recommendation 1.That the government of Quebec ensure stable and viable funding for regional

universities, and that it ensures a wide offering of education, diversified andspecialized, with a view to ensuring geographical accessibility to university studies.(CAU-667 (6.4.1)).

The second particularity to which we refer concerns student financial assistance. Thecorollary of “exodus” towards other regions to study and the additional costs that arethen engendered is the fact that a greater number of university students from theregions in Quebec depend on student financial assistance. Obviously, recourse to SFAdepends on family and student incomes, who can thus have need despite the fact theyare situated relatively close to the university. Next, many students do not leave theirregion of origin to pursue their postsecondary studies. On the other hand, the distancesto travel within the same region leads to the need of finding housing close to the

educational institution... Thus, nearly 70% of university students coming from theregions have recourse to SFA during their studies (FEUQ, 2007, p. 29), while for all of Quebec, it is “only” about 27% of university students that are recipients of SFA (AFE,2008, p. 19).

Thirdly, the job market is often more limited in the regions. This is equally true of professional integration, notably due to the great number of mono-industrial cities thatQuebec has, about 200 (Lucier, 2006, p. 10), for summer jobs and part-time jobs andinternships. We do not have details of the latest statistics of the job market for thedifferent regions of Quebec, but we know that for the summer of 2009, theunemployment rate attained 16.6% in 15 to 24 year olds for all of Quebec (StatistiqueCanada 2009b, 34). We can expect that in the regions the unemployment rate is evenhigher than the Quebec average, so these data are even more disastrous. This situationreduces the possibility of accumulating sufficient funds for living expenses, tuition fees,school material during the course of the academic year and thus increases financialdifficulties and the dependence on the SFA program. Financial factors as barriers tostudy projects are thus more important for students in the regions.




12

Table 7: Status of students according to the generation of graduation and region of study

Montréal Québec Central regions Remote regionsFirst generation 44,3% 48,6% 56,7% 66,1% *

Secondgeneration or

more

47,2% 45,9% 38,5% 28,8% *

Do not know 5,1% 3,7% 2,5% 2,9% *

Prefer not toanswer

3,3% 1,8% 2,3% 2,2% *

Finally, we mentioned earlier the fact of not having parents who accessed universitystudies greatly reduces the chances of a student himself accessing university. The factthat information relative to postsecondary studies has the effect of socializing is very

important with respect to access to studies and plays an even greater role in first-generation students. In this regard, table 7, from the FEUQ study on sources and modesof financing students, shows that nearly 66% of regional students are first-generationstudents. Particular attention must be granted to them to ensure they access university,on the one hand, and that they persevere in their academic path on the other.

Recommendation 2.That the government of Quebec pay particular attention to accessibility to studies forstudents coming from the regions, more specifically in regard to the singular financialdifficulties they experience and the high number of first-generation students. (CAU-668(6.4.1)).




13

4. Provincial tax credit for new graduates working in resource regions

Created in 2003 and modified in 2006, the tax credit for new graduates working inremote resource regions has the goal of “fighting the exodus of youth from remoteresource regions and influence migration towards such regions by young graduates” 4 (MFQ 2009). The FEUQ can only endorse such an objective. All the measures promotingthe establishment of youth in the regions of Quebec are beneficial for the developmentof Quebec.

The tax credit functions as a reduction of the tax burden of individuals. In this case, itconsists of the lightening of the tax burden of new graduates and more specifically newgraduates settling down in resource regions. Here is how the ministry of Finance of Quebec presents this functioning:

[…] an individual who has just graduated and settles down in a remote resource region tohold a job related to his field of specialization can benefit, under reservation of compliancewith certain conditions, from a non-reimbursable tax credit allowing him to reduce the taxeshe must pay of an amount that can attain $3,000 per year— up until a cumulative amount of $8,000 —, as long as he resides in a continuous fashion in a remote resource region and holdsa job related to his field of specialization.5 (MFQ 2009)

Between 2003 and 2006, the measure went from a reimbursable tax credit to a non-reimbursable tax credit. This modification had the effect of reducing the governmentalcosts of such a measure. We can, in fact, see in table 7 that between 2005 and 2006, thetax credit went from $63 million to $18 million in tax expenditures. Nevertheless, thenumber of recipients is in constant increase since the introduction of the measure. Infact, the number of recipients went from 4,578 in 2003 to 15,991 in 2007.

Table 8: Statistic on the tax credit for new graduates in remote resource regions according to the year of taxation6

Year of taxation Number of recipientsAmount in

$M

2003 4 578 21

2004 12 889 63

2005 14 503 63

2006 11 680 18

4 Ministère des finances du Québec. Dépenses fiscales édition 2009. P.B695 Idem.6 Data relative to the contributions drawn from the income tax returns for the years 2003 to 2007,on the date of September 30, 2008.




14

2007 15 991 29

2008(p) n.a. 40

2009(p) n.a. 49

2010(p) n.a. 58Source : MFQ, 2009

During the provincial elections of autumn 2008, a promise of the Quebec Liberal Partydealt with the tax credit. In fact, this promise is found in the electoral platform of theQLP. Thus, “the Liberals also promised to improve the tax credit for young graduatesworking in resource regions. The tax credit would thus go from $8,000 to $15,000 and itwould be spread out over a period of 5 years rather than 3 years.”7”8 Two years later,when the Quebec Liberal Party reached the halfway point of its mandate, nothing has been done to improve the tax credit.

The FEUQ considers this is the moment to remind the Quebec Liberal Party of itspromise made to Quebecers to improve tax measures to encourage young people toreturn to the regions.

Recommendation 3.That the government of Quebec fulfill its electoral promise to improve the tax measuresencouraging youth to return to the regions (CASP-469 (12.1)).

Furthermore, we consider it important that the government of Quebec inform younggraduates of the existence and functioning of taxation measures. In this sense, werecommend:

Recommendation 4.That the government of Quebec publicize taxation measures encouraging the return of youth to the regions (CASP-472 (12.1)).

7 Radio-Canada. (2008) Les promesses des libéraux.. <http://elections.radio-canada.ca/elections/quebec2008/2008/12/09/007-bilan-promesses.shtml >. Site consulté le 16 octobre2010.8 Idem.




15

5. Federal tax credit for new graduates working in resource regions

In certain respects, however, it could be opportune for the federal government tointervene in its fields of jurisdiction. In this sense, the FEUQ supports the efforts that ledto the introduction of bill C-288 proposing the creation of a tax credit offered to newgraduates settling in a designated region to work there (FEUQ, 2009b). This is a secondattempt to try to adopt this bill since its ancestor, bill C-207 was introduced, supported by all the parties except the one in power, but died with the calling of federal electionsin 2008.

In Québec, as we have just seen, such a measure has already proven its worth since2003. It is with the concern of the development and support of the local economy thatsuch efforts must be made. In fact, two main objectives are targeted in the developmentof such a bill to counter the departure of regional youth towards the major urban centersand ensure a skilled workforce that is necessary for the regions. The phenomenon is not

unique to Quebec: everywhere in North America economic activity has graduallyshifted from rural regions to the major urban centers. More and more voices are beingheard to recognize the unique contribution of the regions in the economic structure of states. The time when resource regions could count on the extraction of naturalresources to ensure economic prosperity is no longer a current reality. The developmentof the transformation sector and a constant concern for innovation are necessary tostimulate regional economies.

The shortage of a skilled workforce is not only a problem of training. Youth from theregions are not less instructed. The chronic problem is that they no longer live in theregions. A taxation measure similar to bill C-288 was implemented in Quebec and morethan 9,000 young people in 2004 benefited from this incentive, thus allowing the

establishment of youth in the regions where the migratory balance is negative.Furthermore, as we mentioned previously, for the Federation, accessibility to studiesshould not be thought of according to the time of studies, but rather in an integratedvision ranging from entrance into university to socio-professional integration.

In order to counter the exodus of youth from the resource regions and encourage themto pursue their studies at the postsecondary level:

Recommendation 5.

That the federal government introduce a tax credit for new graduates working in theregions by seeking inspiration from the model developed in Quebec (CASP-470 (12.1)).

Furthermore, in the perspective of the application of federal taxation measuresencouraging the establishment of new graduates in the regions, it would be opportunefor the federal government to publicize such measures to increase the application to thegreatest number of recipients.




16

Recommendation 6.That the federal government publicize its future taxation measures encouraging thereturn of youth to the regions (CASP-473 (12.1)).




17

6. Conclusion

The problems of regional mobility are well known in Quebec. This phenomenon isgreatly accentuated by the aging of the Quebec population, but also by the fact thatregional universities are facing various difficulties in keeping their student population.Closing of programs, difficulty in recruiting professors and problems of fundinggraduate studies are some of the difficulties these institutions must face. This has theeffect that regional youth more easily tend to move elsewhere to be able to pursue theiruniversity studies. To this effect, to clarify these problems, you can consult theresearches, notices and studies of the FEUQ (see the bibliography).

The motivations evoked by respondents to our survey regarding the return to the regionof origin are clear and leave little room for ambiguity. Closeness to loved ones andattachment to quality of life are the main reasons that motive a return to the regions.Conversely, lack of jobs and the quality of life offered by another region are the reasonsmost often invoked to justify the absence of an intention to return.

Finally, the provincial tax credit for new graduates working in a resource region is a beneficial taxation measure for the return of youth to the regions and to theircontribution to the transformation of resource regions into centers turned towards theknowledge-based economy. The FEUQ recommends proceeding to the improvement of this measure in Quebec and introducing it in Canada.




18

Bibliography

AFE (2008). Aide financière aux études – Statistiques; Rapport 2006-2007. Québec : Aidefinancière aux études.

FEUQ (À paraître). Enquête sur les conditions de vie et d’études des étudiants de premier cycle.Montréal : Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec. 138 pages.

FEUQ (2006). Les impacts économiques, sociaux et culturels des universités en région.Montréal : Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec.

FEUQ (2007b). Le développement territorial et les universités. Montréal : Fédérationétudiante universitaire du Québec.

FEUQ (2008c). La délocalisation des campus universitaires; Réponse à un besoin ou course à laclientèle? Montréal : Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec.

FEUQ (2009a). Recommandations fédérales.. Montréal : Fédération étudiante universitairedu Québec.

FEUQ (2009b). L’accessibilité aux études postsecondaires au Canada. Mémoire présenté devantle comité permanent sénatorial des affaires sociales, des sciences et de la technologie . Montréal :Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec. 12 pages.

FEUQ (2009c). L’accessibilité aux études univesitaires : encore aujourd’hui, une nécessité! Mémoire présenté au conseil supérieur de l’éducation en vue du rapport sur l’état et les besoinsde l’éducation 2010. Montréal : Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec. 42 pages.

FEUQ (2009d). Vers une plus grande diversité de l’offre de formation universitaire en région? Montréal : Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec.

FRENETTE, Marc. (2003). Accès au collège et à l'université : est-ce que la distance importe? Ottawa : Statistique Canada.

FRENETTE, Marc. (2007). Est-ce que les universités profitent à la population locale de jeunes ?Résultats provenant de la fréquentation des universités et des collèges et des gains desdiplômés suivant la création d’une nouvelle université . Ottawa : Statistique Canada.

LUCIER, Gaetan (dir.) : Équipe multipartite « partenaires pour la compétitivité et

l’innovation sociale » (2006). Pour une compétitivité accrue et un dialogue social renforcé – Rapport Lucier. Québec : MDEIE et MESS.

MELS (2007). Indicateurs de l’éducation.. Québec : MELS.Ministère de l’Éducation, duLoisir et du Sport. 133 pages.




19

MELS. (2007). Poursuite des études et obtention d’un diplôme chez les bénéficiaires duProgramme de prêts et bourses, volet 5. Québec : MELS.

MFQ (2010). Dépenses fiscales édition 2009. Québec : Ministère des Finances du Québec. .356 pages.

Statistique Canada. (2009b). Information sur la population active – Du 13 au 19 septembre2009. Ottawa : Statistique Canada.

en - notice on youth regional mobility

Documents