MEMORANDUM

TO: Dr. Lorna Turnbull, Acting Dean of the Faculty of Law & Dr. David Barnard, President
of the University of Manitoba
FROM: Devin Johnston, Law Student and Chairperson of UMSU Council
DATE: 23 April 2010
SUBJECT: Proposed Tuition Fee Increases for Law Students

Summary
The purpose of this memorandum is to outline my concerns regarding the proposal to increase
tuition fee increases in the Faculty of Law. In order to correct the issues I will identify, I propose that
the faculty and administration:
1. submit a budget proposal to students outlining how additional revenues from tuition fees would
be used;
2. convene an inclusive consultation process in September or October when students in the
Faculty of Law can actually participate in it;
3. clearly outline how the proposed tuition fee increases will affect part-time and international law
students;
4. implement a per credit hour fee structure consistent with students in other faculties; and,
5. place a moratorium on tuition fee increases for the 2010-2011 academic year until proper
student consultation can be held.

Background
On 12 April 2010, Dr. Lorna Turnbull sent an email to all law students which outlined a
proposal to increase tuition fees to $12,000 per student per year. Prior to this time, there was no
communication between the faculty and students regarding the possibility of tuition fee increases. The
email was sent during the final exam period when most students were too busy studying to direct their
attention to the proposal. The email also invited students to participate in a consultation meeting to be
held 23 April 2010, after the end of the academic year.
Under the proposal, tuition fees would gradually increase to $12,000 over a period of three
years. Currently, domestic students in the Faculty of Law pay $8,208.37 per year. According to Dr.
Turnbull's email, 85% of the revenues generated by increased tuition fees would be allocated to the
Faculty of Law. Fifteen percent would be allocated for student financial assistance and a further 15%
would be allocated toward shared services.
Dr. Turnbull estimated that this would result in and increase of $153,9000 to $162,450 devoted
to needs-based student aid and $718,200 to $758,100 for “other improvements” in the faculty. To date,
no particulars have been provided to students about how this money would be spent.
Inadequate Consultation with Students
The primary concern of most law students is the gross inadequacy of student consultation
regarding the proposed increase. Students were given no advanced warning by the faculty or the
administration of the possibility of fee increases beyond the 5% baseline increase permitted by the

Page 1 of 5
2010 provincial budget. Students were notified of the proposal in the midst of the final exam period
when it was not practicable for most law students to divert their energy and attention away from
studying. The only proposed mechanism of student consultation is a single meeting to be held after the
end of the academic year.
As Dr. Turnbull noted in her email, the timing of this consultation meeting is “unfortunate”. As
a professional faculty attracting students from across Canada and around the world, many of the
students in the Faculty of Law leave Manitoba during the summer months. Indeed, a large proportion of
the students in this faculty work for law firms in Vancouver, Calgary, or Toronto during the summer. By
scheduling a consultation meeting at a time when many students are either out of the province or else
busy getting ready to move, the faculty has effectively closed the consultation process to a large
number of law students.
As the Manitoba Law Students' Association has clearly expressed to Dr. Turnbull, the timing of
the consultation is unacceptable to students. If the proposed tuition fee increase proceeds without
correcting the inadequacy of the consultation process, it will be seen as illegitimate by most students.
Indeed, the last time a major tuition fee increase was implemented in the Faculty of Law, it was subject
to a student referendum. The Government of Manitoba has indicated that its willingness to permit
tuition fee increases beyond 5% is contingent upon demonstrated student support for such an initiative.
It would be impossible for the faculty or administration to demonstrate such support on the basis of the
inadequate consultation process proposed by the faculty.
In addition to scheduling the consultation meeting in a way that excludes a large number of
students, the faculty and administration have not provided students with sufficient information to
participate in the consultation meeting in a meaningful way. To date, no details have been provided
regarding how the faculty proposes to spend the $718,200 to $758,100 which will be added to its
discretionary budget. Without knowing how the money is to be spent, it is impossible to know whether
the proposal represents good value for students' money.
The wording of Dr. Turnbull's email leads me to believe that the proposal to increase tuition fees
originated with the administration rather than with the faculty. If this is true, it is incumbent on the
administration to demonstrate the necessity for an increase in fees. More to the point, the proponents of
a tuition fee increase should be able to provide a budget outlining the items that necessitate an increase.
Unfair Tuition Fee Framework
The last time that tuition fees were increased in the Faculty of Law, they were approved in a
student referendum as required by law. Prior to that referendum, law students paid the same tuition fees
as most other undergraduate students at the University of Manitoba. For the 2002-2003 academic year,
full-time tuition for domestic law students was about $4,348 per year. Under the current proposal,
tuition fees in 2012-2013 will be 276% of the 2002-2003 levels from ten years earlier. During the years
2002-2010, average annual inflation rate was 2.06%.1 Assuming this rate of inflation continues, tuition
will have increased at almost 8 times the rate of inflation over a ten year period.
Despite the Government of Manitoba's assertion that higher tuition fees in professional
programs do not reduce accessibility, it must be borne in mind that access to professional programs is
underwritten by the capacity of professional students to access debt. Increasingly, law students are
relying on high-interest private lenders to finance legal education. Given that students must pay interest
on top of their debt, the actual cost of a legal education is significantly higher than it appears on its

1 Using the consumer price index, as published by Statistics Canada.

Page 2 of 5
face.
For example, suppose that a law student graduates with $36,000 ($12,000 in tuition fees over
three years) in debt at 5% interest and suppose further that the student pays $250 per month upon
graduation to service that debt. It will take 18 years for the law student to completely pay down her
debts. By the time she is debt-free, she will have have paid $54,945.98 in tuition and interest. Of
course, this example is somewhat unrealistic because law students have numerous expenses beyond
tuition fees including housing, food, transportation, and books.
Policy-makers sometimes feel that it is acceptable for professional students to take on larger
debt loads to finance their education based on the faulty assumption that a professional education
automatically results in a high income upon graduation. This is not the case. The current articling salary
at both Manitoba Justice and Legal Aid Manitoba is $30,000 – less than the average salary for
unattached individuals in Canada. Remuneration for lawyers at all levels is significantly lower in
Manitoba than in other markets such as Vancouver, Calgary, and Toronto. Of course, a majority of
graduates from the Faculty of Law go on to practice in Manitoba.
The situation is even worse for international students. Currently, international students in the
Faculty of Law pay $18,730.58 per year in tuition fees, or about 228% of the domestic rate. Aside from
being overtly discriminatory, the differential fees imposed on international students are an undue
financial burden. International students face unusually high expenses in terms of moving and housing;
moreover, international students face severe restrictions in terms of their ability to work in Canada
while in school. When higher tuition fees are imposed on international students on top of those
expenses, the result is that our university is effectively closed to the vast majority of qualified
international candidates.
The proposal communicated by Dr. Turnbull makes no mention of how the tuition fee increases
will affect international students. For example, it is unclear whether international students will merely
be subject to the increase in base tuition or whether there will also be an increase in differential fees. In
either case, international students will be required to pay more than $22,000 in tuition fees by the 2012-
2013 academic year.
Part-time students are also left behind under the current fee structure. Unlike most other
faculties of the university, law students' tuition fees are not assessed on a per credit hour basis. Instead,
the Faculty of Law charges a flat fee per year on either a full-time basis or a half-time basis. The result
is that part-time students taking less than a half course load pay more per credit hour than full-time
students. If the Faculty of Law adopted a per credit hour fee structure, part-time students would only be
charged for the number of credit hours of legal education they actually receive. Of course, as tuition
fees increase a larger proportion of students will opt to enrol part-time in order to continue working
while in school.
Despite the major financial burden that increased tuition fees would impose on students, the
administration and faculty have not demonstrated a pressing need for higher revenues in the Faculty of
Law. To date, law students have not been provided with a detailed budget of how the faculty proposes
to spend the revenue from higher tuition fees. Although Dr. Turnbull has indicated that 15% will be
earmarked for needs-based student financial aid, the remaining 85% is completely unaccounted for.
Fifteen percent will go toward shared services, although the particulars of this portion have not been
provided to students (other than the suggestion that some part of it may be spent on library services).
Shared services encompasses an enormous range of possible expenditures, not limited to library
services, and students are entitled to know the administration's priorities for this portion of the

Page 3 of 5
increased revenue. The remaining 70% of increased revenues would be used by the Faculty of Law for
as-yet undefined “improvements” in the faculty. Without knowing what the money will be used for,
students are not in a position to determine whether a tuition fee increase is necessary or prudent.
If it is the position of the administration and faculty that higher tuition fees will result in a
higher quality of legal education, it is incumbent on them to demonstrate that such a correlation exists.
One of the primary indicators of quality in education is the ratio of students to faculty. According to the
University of Manitoba's Annual Financial Report 2009, the Faculty of Law spent $2,850,202 in
academic salaries and wages in 2009, an increase of 46% over the 2002 level of $1,951,648. Over that
same period, tuition fees in the Faculty of Law increased by 96%. This indicates that the majority of the
increased revenue from high tuition fees was not used to hire new teaching staff. Indeed, there has been
no net change in the number of full-time academic staff since 2002. Given that the tuition fee increases
between 2002 and 2009 did not result in significantly lower student-faculty ratios, there is no reason to
expect that the newly proposed increases will either.
Recommendations
Provide an Itemized Budget
My first proposal is to provide students and other stakeholders with an itemized budget
outlining how the revenues from increased tuition fees would be spent. This is a necessary precondition
for any meaningful consultation. Knowing what the faculty intends to do with its increased revenue,
students will be better positioned to provide feedback regarding the wisdom of the proposed
expenditures and to say whether they represent good value for students' money.
Hold Inclusive Consultations with Students
As the principal stakeholders in tuition fee policy, it is imperative that students have a
meaningful opportunity to provide informed feedback on the proposed tuition fee increases. The
consultation meeting scheduled by the faculty after the end of the academic year is unacceptable to
students because the timing will debar many students from participating in a meaningful way. Those
who do participate will do so on the basis of inadequate information.
Instead, the faculty consult with the Manitoba Law Students' Association and the University of
Manitoba Students' Union over the summer, culminating with an inclusive public consultation meeting
and student referendum in September or October. A fall consultation process will enable a much larger
number of students to participate and provide their feedback. Moreover, a free and fair student
referendum would be necessary to demonstrate student support for a tuition fee increase as required by
the Government of Manitoba, particularly given that UMSU Council has passed a motion condemning
the proposed fee increases.
Outline How the Proposal will Affect International and Part-Time Students
Students have not yet been provided with any information about how the proposed tuition fee
increase will affect international or part-time students. Given that international students are already
being charged unrealistically high tuition fees for their legal education, students are suspicious about
the omission of any mention of differential fees in the current proposal. Without knowing how the
proposed fee increases will affect international students, it is impossible for current international
students to participate meaningfully in student consultations. This information should be provided as
soon as possible.
Implement a Per Credit Hour Fee Structure

Page 4 of 5
 The Faculty of Law should implement a per credit hour fee structure, consistent with other
faculties in the university. There is no reason to overcharge part-time students who are enrolled in less
than a half course load.
Moratorium on Fee Increases until Proper Consultation Process is Held
Finally, the administration and the faculty to institute a moratorium on tuition fee increases for
the 2010-2011 academic year. Given that it would be impossible to convene a fair, open, and inclusive
consultation process before September, there should be no fee increases for the upcoming year. To
implement a fee increase would be to deny students the opportunity for meaningful input and
participation.

Page 5 of 5