SOS Trent
The Save Our School Trent movement and occupation was the climax of a five-year battle with the provincial government over the doubling of international student tuition fees. While all other Ontario universities had implemented the fee increase in 1977, Trent initially refused to implement the hike on its students even though it faced serious financial challenges at that time.
In January 1981, the Ontario government announced that international fees, which had previously doubled to $1,500, were going to increase to $1,900 and domestic tuition fees were about to increase from $800 to $900. Universities were not obligated to increase their tuition fees but if they refused, they risked a huge financial burden resulting from cuts in government funding. Although Trent implemented the increase in fees in 1981, it did not stop students from rallying against the decision itself and the decision-making process, holding true to Trent values.
Students were angry because the increases in tuition fees were barely discussed by the University Senate and were still brought before Trent’s Board of Governors for final approval. On March 6, 1981, hundreds of students filed into Wenjack Theatre to rally against and express their opinion on the implementation of increased tuition fees at the Board of Governors meeting. Students felt that the increase was detrimental because it caused those who could barely afford university already to suffer even more financially – especially international students. It seemed to many as if Trent had moved into a ‘New Era’ where policies began to enacted without first reaching consensus among university stakeholders.
Despite a large demonstration and presentations on alternatives, the Trent Board of Governors voted to implement the tuition fees. Their hope was that these increases would help pull the university out of a major financial deficit. Dissatisfaction and anger were at an all-time high.
Students felt helpless in their attempts to demonstrate to the Trent administration that the increase in tuition fees was extremely detrimental to the university and the students it serves; the Save Our School movement was formed.
In March of 1981 members of SOS entered President Theall’s office with specific outlined demands. They demanded that the decision on the tuition fee hike be rescinded, that the item be sent back to the Senate to be discussed for further consideration and that the Board of Governors reconsider its stance. SOS balanced its approach to clearly condemn the changes at Trent which they saw as allowing the University to be an institution of elites and wealthy students, as well as acknowledging that the real culprit behind Trent’s financial difficulties were the policies of the Ontario government.
SOS received overwhelming support from the Trent International Student Association as well as the Trent Student Union and hundreds of other students, as well as student associations from other universities all over Ontario. After eleven days of the occupation, that was paralleled with continued rallying against the administration, Trent University agreed to rescind its decision on the differential fees and until the issue received further consideration by the Senate. All SOS members were granted legal and academic amnesty. On the last day of the occupation SOS released this statement,
“What is important is that we have joined together as a student body to show our deep concern for Trent. That we have fought for the principles which constitute the foundation and character of this university. That we have displayed a commitment to responsible and democratic decision making, and have argued the central importance of cultural, ethical, and academic consideration in the decision making process. We cannot forget this in the days, months and years ahead.”
In early April, the fee increase had been fully discussed in the Senate and voted. However, on April 24, 1981, the board declined to change its position and the tuition fee increase was approved.
While the occupation was not successful in preventing the differential fee and tuition fees increase, what is important was how students brought attention to changing ideas and values at Trent. They stood up for what they felt was important; keeping students at Trent and focusing proper discussion on decisions that affected students.
The Trent 8
In 1999, the Ontario government introduced a $742 million dollar capital investment program called SuperBuild. The moneys would be shared amongst Ontario universities as structural support to accommodate the double cohort year (the doubling enrollment in 2003 when both grade twelve and grade thirteen students graduated at once). The idea was that Ontario universities would submit an application outlining how they would use the grant to build classrooms and residences to accommodate the influx of students and then the government would asses the application and would grant universities money accordingly.
Trent was granted $23.26 million from the SuperBuild program. President Bonnie Patterson expressed that a major part of the SuperBuild program was the centralization of the university. A decision was made to close the downtown colleges, in particular Peter Robinson College, and build a new residence on the main campus.
Once again, Trent was undergoing a dramatic change. The SuperBuild money was going to provide Trent with its largest grant it had ever received and many people felt that more could be done with this grant than close one of Trent’s original and beloved colleges. Compromise proposals and reports were written in order to demonstrate the benefits of keeping PR and the issue was even voted down in the Senate. Regardless Patterson went forward with the motion to close PR and had it passed by the Board of Governors, despite immense opposition from students, faculty, staff, alumni and community members.
As one of Trent’s original colleges, Peter Robinson was a community that was known and loved by its affiliated students, faculty and alumni. Concerned students, after having all doors of discussion closed to them, and after the administration refused to hear them, took on a new plan of action.
On February 26, 2001, a group of students entered Vice President Graham Taylor’s office in Lady Eaton College announcing their subsequent occupation of his office. Eight female students barricaded themselves inside. They were to be known as the Trent 8.
Natalie Napier ’00, one of the eight women involved in the occupation says that, “We tried a lot of different tactics before resorting to an occupation: we participated in open forums, wrote letters and newspaper articles, and held peaceful rallies and demonstrations, among other things.” However, nothing seemed to work. The occupiers had issued demands to Patterson in regards to the closing of the colleges but the President stated that none of their demands were negotiable. Napier emphasizes that the students didn’t take their decision lightly, “You can’t jump into an occupation, because there’s nowhere to go after that.”
Just when the occupiers believed that they had begun real negotiations with the administration, Patterson requested a squad of twenty-five police and a canine unit, enter campus to remove the eight occupiers as well as all students outside the office who were protesting in solidarity with them. On March 1st at 3am, after three days of peaceful protest, over twenty students were arrested and the eight female students faced criminal charges.
“The occupation was a failure in that the administration met none of our ‘demands’ for transparent governance and simply dug its heels in further,” says Napier. Peter Robinson College was closed and sold in 2002. “Despite that disappointment it was an exciting time because a huge number of students, faculty, and community members became aware of problems in the administration’s decision-making processes and took a stance.”
The efforts of the Trent 8 and those who supported them were immensely appreciated by the Trent community. Although an occupation may seem undesirable because of its climactic nature, once again, students had refused to sit back and allow decisions to be made without their opinions being heard.
“It’s funny,” Natalie reflects, “because I think of that experience of democratic engagement in campus politics as a hallmark of the Trent education, but ultimately we were not actually operating in a democracy. Still, those skills are transferable.”
It is important to mark the 30th anniversary of SOS Trent and the 10th anniversary of the Trent 8 so that we may learn about and understand Trent’s rich history of student activism. Trent students should be aware and concerned of all forms of decision making by the administration and government and be proactive in their response. Let us work towards not just preserving the founding values of Trent, because times and circumstances change, but preserving the fundamentals of an education without any biases or external economically or politically motivated influences.
I encourage all Trent students to sign out Whose University Is It? from Biko Library, a documentary focused around the closing of PR and the occupation, as well as visit the lovely ladies in the Trent Archives, to read archived Arthur issues and learn more about Trent’s active history, to better understand the issues current Trent students are facing.
