P. w C STUDENTS NEED v_oun supvonr

BILL S7 Umvlm'ty Gunu Commuim I" Seam: 15 mds

"1 anmn mayinqu by u-msn 11.4.1 5 10 mm In .4. o. 511.. o. 1. 1.».

av pvoqvop oI mu... m

9 mm, .11». a-mw ol 1» (an my

in .1». opimnnoIIMu-ww I a" buunnwllI‘ImI-on an ad w . w "”1 MI ”mun.“ hm. .q HM

YOUR VOICE IS NECESSARY FOR OUR SURVIVAL PLEASE SIGN AND MAIL nus" run;

I In} the undersigned culuenlxl oI Pnnn Ed~ ’"""" “WWW" ANN“

, E 0 Be: 906 mm Island am hue) suonqty opposed to Bill ,, m o, wm MW

Numbu 57 Chmlonmnwn v E 1

m 1w..- mmnu mm on:

33-" 392-2535

PRINCE OF WALES COLLEGE FACULTY RESOLUTION ON BILL No 57 (UNIVERSITIES GRANTS COMMISSION ACT)

The fullipage ad plated by PWC students protesting Bill 57, as published in The Guard/an {(har/ottetown) on March 30, 1968 (p. 14),

accidental.” dhe Liberal government felt free to introduce a Uni— versity Grants Commission Act, creating a body to advise how it should direct the federal education grant. St. Dunstans seems to have resigned itself to the fact that it was losing its financial autono— my, and government must have its say. But Prince otWVales strongly opposed the Act particularlv the provision that the universities could be directed to drop duplicating p1og1ams. ln p1inciple, this threatened academic freedom; in practice, it seemed an end run to full St. Dunstan's/Prince ofVVales co—ordination.

In late March 1968, Prince ot‘Wales launched a concerted oppo— sition. Students ran a full— —pa<re ad in Island newspapers condemn—

ing government control of university education, and faculty unani—

vo Lorne Mouse, “’lhe Development otthc University of Prince lidward Island (111647 1071)," llnpuhlished 1\l lid thesrs, Universit} oIchw Brunswick, 1972,11, IS,

z\l.x\X r\I;\CIC.-\CHI’.R\ — I7