Thousands of Nova Scotia students preparing to take to the streets for a “Reduce Fees-Drop Debt” rally Feb. 2 were shocked to learn a day before that the pro­vince’s next budget would reduce grants to universities by four per cent and also not renew a tuition freeze agreement that expires this month.

One recommendation from last September’s controversial report on Nova Scotia’s university system by government-hired consultant Tim O’Neill suggested “allowing tuition fees to increase.”

“Students and their families were promised a better deal when the NDP was elected,” said Gabe Hoogers, Nova Scotia representative for the Canadian Federation of Students, the lobby group that organized the turnout over debt and tuition.

“Instead, the government is using the O’Neill report to justify funding cuts and tuition fee hikes, policies they previously condemned.”

Advanced Education Minister Marilyn More said tuition fees will increase by three per cent for each of the next three years, but that the government will offset the increases by continuing to fund the student bursary program.

The average student debt from all sources for Nova Scotia graduates is $31,000.

A 2006 Education Review published by CAUT showed that increases in tuition fees make universities no-go zones for young people from modest backgrounds. Nova Scotia ranked the worst among all the provinces in Canada at that time, with low income families having to spend a startling 67.7 per cent of their after-tax income to meet the cost of tuition fees.

A recent poll conducted by Opi­nion Search for a coalition of students and academic staff showed that 83 per cent of Nova Scotians want tuition fees reduced, while nearly 60 per cent indicated they would be willing to pay higher taxes to make post-secondary education more ac­cessible to more people.

By increasing tuition fees, “the government is completely opposing the will of Nova Scotians,” Hoogers said.

The coalition, in criticizing the government’s plans, said the tuition changes impose a higher burden on low-income students, making it a “discriminatory tax.”