The Alberta government is seeking greater control over post-secondary tuition, institutional neutrality, and student conduct policies through legislation that would allow the province to make changes without introducing additional bills in the legislature.
Bill 38, the Advanced Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2026, was introduced on Tuesday by the Minister of Advanced Education, Myles McDougall.
The proposed legislation would amend the Post-secondary Learning Act to give the minister greater oversight over tuition rates for individual programs, institutional statements on political, social, and ideological issues, and how post-secondaries handle student misconduct.
However, specific details for those have been left out of the legislation itself.
Instead, the province would establish many legal requirements through future regulations and ministerial orders, allowing the government to introduce or change requirements at the minister’s discretion.
Regulations are legally binding rules that the government can create or change under existing legislation without introducing a new bill or holding a vote in the legislature.
Ministerial orders work similarly, but allow an individual minister to make specific decisions using powers granted by law. Under Bill 38, the minister of advanced education could use these orders to make changes.
This means the province could change tuition limits and other requirements related to Bill 38 in the future without having to amend the Post-secondary Learning Act again.
The proposed changes would leave institutions responsible for developing and administering their own policies, but those policies would have to comply with provincial requirements.
At a news conference this morning, McDougall said the government expects to have regulations in place sometime in 2027.
“I think the basic principles are in the legislation,” said McDougall. “And any specific details on how you’re going to interpret a certain thing or how a particular process has to happen will be involved in the regulations.”
The legislation would also allow the minister to review institutional policies, require further consultation with campus communities, and, at his discretion, determine when updated policies must be submitted for review.
The government says the changes are intended to make tuition more predictable, protect freedom of expression, and establish consistent standards for student misconduct proceedings.
Minister to set tuition limits by program
Under Bill 38, Alberta would replace its existing annual tuition increase limits with a system that allows the minister to set maximum tuition amounts for individual programs or groups of programs.
Institutions would still determine their own tuition rates, but would have to remain within the limits established by ministerial order.
The change follows an earlier tuition framework presented to student leaders in August, which outlined plans to divide post-secondary programs into five clusters based on factors including labour market demand, program costs, and government priorities.
According to documents obtained by the University of Calgary’s student newspaper, The Gauntlet, programs considered a higher government priority or more closely aligned with labour market needs would receive greater provincial subsidies than those ranked lower.
Under that proposal, the amount students pay could depend partly on which cluster their program falls into.
Bill 38 does not establish the five clusters or specify which programs would be subject to different tuition limits. Those decisions would be made through future regulations and ministerial orders.
At Tuesday’s news conference, McDougall said the government would consider several factors when setting tuition limits, including the cost of delivering individual programs, differences in tuition between institutions, and how much of those costs should be covered by public funding.
He said the government had identified differences in tuition and program costs across institutions that had developed over the past two decades.
Existing domestic students would have their tuition increases capped at two per cent for the 2027–28 academic year.
It remains unclear what protections students would have against future increases, including those already partway through their degrees.
The Mintz Panel had previously recommended guaranteeing that students’ tuition would not increase by more than two per cent annually throughout their programs, while allowing institutions to set different tuition rates for incoming students.
That long-term guarantee has not been established in the proposed legislation.
When asked why the government had not included that protection in Bill 38, McDougall said a decision had not yet been made.
He said the government was still considering the recommendation alongside changes to the province’s post-secondary funding model, which is expected to be released with the 2027 provincial budget.
When asked how the new system would provide predictable tuition costs for students whose programs extend beyond 2027–28, McDougall pointed to the two per cent cap for that academic year.
“What happens in the future will continue to be dependent on circumstances,” said McDougall, citing the “ample notice” given to students regarding the two per cent cap.
Further details about the length and scope of tuition protections are expected through amendments to the Tuition and Fees Regulation under the Post-secondary Learning Act.
New limits on institutional statements
Bill 38 would also require public post-secondary institutions to adopt institutional neutrality policies, limiting their ability to take official positions on political, social, or ideological issues unrelated to a school’s academic mission.
The requirements would apply to institutional statements, including those made by governing boards and senior officials on behalf of their institutions.
Students, faculty, and staff would still be permitted to express their personal views, and the government says the changes would not restrict academic freedom or lawful expression.
McDougall said university presidents would also be able to express their personal opinions, provided they were not speaking on behalf of their institutions.
The legislation does not specify exactly what constitutes an institution’s academic mission or which officials would be subject to restrictions. Those details would also be determined through future regulations.
When asked how the government would determine which issues institutions could publicly comment on, McDougall said universities would still be permitted to take positions on issues directly related to their responsibilities, including government funding decisions.
“If they as an institution would like to express an opinion about funding, I think that’s fine,” said McDougall, explaining that funding is part of a post-secondary institution’s mandate.
McDougall said universities could express sympathy for people affected by violence but should not take positions on political issues behind conflicts, specifically using Israel and Palestine as an example of what universities should avoid expressing opinions on.
He also suggested that general statements supporting reconciliation would not necessarily violate neutrality requirements.
The examples raise questions about how institutions would determine whether an issue is closely enough related to their academic mission to justify making an official statement.
Alberta’s post-secondary institutions already operate under provincial freedom of expression requirements. In 2019, the government required publicly funded institutions to adopt the University of Chicago’s principles on free expression or develop policies consistent with them.
The proposed requirements would regulate when institutions themselves can take positions on public issues.
McDougall said the government wanted to give existing freedom of expression principles “the weight of the law and regulation” and establish ways to ensure institutions follow them.
As previously reported by the Griff, student representatives have raised concerns about how neutrality requirements could affect university-supported events and initiatives, including Pride Week and Truth and Reconciliation Day.
Students’ Association of MacEwan University (SAMU) president Nathan N. Poon previously questioned whether the requirements could discourage institutions from recognizing social issues or supporting certain campus activities.
The province has not indicated if any of those events would be prohibited.
When asked whether institutions could face penalties for violating neutrality requirements, McDougall said there would likely need to be consequences.
“There has to be some consequences if you don’t follow the rules and the law,” said McDougall.
He said the government is continuing to work with post-secondary stakeholders to determine what would be a reasonable penalty.
Province to set student misconduct standards
The proposed legislation would also give the government greater oversight of student codes of conduct, which outline how post-secondary institutions handle allegations of student misconduct.
While institutions already have policies addressing misconduct, non-academic misconduct, and sexual and gender-based violence, Bill 38 allows the province to establish minimum requirements for those policies.
These could include standards for how misconduct complaints are handled, how quickly cases are addressed, and how students’ privacy is protected.
McDougall said the proposed changes follow a 2025 government review of nearly 200 student conduct policies from across Alberta’s post-secondary system.
According to McDougall, the review found differences in how institutions wrote and applied their policies. He said the government wants students to have clearer and more consistent processes for handling misconduct allegations.
Institutions would continue handling individual misconduct cases, but the minister could review their codes of conduct, require changes, and direct further consultation with campus communities.
The government has not yet outlined specific minimum requirements for student conduct policies or what penalties institutions could face for failing to comply.
Those details would also be established through future regulations.
Questions remain over implementation
McDougall defended the proposed changes when asked whether the government was interfering with universities’ independence.
“We are respecting the university’s autonomy,” said McDougall, adding that institutions must also be accountable to taxpayers because they receive public funding.
While institutions remain responsible for managing their own operations, Bill 38 would give the province greater authority over what requirements they must follow.
With many of the requirements yet to be established, the government would retain the authority to determine their scope and enforcement, as well as make changes to them in the future.
