LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Millennials, myself included, have the honour of facing the Great Recession as we were in or finishing undergrad and now we face the COVID-19 recession, which could be even worse, a decade or so into our working lives.  It's a double whammy.

Millennials and Gen Z-ers faced the highest tuition prices in history; both will be graduating loaded with student debt and facing unprecedented recessions.

While it's difficult to aggregate student loans owed across the country given that there is a mix of federal, provincial and bank-based loans in place, a 2015 study suggested the average student owes roughly $27,000 in student loans.

We also know that the federal government holds at least $19 billion in student-loan debt.

Sooner or later, we're talking about real money.

It takes the average student between nine to fifteen years to pay off their debt so tens of thousands of students who graduated before the last recession still hold debt as we enter this new recession.

This is a massive anchor on our economy at a time when we need young people, to quote George W. Bush, to "go shopping".

So, I have a modest proposal to throw into the mix of once radical ideas that now look like common sense in the context of COVID:

The federal government should forgive student-loan debt to stimulate the economy, and allow two generations of young people the chance at a fresh start just as our economy needs young consumers spending.

This is not entirely without precedence: between 2015 and 2019, the federal government already wrote off over $710 million in debt for over 40,000 graduates in rough terms, that is equal to 4% of the total student-loan debt the federal government holds.

Furthermore, it's important to keep in mind that the $19 billion dollars in loans is already money the federal government has expended; indeed, the feds typically book around $860 million in interest charges per year.

Forgiving student-loan debt would have major ripple effects in our economy.  Let's say the typical graduate spends $250 per month to service their student debt.  Isn't that money better spent at a local restaurants or small businesses when we come out of this lockdown?

Put another way who benefits more from $860 million in annual student-loan interest payments: the federal coffers, or graduates and the businesses their consumer habits support?  I know how I would answer that question.

In a world in which the federal deficit could top $300 billion, forgoing $860 million in interest fees per year is a comparative drop in the bucket but one that would have a huge impact on hundreds of thousands of graduates.

Student-loan interest payments are also tax deductible.  Take away the debt, you also close off the tax deduction, which represents a natural offset for the government's books.

Three months into lockdown, we now live in a world in which some 24 million Canadians receive some form of government assistance per month from the Canada Emergency Response Benefit to Old Age Security to welfare to the Canada Child Benefit.  Although the amounts differ for each program, as Max Fawcett succinctly put it: "The issue for Canada is not whether a good basic income is possible but who is currently left out."

We have a de facto basic income a once radical idea now accepted as (at least temporarily) necessary.  (And let's not forget income tax was a temporary, emergency measure 100 years ago.)

I'm all for the idea of keeping some form of a basic income.  But I also believe the government should take this opportunity to forgive student loans, a targeted way to stimulate the economy.

One thing I've had in the back of mind throughout this pandemic is the ancient Jewish concept of a "Year of Jubilee", when debts were forgiven and slaves set free.  There have been calls for such a concept to apply to African national debts, including during the pandemic.  There ought to be a similar approach to student debt.

At the end of the day, it's about enlightened self-interest, not charity.  If students or even African nations are free from crippling debt, there's more money being spent in an economy that sorely needs consumers to go shopping.

Photo Credit: Loans Canada

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Alberta's top medical officer of health Deena Hinshaw maintains her sterling reputation partly because she has the good sense to admit and apologize when she's wrong.

If a misstep has been identified in the current fight against the pandemic, she leads her daily press conference with that and explains how the province will do better going forward.  The way the outbreak at the Cargill meat packing plant was initially handled is a prime example.

It's a lesson Premier Jason Kenney and Health Minister Tyler Shandro should take to heart.

The UCP government has clearly screwed up its relationship with the province's doctors.  It tore up its master agreement with the physicians, imposed a series of fee changes and cuts without consultation and eventually had to walk back some of its moves when rural doctors began threatening to withdraw services en masse.

And still the war of words between the government and the doctors rages, being played out in lawsuits and childish social media insults, thunderous rhetoric by the premier and biting responses from the Alberta Medical Association.

It's time to knock it off.  Kenney and Shandro need to own their mistakes in the recent budgeting process and try some statesmanlike negotiation.  The relationship between the province and the physicians' representative body has to be repaired for the sake of vulnerable and anxious patients, fearing the immediate Covid virus on one side, and the potential loss of their doctors' services on the other.

Instead, the provincial government is blaming the Alberta Medical Association for sowing confusion, particularly about the province's changes to compensation for rural doctors.  The government has snipped away at some AMA functions related to upgrading training and liability insurance.

And Kenney darkly warned recently, "With the great fiscal reckoning that Alberta will face following the pandemic, we cannot continue to see annual increases to physician compensation that are typically three to four times higher than inflation."

And he continues to back Shandro, a minister who clearly will never be able to negotiate effectively with the AMA, given all the recent poisonous water under the bridge.  Shandro, who has exhibited shaky judgment by confronting doctors personally in person and through private cell phone numbers, is the embodiment of the failure of the government to consult or negotiate on possible changes to doctors fees.

The AMA is not backing down from the fight.  Leading doctors from around the province, representing the gamut of specialties, have rallied around the association signing off on letters to Shandro and penning opinion pieces in provincial daily papers supporting the AMA's right as sole negotiator for doctors.

"We will not be entering into any discussions without representation from the AMA," 60 representatives of doctor subgroups wrote to the minister.

The opinion piece, signed by several medical staff associations from around the province takes the fight a bit farther.

"The minister of health has lost the respect and trust of physicians.  An attack on the AMA is an attack on all of us.  This key relationship is severely damaged.  We need a respectful partner who honours collaboration rather than a divide-and-conquer strategy."

The roots of this disagreement have been somewhat obscured by the overgrowth of grievances and bluster.  Essentially the government decided that budget cutting and the advice of outside budget cutting "experts" trumped long running negotiation and consultation.

There probably are a few provisions in the governments shake-up of physician pay and fee structures that have some merits.  Does Alberta really need the dominance of a fee-for-service pay model when other arrangements for some practitioners offer more budget certainty and transparency?  Should the eligibility for various top-ups to normal fees be re-examined and perhaps adjusted?

Instead of asking valid questions in a negotiation with the affected parties, the UCP decided to just impose its suppositions.

It's time for Kenney, and a new health minister, to reset the process.  Take your accountant's recommendations into the mediators' office and treat the responses with respect.

Albertans already confronted with the biggest health crisis of the century will thank you for taking away at least one source of anxiety about the health care system as a whole.

Photo Credit: Red Deer Advocate

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.