Canada Heads Down the Path to Debilitating Debt Again
By Gwyn Morgan, Columnist, Troy
Media
Published in The Roughneck Buy
& Sell / May 2016
The
federal government’s planned $30-billion budget deficit, to be followed by
three more deficits totalling $113 billion, brings to mind former U.S.
Secretary of State henry Kissinger’s observation that “It’s not often that
nations learn from the past, even rarer that they draw the correct conclusions
from it.”
The budget deficit is triple the “modest” and declining
$10-billion deficit promised by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during last year’s
election campaign.
Likewise in 1970, Trudeau’s father Pierre forecast a “minimal”
$5-billion federal deficit. That was followed by a dozen years of
out-of-control spending that drove the deficit to over $32 billion and saw the
national debt balloon by more than 700 per cent. Canada’s prime lending rate
reached an incredible 22 percent, causing a great many personal and business
bankruptcies while collapsing private investment. Sky-high interest rates drove
up the cost of servicing that national debt, spawning even higher deficits.
Canada, once one of the world’s strongest nations
financially, was transformed into an economic basket case.
Ottawa would implement 27 consecutive annual deficit budgets
before tough spending cuts stabilized and eventually reduced our country’s debt
burden.
Today, our national debt stands at $617 billion. Finance
Minister Bill Morneau’s recent deficit forecast would take that to $730 billion
by 2021. Even with today’s record low interest rates, debt servicing will eat
up $26 billion this fiscal year. If interest rates were to rise by a modest two
per cent, the cost of servicing that increased debt would rise to over $44
billion by 2021, leaving the next government with no choice but to run even
higher deficits or slash program spending.
OK, so taking on more national debt is risky, but isn’t it
true that deficit spending is necessary during times of economic difficulty?
And doesn’t economic growth eventually make it easier to balance the budget and
pay down the debt?
Answering the first question requires defining “economic
difficulty.” The Conservative government of Stephen Harper, along with
virtually every other government in the developed world, ran large deficits in
response to the 2007-08 global financial crisis. Fortunately, a series of
previous budget surpluses lowered the national debt, placing Canada in the
strongest financial position of any G-7 country to implement stimulus spending.
The moral of the story is that governments should keep their
financial powder dry and only run deficits when the economic need is both
imperative and temporary. The current period of low growth doesn’t come
anywhere close to meeting those criteria. And what if this low growth period is
not a temporary situation?
There’s good reason to believe that lower growth will be the
new normal for our country. Demographics alone make this highly likely. The boomer
bubble is greying, with profound implications on labour force growth, the No. 1
driver of economic growth in almost every country.
Statistics Canada forecast labour force growth will slow to
just 0.5 percent per year during the term of the federal government. Some
250,000 baby boomers are retiring each year. Soon that number will grow to
400,000. This will have a profound impact, as a smaller pool of working-age
taxpayers must fund the rising health care and social costs of a burgeoning
population of seniors.
And if the Liberals remain focused on trying to grow the
economy through government spending, rather than policies that encourage
private sector wealth creation, the chances of a rebound in growth will be very
unlikely indeed.
Running up the national debt in the face of these realities
means handing the next generation a massive debt burden. Some of that next
generation are uniting to fight against the legacy. Generation Screwed is a
movement made up mainly of millennials (born anywhere from the early 1980s to
the mid 1990s).
Their website opens with “Past generations voted to spend
more and more money expanding entitlements and the size of government. They are
handing the next generation the bill.” The website includes a link to a “How
screwed are you?” map the shows combined federal and provincial debt per person
depending on where you live.
I met some of these
young anti-debt activists during a recent trip to Ottawa. One of them said to
me, “Parents try to leave their kids some money. Governments will leave us nothing but debt.”
Ironically, it was their millennial cohorts who helped elect
the government that will make that debilitating legacy a lot larger.
Comments
Post a Comment