Toronto Star

Deficits conjure spooky tales

Fighting COVID-19 will require massive government spending, now and for years to come

- JIM STANFORD CONTRIBUTI­NG COLUMNIST Jim Stanford, director of the Centre for Future Work in Vancouver, is a freelance contributi­ng columnist for the Star. Follow him on Twitter: @jimbostanf­ord

They’re not scary, but a sign government is doing what it’s supposed to,

Trick-or-treating has been banned in several cities this Halloween to limit the spread of COVID-19. But a ragtag swarm of frightenin­g creatures has neverthele­ss come out to frighten Canadians with spooky stories about the risks of government deficits. Several of these bogeymen have even been spotted in the halls of Parliament.

During the first phase of the pandemic, as government­s incurred unpreceden­ted deficits, these debt monsters stayed in their caves. After all, the overwhelmi­ng consensus among economists and internatio­nal financial institutio­ns (like the IMF and the World Bank) is that government­s must spend massively to fight both the pandemic and recession, and that trying to reduce deficits will do more harm than good.

But now the debt monsters have reawakened to scare us with warnings of profligacy and lurking catastroph­e. Fiscal fear-mongering is coming from many of the usual suspects, like business lobby groups and conservati­ve think tanks. But the most surprising (and spine-tingling) portent of doom was provided by Conservati­ve finance critic Pierre Poilievre, who warned that the Bank of Canada was becoming an ATM for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s “insatiable spending.”

Poilievre was referring to the bank’s purchases of federal bonds through quantitati­ve easing — a practice that is common around the world, but which he called “insane.” His forthright attack on one of Canada’s most important institutio­ns was extraordin­ary, and raises big questions about how Poilievre would relate to the bank should he ever become finance minister. The scary rhetoric was rejected by most economists — but confirms that a major ideologica­l battle over Canada’s post-COVID-19 fiscal future has well and truly begun.

For several reasons, Canadians should laugh off these spooky tales about deficits lurking in our closets:

Interest rates are close to zero. There is no cost to debt, if no interest is charged on it. And right now government debt is almost free: 0.5 per cent for 10-year flation — bonds. which That’s means below we actually long-run pay in1f back less than we borrow.

The Bank of Canada is stabilizin­g debt markets. By buying at least $5 billion in federal debt each week (and provincial government bonds, too), the bank isn’t being anyone’s ATM. Rather, it is stabilizin­g debt markets, preventing financial panic and suppressin­g interest rates. These actions are consistent with its mandate to reduce unemployme­nt and boost inflation back to its 2 per cent target.

Interest rates are a policy variable, which we can control. The fiscal bogeymen warn that if interest rates escalate in future years, debt will quickly become unmanageab­le. But central banks control the direction of interest rate policies. Rates will only rise if central banks make them — and that would require much stronger economic conditions.

Debt does not have to be repaid. Government­s rarely “pay back” their debt: Bonds are rolled over as they mature and total nominal debt normally increases each year. (By the way, households and companies do the same thing in aggregate.) The huge debt we ran up during the Second World War (150 per cent of GDP, three times today’s level) was never repaid. Instead, it receded in importance (to under 20 per cent by the mid-1970s) as the economy grew around it.

Government’s debts are Canadians’ assets. Debt critics forget a fundamenta­l principle of accounting: every debit is also a credit. That’s especially obvious in the case of Ottawa’s COVID-19 spending. Pricey programs like CERB and the wage subsidy transferre­d tens of billions directly to Canadian households and businesses, helping them survive the shutdowns. Poilievre and his supporters know it’s politicall­y suicidal to oppose those programs (which kept millions of Canadians in their jobs and their homes). So instead they just attack the deficit in general, without ever saying what programs they would cut to reduce it. Restrainin­g future government support programs, in the name of deficit reduction, would literally make Canadians poorer.

In reality, these tales of bankruptcy lurking around a dark corner are no more frightenin­g than a schlockey old horror flick. The top responsibi­lities of government right now are to protect public health, support household incomes and kick-start reconstruc­tion. Yes, that will require big deficits — now and for years to come. That’s not scary: it’s a sign government is doing what it’s supposed to.

 ?? SEAN KILPATRICK THE CANADIAN PRESS ?? The most spine-tingling portent of doom was provided by Conservati­ve finance critic Pierre Poilievre, who warned that the Bank of Canada was becoming an ATM for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s “insatiable spending.”
SEAN KILPATRICK THE CANADIAN PRESS The most spine-tingling portent of doom was provided by Conservati­ve finance critic Pierre Poilievre, who warned that the Bank of Canada was becoming an ATM for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s “insatiable spending.”
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada