The Lockdown Contrarians Were Right

Gwyn Morgan
June 10, 2020
The days are at their longest, everything’s blooming, summer is nigh and Canadians are increasingly going about their regular lives. Spirits are lifting. And serious questions are being asked. Like Plato’s cave-dwellers emerging out of the darkness, we are blinking in the dazzling light of our 5 am northern dawns. What just happened? Do the claimed but unprovable benefits of the pandemic response stack up against the staggering quantifiable damage? Could we have done better? Gwyn Morgan takes a clear-headed look at these questions and prescribes some principles to dig our way out and avoid a needless repeat.

The Lockdown Contrarians Were Right

Gwyn Morgan
June 10, 2020
The days are at their longest, everything’s blooming, summer is nigh and Canadians are increasingly going about their regular lives. Spirits are lifting. And serious questions are being asked. Like Plato’s cave-dwellers emerging out of the darkness, we are blinking in the dazzling light of our 5 am northern dawns. What just happened? Do the claimed but unprovable benefits of the pandemic response stack up against the staggering quantifiable damage? Could we have done better? Gwyn Morgan takes a clear-headed look at these questions and prescribes some principles to dig our way out and avoid a needless repeat.
Share on facebook
Share on Facebook
Share on twitter
Share on Twitter

After being all-but locked down since mid-March, Canadians are emerging to face the incomprehensible damage that has occurred in just 12 weeks. Besides the patients and valiant front-line workers who succumbed to the Covid-19 virus, shutting down large sectors of the economy caused thousands of lost businesses, millions of lost jobs, and billions (perhaps trillions) in lost savings. The Prime Minister’s spending announcements, delivered from in front of Rideau Cottage, added more than $20 billion to our national debt – per week.

With the benefit of hindsight, let us examine two vital questions.

Was confining much of the working-age population the right decision?

The living should get easier this summertime, but the economic devastation of Canada’s pandemic response will be felt for a long time.

According to Public Health Agency of Canada data, there had been 7,773 Covid-19 deaths in Canada as of June 7. Federal Chief Medical Officer Theresa Tam has confirmed that 81 percent of them were linked to long-term care facilities. Of the remaining 1,482 deaths, most were people over the age of 70. Only 229 of the total deaths were aged under 60 and almost all of those had pre-existing health conditions. Clearly, for a healthy working-age person, the risk of dying from Covid-19 is significantly lower than dying by accident or from other diseases.

If Canada’s working-age people hadn’t been removed from the workforce plus been subjected to such severe general restrictions – everything from being barred from medical and personal care appointments, to cancelling travel and being unable to go about their daily lives, nearly all of which involves economic activity of one sort or another – Canada’s economy would have continued to function without the job losses, bankruptcies and tragic social impacts including mental health deterioration, suicides and family violence. And without the need for the crippling increases in our national debt. In hindsight, keeping healthy working-age people away from their jobs – the first such quarantine ever undertaken – may be the most damaging decision in Canadian history.

 Did the shutdown of surgical wards to prepare for Covid-19 victims cost more lives than were saved?

These shutdowns came as Canadians in need of health care were already suffering on long waiting lists. A December 2019 Fraser Institute report found that waiting lists averaged 20 weeks and totalled more than 1 million people. Cancer, cardiac and other patients who had finally been given a surgical date were sent notices of indefinite postponement. The mental anguish of knowing that a tumour continues to grow or a blocked artery might cause a heart attack adds even further medical risk. Now, three months later, no one knows how much longer their wait will be. B.C., for example, has announced that it will take as long as two years to work through its 30,000 cancelled surgeries. Ironically, B.C. Health Minister Adrian Dix has now turned for help to the same private clinics he’s been trying to shut down.

Picture of empty hospital hallway as governments attempted to prevent healthcare systems from being overrun by pandemic patients.
Picture of waiting room in private clinic, an alternative for governments looking to treat the backlog of patients as a result of the lockdown.
Waiting for a wave that never came: With Covid case modelling off by orders of magnitude, tens of thousands of other patients lost their much-needed health care.

Preparing for the possibility that hospitals could become overwhelmed by Covid-19 victims was a prudent decision. The problem is that our medical system went into the crisis with essentially zero unused capacity and the longest waiting lists in the OECD.

Statistics Canada data shows that, in 2018, cancer and cardiac deaths totalled 132,699 nationally. Delays in treating these diseases seem likely to overwhelm the lives saved from focusing on Covid-19.

Did Sweden get it right?

Severe impacts of the lockdowns are also being seen in other Western countries, except one. Sweden adopted a no-lockdown policy that Norway’s State Epidemiologist criticized as “going against the whole world”. Sweden has seen a relatively high death rate compared to its Scandinavian neighbors, but it is well below that of Britain, Spain, and Italy, and about the same as France. And Quebec, with 2 million fewer inhabitants, has had more deaths than Sweden.  

While unemployment has risen, the Swedish economy remains essentially intact and there’s been no need for massive increases in public debt. Also noteworthy about Sweden’s response to the coronavirus was that it was implemented largely through persuasion and suggestion, and succeeded through social consensus, rather than through government edicts as in Canada. These at times seemed erratic and arbitrary as well as heavy-handed, and some are now facing constitutional legal challenges.

Picture of square in Sweden where the government did not implement a lockdown in response to the pandemic.
Picture of open cafe in Sweden where they did not force citizens into a lockdown to fight this pandemic.
Although its approach came at a cost, Sweden’s daily life went on — and its economy remained intact. Below, Sweden’s State Epidemiologist, Anders Tagnel.

What were the main elements of Sweden’s “going against the whole world” policy?

Swedes were encouraged to work from home, follow good personal hygiene and practice physical distancing. They were instructed to self-isolate if unwell. The elderly and immune-compromised were advised to stay home. Universities were closed, but schools for children under 16 remained open. Shops, daycares, bars, restaurants, and gyms also remained open. Gatherings were limited to 50 people. 

Why reopen? Governments must assure Canadians there won’t be another lockdown, or many businesses will simply stay closed forever.

These mid-pandemic measures are virtually the same as those planned in Canada for the phased reopening our economy. And that raises a crucial point. Epidemiologists are warning, “The virus is still out there”. But with relatively few Canadians having gained immunity by contracting the virus, there’s no reason for our susceptibility to be any different than it was before the shutdowns. So why should we expect the final death toll to be any different than if, rather than impose the general lockdowns, Canadian governments  had taken a more restrained approach and implemented those measures in the first place? What is dramatically different between Canada and Sweden is that we face the huge challenge of restarting a severely damaged economy. As Sweden’s State Epidemiologist Anders Tagnel notes, “It’s very hard to stop a lockdown”.

Here are some items I believe are crucial as we take on that challenge.

 Governments must immediately declare that the lockdowns will not be reinstated. Fear of another lockdown will hold the economy in a debilitating limbo because businesses cannot afford to take the risk of reopening. Many will simply close down permanently, adding to the already-immense toll. Few new projects will be started, because investors will remain on the sidelines.

Not at significant risk: Schools should reopen as soon as possible, while we focus on protecting those who are actually vulnerable.

 Open the secondary schools. There have been zero deaths of children under age 16 in Canada. And there’s a growing consensus that their light viral load makes children unlikely spreaders of the virus. Rather than being the most vulnerable, as they were to the Spanish Flu a century ago, they appear to be the least vulnerable to Covid-19. Reopening schools therefore poses low risks. When summer ends, many parents need to get back to work, rather being kept home supervising their children.

Students should bypass universities. Universities and many colleges have announced that in-person classes will not reopen in September (even if governments fully reopen the rest of society), while simultaneously increasing tuition. Students shouldn’t simply accept this reduction in teaching quality combined with the affront of higher costs. Since they’ll be forced to learn in a virtual environment anyway, they should take advantage of other online learning opportunities to bypass universities and their high tuition fees. To support this choice, and signal to colleges and universities that their selfish tactics are unacceptable, governments should mandate the recognition of online credentials from credible providers.

Right all along: The pandemic response should have taken other critical factors into account. There’ll be no excuse next time.

 Don’t leave pandemic response measures solely in the hands of Chief Medical Officers. They did their job of “flattening the curve” well. But the measures taken should have also considered the impact of hospital bed closures on treatment of other diseases, small business owners who face losing everything, stress-induced mental health deterioration, suicides, family violence, long-term unemployment and massive public debt.

The strategy to cope with any new outbreak should include our best financial, business, education and mental health experts working as a team. These teams should be assembled immediately as we navigate the unknown course of the corona virus. There’s little point to sweeping measures that over-protect the entire population against a single virus if the resulting damage is so severe that the nation in its weakened state can’t cope with future crises, whether those are health-related or otherwise. For such crises will surely occur.

Gwyn Morgan is the retired founding CEO of Encana Corporation.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

Thirteen Things That Can’t Be Said About Aboriginal Law And Policy In Canada

How do you make new laws and policies or reform old ones in a democracy? You talk openly about every aspect, carefully consider the pros and cons and the long-term implications, and strive to come up with solutions that are fair to everyone. That has been the ideal, anyway, in Canada since Confederation. So what happens when vast areas of law and policy cannot even be discussed any longer? Bruce Pardy lists the things that have become perilous to say regarding Indigenous issues – but that need to be said if Canada is to maintain a legal system that is fair to all Canadians.

Democratic socialism is the new communism, but what does that mean for the people old enough to remember living under communism?

New Communism, Old Fears

Supporting or working to bring about “democratic” socialism has become an alluring option for ever-more voters across North America. It is ascending on clouds of virtuous intentions, high hopes and utopian goals, backed by elaborate theories, with good doses of anger and envy adding punch. Yet it has all been tried before – and failed calamitously, an unmitigated horror ending in ruination. Luckily, people who have personally lived through it are still around to tell the tale. Through the eyes of one survivor of Eastern European communism, Doug Firby issues a stark reminder of what real oppression looks like and a plea to younger Canadians to resist the seductive call of socialism.

What would have happened if Canada rejected "coronapsychosis"?

Rejecting “Coronapsychosis” Could Be Good for Our Health

It will remain forever unknowable how Canada would have fared had our country not largely aped the “lockdown” model adopted by most of the advanced countries. But there is meaningful evidence for those who care and dare to look – and the implications aren’t pretty for our public health officials and their political acolytes. Brian Giesbrecht examined an obscure, far-off country run by an eccentric old man who decided to do the pandemic his own way – and may well have saved not only his nation’s economy but hundreds of his compatriots as well.

More from this author

The future of Alberta, and Canada for that matter, is at the brink. Can we walk it back?

Stepping Back from the Brink – Maybe

“You don’t know what you’ve got ’till it’s gone” was penned long ago as an environmentalist, anti-establishment lament. These days, the environmentalists are the establishment, industry is the underdog, and the federal Liberals have come close to destroying the nation’s foremost generator of wealth and tax revenues. Some recent pronouncements by certain federal ministers, however, have Gwyn Morgan seeing glimmerings of reason, or at least pragmatism. If they do suspend their scorched-earth campaign against oil and gas, though, it won’t be for any love of the resource sector, let alone of Alberta. It will simply be because they need the money desperately. If that’s what it takes, writes Morgan, so be it.

Will WE be the same after this Trudeau ethics scandal?

The Biggest Question Mark in Trudeau’s Latest Ethics Scandal

We are now onto Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s third official ethics imbroglio. Mr. “blind spot”, as a previous ethics commissioner termed him, is back at it, once more trailing cabinet ministers and political flunkies. The blind leading the blind, as it were. This time around it’s a close to billion-dollar sweetheart deal offered to WE Charity – an organization with close ties to Trudeau and cabinet ministers. As the Opposition and media focus on the mechanics and legalities of the growing scandal, Gwyn Morgan probes the deeper question of why anyone would think shovelling vast sums into yet another summer jobs program for students was a good idea. The possible answer is downright diabolical.

Canada Needs its Oil and Natural Gas Industry More than Ever

You don’t see news media reporting that Germany has declared Audi and BMW to be obsolete companies from yesteryear. Nor that Switzerland has come to regard its banking sector and watchmakers as sunset industries. There’s been no announcement that South Korea is shuttering Samsung. Nor that the Greeks are tearing over hill and dale torching their olive and orange groves. Everywhere you look, countries are leaning on their proven economic strengths to power their post-Covid comeback. So why is Canada’s federal government, seemingly alone in the world, intent on euthanizing this nation’s number-one source of export earnings and inter-regional tax transfers – the oil and natural gas sector? Gwyn Morgan moves briskly through the recent madness and declares that this is one instance of ideological folly the country simply can’t afford.

Share This Story

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

Donate

Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

* indicates required
Interests
By providing your email you consent to receive news and updates from C2C Journal. You may unsubscribe at any time.