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

The Fake News Fake-Out

The news business is at its least reliable when reporting on itself. Coverage of a media company’s own financial results, for example, is inevitably glowing and upbeat, whatever the actual figures might say. The same thing holds for concerns over “fake news”. Seizing on recent panic about the spread of misinformation, and thanks to a generous federal grant, Canada’s legacy newspapers have devised their own system for identifying fake news. But as Peter Shawn Taylor discovers, the criteria strangely celebrate their own product at the expense of their many online competitors. And much of it contradicts the basic rules of good journalism.

Hating Jordan Peterson

Who kicks a person when they’re down? Who dresses up their own resentment, spite or ideological fervour as analysis? One doesn’t need to agree with Jordan Peterson’s every idea to regard his recent comeback from the brink of death, destruction and oblivion as welcome, commendable and inspiring. At least worth a shred of empathy. But not from the more doctrinaire of his woke Left critics. As Janice Fiamengo finds, they aren’t just revelling in the popular author’s misfortune but are committing what they normally consider an unforgivable sin: blaming the victim.

George Orwell on the Myanmar Coup

“The whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought”, George Orwell wrote in his famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. “In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” Orwell understood that whoever controls language controls political thought. And such an insight is as applicable to Myanmar in 2021 as it was to Oceania in 1984. Using Orwell as his guide, and relying on his extensive personal contacts throughout the country, C2C Journal associate editor Patrick Keeney takes a close look at reality and meaning in the recent coup in Myanmar.

More from this author

Main_Pandemic_Policy_covid_canada

Pandemic Follies: The Biggest Government Policy Mistakes

Canada’s economy was supposed to have been cruising along the road to recovery by late last year. Instead, the nation is once again shedding jobs, unemployment is high, companies continue to shrink or go under, entire industries are threatened and growth is almost nowhere to be seen. So why are governments seemingly doing everything in their power not only to hold back recovery but destroy much of what remains? Gwyn Morgan assesses several key areas of our nation’s battered economy and reviews the central role played by poorly thought-out, unneeded and avoidable government policies in each one.

A Practical Way for Canada to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Carbon dioxide emissions are a globe-girdling phenomenon driven by industrialization, and atmospheric gases obviously don’t care about national boundaries. So it’s distinctly weird that some left-leaning governments, Canada’s Liberals among them, insist that recognized emissions reductions must take place right here at home! Isn’t the goal “saving the planet”? In fact Canada has a clean-burning energy resource that’s voluminously abundant and economically accessible with current technology – and which the world can’t get enough of. As Gwyn Morgan writes, jobs, wealth-creation, tax-revenue and environmental improvement on a global scale all await, if only governments dropped their ideological blinkers.

The Economics of Green Energy Ideology

Solar panels filling fields in cloudy northern countries. Wind turbines manufactured for export by the world’s largest builder of coal-fired power and worst emitter of greenhouse gases. Governments deliberately demolishing their country’s most valuable industry. It is increasingly clear that so-called green energy isn’t just another instance of youthful idealism going a little too far, much less a practical way to a clean future, but a nasty utopian ideology bent on impoverishing entire countries. Gwyn Morgan examines a slice of this destructive landscape and warns of the severe risk to Canada’s economic well-being.

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.