 |
     |
|
|
So there's an election in Canada -- again. It got me to wondering about what was going on in my riding. There are at least two candidates: the incumbent, Pierre Poilievre (Conservative) and Michael Gaffney (Liberal). For various reasons, I've decided to support Gaffney and the Liberal government. One of the ways I'm going to do that is by raising the battle here.
Let's start with an obvious difference between the two men. Poilievre is a young man -- in his mid-twenties. Conversely, Gaffney is a little more experienced with life: in sport, in business, as a family man. A quick glance at his resume alone, never mind a conversation with him, shows the breadth of his experience. So when he talks about things like funding education, it's worth engaging and arguing. He's obviously had the chance to think about it as a student, as a tax-paying businessman, as a coach of student athletes, and as a father with children that will continue the cycle. On his own blog, Michael relates a story about when he learned about the Australian government's funding scheme, The Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS). Rather than relate how the scheme works, read Michael's post, Should Canada implement a university student loan progam like Australia? (which has pointers to the Australian government's explanation).
It's an interesting scheme, not especially unlike the Canada Student Loan program, with some critical exceptions. First, unlike a CSL, the government seems to fund and underwrite the loans (not a major bank).
Second, the repayments are not made on a fixed time basis (i.e., six months after you're out of full-time schooling), but rather begin at a reasonable threshold income level. This makes perfect sense. When a student that's had to take out loans finishes school, he or she immediately enters an economic chasm: new living expenses, furnishings, transportation, and so forth all while the student's annual income is likely at its lowest except for when (s)he was waiting tables during high school. Conversely, tagging the repayment "tax" as a source deduction from earnings only after the former student has reached an income level that can sustain the repayment amount, makes much more sense. And, as the income level rises, so does the repayment contribution.
As noted in Michael's post or in one of the comments to it, the Australian scheme is indexed to inflation only. Interest does not accrue on it. The same goes in Canada as long as the loan is not in repayment mode, at which point interest kicks in. If the Australian scheme doesn't charge interest even during the repayment period . . . wow! What a program.
It is by any means a program that big-L Liberals in Canada would be right and justified to support. It is fair and hopeful. It would offer opportunity with responsibility. What more should anyone ask for except a helping hand?
Gaffney's astute to evaluate this program. If you have a young family and are looking at that beautiful ten-year old wondering about the spiraling cost of education, think about Australia's HECS and what it could become in Canada.