Does government really need to borrow $6.5 billion to build schools?
While there is little doubt that investment in new and modernized schools is necessary, there is some question whether debt financing a full $6.5 billion in school construction is the most appropriate policy choice. The Alberta government should have been more policy creative, rather than accounting creative, by anticipating trends in population and student enrolment growth much earlier in the long-term capital budget planning cycle.
Another issue is the extent of the operating costs associated with building 90 schools over seven years. Those schools don’t come equipped with teachers, education assistants and other staff. These people need to be hired. While the Smith government announced earlier this summer a $125-million increase in operating support for school jurisdictions for hiring new teachers and educational assistants, I don’t believe this is a sufficient level of operating funding to accommodate all of these schools.
The government has a responsibility to disclose to Albertans the full operating costs associated with building 90 schools over the next seven years.
And it should prepare and publicly release a comprehensive annual infrastructure report to provide detailed information to Albertans on the progress made in meeting the various commitments in the capital plan, including progress made in eliminating the province’s infrastructure deficit.
Alberta’s “borrow and lease” program for school constructions appears be the result of a failure to anticipate long-term capital needs. The Smith government needs to provide Albertans with a clearer rationale of why it chose to go $6.5 billion more into debt, rather than pursuing more appropriate policy options to free up some financial resources.