Medicare: Accountable, Accessible, Public.

Ethical health care means public delivery

Real accountability is key to a high quality, public health care system Through strengthened accountability, the federal government must get serious about monitoring and enforcing the Canada Health Act. Canadians deserve to know whether federal dollars are being used wisely and that public services are being protected.

The provinces need to be made accountable for how they spend our health care dollars. The federal government should let the provinces know that the health transfer comes with strings attached, in the form of mandatory, detailed reporting of health care expenditures. Better monitoring and enforcement of the Canada Health Act is urgently needed.

In addition, the federal government must close the loophole that allows some doctors and other health care practitioners to work simultaneously in the public and private systems.

This practice creates an incentive for physicians to refer patients from the public system into their private practice.

Ethics and health care should go hand in hand. Monitoring and enforcement of the Canada Health Act are the only way to ensure accountability.

Ask the candidates

Will your government ensure that the provinces are held fully accountable for how they spend health care dollars? Will you make it clear that federal funding to the provinces comes with strings attached?

Will you act to strengthen accountability and reporting mechanisms?

Will your government act to close loopholes that permit doctors to work simultaneously in public and private practice?

Download this issue sheet as a below.

medicare1-e.pdf

Ethical health care means all will have access

Public health care matters to Canadians. We take pride in our Medicare system and place great importance on protecting a system that provides full access to high quality care.

Unfortunately, years of deep cuts and poor enforcement of the Canada Health Act have taken their toll.

A Supreme Court ruling on health care released last June in Quebec is believed by some to have opened the door to greater privatization. In releasing the Chaoulli decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Quebec government could not stop patients from paying for private insurance for procedures also provided under Medicare. They justified this because long waiting times can cause undue hardship. However, a two-tiered health system will not solve the problem of excessive waiting periods. In fact, Canadians are more likely to find themselves waiting longer to get the care they need.

Studies undertaken in countries with parallel public and private systems have shown that the introduction of private service delivery has increased waiting times for those waiting for public services. In Australia, England and New Zealand, countries which have parallel public and private systems, patients now face longer waiting periods than those who live where a national public system is in place.

Private clinics drain resources from the public system. In a system where there is already a shortage of doctors and nurses we can not afford to lose more medical professionals to private practice. Canada needs a strategy that will provide a long term solution to the problem of unreasonable waiting times. We need a strategy to recruit and train more nurses and doctors to work within the public health care system in every province and territory. Most of all, we need a plan that keeps Medicare out of the hands of corporate interests.

Ask the candidates

What will your government do to ensure reasonable wait times while also ensuring accessible, accountable health for all who live in Canada?

What concrete steps will your government take to recruit and retain doctors and other health care practitioners in the public system?

Download this issue sheet as a below.

medicare2-e.pdf

Ethical health care means public delivery

Private health care costs more and delivers less. Handing health care delivery over to the private sector is a bit like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. For-profit clinics exist to provide care but also to make money. These goals can often prove to be contradictory and it’s the patient, as well as taxpayers who pay the price.

Consider the following:

• A survey conducted in Canada in 2003 found that administrative costs for private insurers was 13.2%. In comparison, administrative costs make up only 1.3% of
  costs in the public sector.
• The United States, which does not have a national public health system spends 16% of its GDP on health care compared to the 10% of Canadian GDP spent on health care.
• A heart bypass costs $23,921 in the US and $12,000 in Canada (Can. dollars).
• A whole slew of studies in the US have revealed that for-profit hospitals bill more for the same services offered in public hospitals.
• The American group, Physicians for a National Health Program, recently compiled a list of civil and criminal fines and settlements paid by for-profit health insurance companies. Infractions included billing fraud, patient abuse, price-fixing, suppressing research data, faulty equipment – totalling hundreds of millions of dollars.

For-profit health care providers have an incentive to cut corners.

Why should we believe that they would put patients before profits? Experience in those countries, and even in Canadian provinces, where private services have been allowed has consistently demonstrated otherwise.

Ask the candidates

Will your government stop the funding of for-profit health care services with public dollars?

medicare3-e.pdf

A strong, public health care system makes good economic sense

There are many benefits to a publicly funded health system, including better care, delivered more efficiently, at a lower cost. However, there is increasing evidence that our Medicare system is also helping create better jobs for Canadian workers.

For example, in July 2005, Toyota announced plans to locate a plant in Woodstock, Ontario instead of in the United States (our cost saving national health insurance plan is widely believed to be a central reason for the move).

Publicly funded health care gives Canadian companies a huge advantage, as their health care costs are much lower than those of their US counterparts that provide health benefits to employees. As the high cost of private health benefits continues to rise, we can expect to see some of these US firms begin to look northward.

We need to spend more on health care but we also need to spend more wisely, where it is needed most. For example, the federal government could help reduce the strain on hospitals through expanding public homecare and encouraging the use of community health centres. Long term health care costs would also be reduced through the establishment of a national Pharmacare plan.

This election is an opportunity for Canadians to make their candidates take a stand to protect, strengthen and expand our Medicare system. Let’s let our candidates know that we want a fully public health care system and that we expect them to spend our tax dollars wisely.

Ask the candidates

What measures will your government take to strengthen and expand public health care?

Do you support a national Pharmacare programme?

What will your government do to raise public awareness of the economic value of a strong, national health care system?

Download this issue sheet as a below.

medicare4-e.pdf