Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s move to cut back on health-care transfer payments to the provinces in 2017 is the first step toward privatization of the health provision or the institution of a two-tier system in Canada sometime after 2017.
The reason for this is that the federal government, through capping transfers, is telling the provinces that if you want public health, you pay for it. Provinces, at least the ones that don’t have oil and gas such as Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Alberta, simply won’t have the money to continue to provide government health care while paying for seniors’ drugs. They are having trouble covering costs now and that’s before the gigantic wave of boomers reach its catastrophically high-cost health-care years. Even with the gigantic tax-revenue resources of the federal government and their health-care transfers, provinces were probably not going to able to continue to provide the services available now to the public while continuing to do the other important things this level of government does.
Particularly concerning was the way the Harper government released the news. The slowest news time is just before Christmas and New Year’s so this probably didn’t strike home with Canadians. Furthermore, this health-care transfer cap was done unilaterally by the federal government so that no public debate could occur. Traditionally and probably still today, health care is the most important issue to Canadians. Not to debate this issue in public is horrible democracy. But then that’s how Harper likes to do government. Canadians knew that before the election and yet gave the Conservatives a majority. Now they are paying the price.
Most provinces and territories won’t be able to afford the added costs incurred by the Flaherty spending cap. So they will have to privatize huge portions of the health-system because the wave of aging boomer costs will swamp provincial treasuries. It’s not that the federal spending cap is so onerous now, though it is a problem. It’s continuing presence will mean the vast revenue resources of the federal government won’t be there to cover the skyrocketing cost of health when it is needed most — post-2017 when the cap takes effect.
Very disturbingly, this cap means that seniors (most of whom are strapped for cash in retirement) won’t be able to pay for these added costs if (or more likely when) they aren’t provided by the provinces. Rich seniors will take this in stride. But most Canadians have not saved enough for retirement even with an almost all-inclusive health-care system kicking in at age 65, as exists at present. Now they will either not get health-care or be driven into poverty to obtain it. That’s what this federal spending cap means. So the generation that paid high taxes to preserve public health won’t be able to receive it.
The alternative would be to secure private health-care insurance. But for most seniors, they will already have major health issues by age 65 so private insurers won’t provide coverage for them because of pre-existing conditions or the coverage they receive will be inadequate to cover catastrophic illnesses. Those are what you get past age 65.
We are on the cusp of the bad old days of health care in Canada. There was a time when Canadians were refused care because they couldn’t pay. Those days are returning.
Original Article
Source: Ottawa Citizen
The reason for this is that the federal government, through capping transfers, is telling the provinces that if you want public health, you pay for it. Provinces, at least the ones that don’t have oil and gas such as Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Alberta, simply won’t have the money to continue to provide government health care while paying for seniors’ drugs. They are having trouble covering costs now and that’s before the gigantic wave of boomers reach its catastrophically high-cost health-care years. Even with the gigantic tax-revenue resources of the federal government and their health-care transfers, provinces were probably not going to able to continue to provide the services available now to the public while continuing to do the other important things this level of government does.
Particularly concerning was the way the Harper government released the news. The slowest news time is just before Christmas and New Year’s so this probably didn’t strike home with Canadians. Furthermore, this health-care transfer cap was done unilaterally by the federal government so that no public debate could occur. Traditionally and probably still today, health care is the most important issue to Canadians. Not to debate this issue in public is horrible democracy. But then that’s how Harper likes to do government. Canadians knew that before the election and yet gave the Conservatives a majority. Now they are paying the price.
Most provinces and territories won’t be able to afford the added costs incurred by the Flaherty spending cap. So they will have to privatize huge portions of the health-system because the wave of aging boomer costs will swamp provincial treasuries. It’s not that the federal spending cap is so onerous now, though it is a problem. It’s continuing presence will mean the vast revenue resources of the federal government won’t be there to cover the skyrocketing cost of health when it is needed most — post-2017 when the cap takes effect.
Very disturbingly, this cap means that seniors (most of whom are strapped for cash in retirement) won’t be able to pay for these added costs if (or more likely when) they aren’t provided by the provinces. Rich seniors will take this in stride. But most Canadians have not saved enough for retirement even with an almost all-inclusive health-care system kicking in at age 65, as exists at present. Now they will either not get health-care or be driven into poverty to obtain it. That’s what this federal spending cap means. So the generation that paid high taxes to preserve public health won’t be able to receive it.
The alternative would be to secure private health-care insurance. But for most seniors, they will already have major health issues by age 65 so private insurers won’t provide coverage for them because of pre-existing conditions or the coverage they receive will be inadequate to cover catastrophic illnesses. Those are what you get past age 65.
We are on the cusp of the bad old days of health care in Canada. There was a time when Canadians were refused care because they couldn’t pay. Those days are returning.
Original Article
Source: Ottawa Citizen
No comments:
Post a Comment