Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Shaun Francis

GET UPDATES FROM Shaun Francis
 

Harper's Historic Health Care Pledge Meets Deaf Premiers

Posted: 01/25/2012 4:26 pm

Harper's hands-off approach could be the most important change to health policy since Tommy Douglas.

Last week, the provincial premiers disclosed how they would respond to the Harper government's exciting new approach to medicare. The response indicates that, yet again, provincial politicians just don't understand the scale of the problems we face. Indeed, the group of premiers we currently have running the provinces may be too out of it, and too ideologically pre-programmed, to grasp the opportunity Prime Minister Harper has given them.

First, some background: The federal government helps the provinces pay for health programs, which our constitution stipulates are a provincial responsibility. The arrangement dates back at least to 1957, when prime minister John Diefenbaker's Tory government began subsidizing certain provinces' public hospital insurance programs. The Diefenbaker subsidy freed up enough cash for Tommy Douglas' provincial government in Saskatchewan to go ahead and fund the expansion of that province's hospital insurance program to include primary care, such as doctor's bills. The result? Saskatchewan led the country toward medicare.

In recent decades, the federal government has provided the health subsidy in exchange for the provinces fulfilling certain conditions. For example, Pierre Trudeau's 1984 Canada Health Act made the subsidy conditional on five principles. If the provinces didn't adhere to those principles, the feds wouldn't fork over the money. As a National Post editorial adroitly put it recently, "the entire structure of the Canada Health Act ... is essentially based on extortion."

Back in December, federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty presented a new arrangement between the provinces and Ottawa. All the premiers grasped the implications of the overt, financial component: The Harper government pledged to continue the six per cent increases in federal health-care funding until 2017, then committed to increases equal to economic growth plus inflation until 2024, with a minimum annual increase of three per cent.

What few of the premiers seem to have understood is the more exciting, second part of the announcement: Harper and Flaherty told the premiers they were handing over the money without conditions. For the first time in decades, the deal was: no strings attached.

If the extortion is over -- if the Harper government truly means what the Prime Minister has said, and there truly aren't any restrictions on the money that the feds pay to the provinces -- then Harper's pledge would seem to effectively suspend the legislation that has defined Canadian health care for the last 27 years.

Even if Harper is merely signaling a looser interpretation of the Canada Health Act's five principles -- public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility -- this could usher in a new age of Canadian health care. Harper is challenging premiers to compete with one another in the pursuit of health-care excellence, and providing them with the freedom to innovate as they see fit.

But rather than accepting the challenge, thus far the premiers are doing the opposite. They are convening something called the Health Care Innovation Working Group, which will be chaired by PEI's Robert Ghiz and Saskatchewan's Brad Wall. According to one report, the group "will attempt to explore more co-ordinated management and to address competition across health systems" -- the goal being to avoid "competition" in regard, for instance, to health-workers' salaries.

That's just the sort of market-averse, socialist thinking that got us the problems we have today. "Competition" is a good thing, and the provinces should embrace it. Competition is how federalism is supposed to work. Federalism is a race among the provinces to achieve excellence. Since 1984, the Canada Health Act has hampered that race. No longer. Harper has fired the starter's pistol, even if none of the premiers appear to have heard it.

This article originally appeared in the National Post

 

Follow Shaun Francis on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@shaun_francis

 
 
  • Comments
  • 19
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:16 PM on 01/26/2012
So according to Shaun Francis, Diefenbaker and his glorious Tory government benevolently created medicare in Canada. Tommy Douglas then copied him and took credit and Pierre Trudeau the Liberal extortionist came along and ruined everything. Now Stephen Harper and his glorious Tory government are going to benevolently fix it the way it was and all the premiers who are not swallowing the blue kool-aid are the deaf ones?
04:17 AM on 01/27/2012
If we read the same posting I read somewhat differently- Says Diefenbaker gave money to Douglas so he (Douglas) had more money to expand his medicare plan.
09:40 AM on 01/26/2012
Competition has worked very well in the US, and can work very well in Canada to delivery excellent services for maximum profit to those who can afford it. In the US they are considering legislation so health care providers must spend at least 80% of premiums on patient care. In Canada we currently spend 100% of the money invested in health care on the provision of the service, well there certainly could be savings in some areas there is no evidence that what the government is proposing will deliver better service.

This article and the government's proposals are completely ideological based and have nothing to do with helping Canadians get the treatment they deserve. Both the government and the author should be ashamed of what they are advocating, while the author is entitled to his opinion the government is elected for one purpose to make life better for it citizens not promote ideology. ,
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tweed7t
wear sunscreen and dance
01:51 PM on 01/26/2012
it is mind numbing that anyone would use the U.S. system as a model for health care policy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SayBlade
This micro bio intentionally left blank.
09:38 AM on 01/26/2012
To the headline writer: Deafness is a condition one is either born with or acquires through illness or accident. Willful avoidance of hearing is another thing entirely.

In this article the reasons for that willful avoidance are another issue entirely. Perhaps what has been proposed is not worth listening to in the first place.
04:32 AM on 01/26/2012
Those five principles exist FOR A REASON. How naive must you be to believe that successive provincial governments (of all stripes) wouldn't save money by making health care disappear in more remote areas? [accessibility] Or that a private company, tasked with taking over the health care regime, wouldn't owe their allegiance (and therefore their dollars) to investors instead of Canadians? [ public administration] Do people really believe that if we free the provincial governments from any kind of accountability they would spend the money with a new fiscal wisdom born of the free market? No, they wouldn't. Free provinces from accountability on health care and you're giving them license to cut corners, restrict access, and divert funds from health care to pork projects. To believe anything else is delusional. Leave the checks and balances as they are, and force the provinces to be accountable for the decisions they make in maintaining Canada's health care system.
07:58 AM on 01/26/2012
And the worst of it all is the fact that if one or two provinces (Alberta and Quebec for example{ decide to move to a privatized two-tiered system then we are all screwed. Such a move would make it impossible for future Federal governments to roll this back and worse yet, it would open up other province to lawsuits supported by the precedent in the two-tiered provinces.

Talk about a slippery slope.

Way to go Canadians - you elected this guy to a majority and now you get what you paid for ... well done....
photo
Add In Canadia
Egotism is a weakness
03:37 AM on 01/26/2012
Not sure if there's any sense in having the province manage their healthcare systems 100% on their own with no federal standards. All that means is that in the end there will be a province to travel to to get healthcare, and a province you want to avoid if you want to get healthcare.

I'd much rather have it as "I'm a Canadian, and it doesn't matter where I am in Canada I hope to get the same service from coast to coast."
01:51 AM on 01/26/2012
year of the dragon

competition is a good thing like 1929 like 2008

consciousness is agood thing

competition had created the best health care system 5 000 years ago true story

consciousness is agood thing

Shaun Francis should lead a parade in honour of the great King Friedrich's 300th birthday anniversary
capitalist bosses love the musik he composed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wM8pTDUbtQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-P-BAebl1c&feature=related

a big company is just so much smaller than a million people anyon eof which can outcompete any gargantuan company

competition is a word for warfare even though it literally means to strive together [ a company ]

what fosters exellence is consciousness and co-operation

if america' system wernt worse than canada's then the word socialist might sound like a sane thing to say

my good friend Diefenbaker tells me that King frederick II actually started Canada His alliance with england let to the 7 years war in which england took quebec but King George the 3rd ,grandson of the kingof Hesse, had to raise taxes to pay for iraq pardon me and then the tea party made america; so old fritz made canada and america; if fritz's son, frederick the 3rd, had helped the british ,america would be part of Canada

true story , call me sane if you like
08:38 PM on 01/25/2012
So this is the socialist thinking that got us where we are today - every single person receives the same treament, no matter the size of their wallets? MOAR of that thinking please!!!
georgee2
My Canada Includes Everyone
08:19 PM on 01/25/2012
More private health care propaganda. Private health care is what we will get if we continue with Harper's plan.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tnanimation
01:58 PM on 01/26/2012
This in itself will be an issue that could end the Harper government next time around.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Skepticat
Supporting skeptical felines everywhere
08:10 PM on 01/25/2012
"Market adverse socialist thinking" - wot rot!. The purpose of universal health care was to ensure universal access to health care - not create "markets" or simply to provide profits as is the case in the socialist adverse system in that country to the South.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SayBlade
This micro bio intentionally left blank.
09:41 AM on 01/26/2012
Me fan, me fave.
08:07 PM on 01/25/2012
I guess Shaun Francis' position makes sense, his foundation's website: http://truepatriotlovefoundation.com/about/shaun-francis/ lays it all out for us, he would profit from private healthcare:

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Shaun Francis is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Medcan Health Management, Inc., a leading healthcare services provider. Established over 20 years ago, Medcan’s primary purpose is “keeping busy people healthy” by providing outpatient based preventive, diagnostic, and primary healthcare services to corporate executives, individuals and families. In 2010 Medcan was featured in the Globe and Mail as one of the Top 100 employers in the Greater Toronto Area and in 2011 Medcan was featured in the National Post as one of Canada’s 50 Best Managed Companies. Prior to rejoining Medcan, Shaun was one of the founding employees and Senior Vice President of Strategy and Business Development for Dallas based Broadlane, Inc., a leading business process outsourcer for over 900 US hospitals. In 2010, Broadlane was sold to MedAssets for US$850MM. Prior to joining Broadlane, Shaun served as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Medcan. Shaun also worked for Morgan Stanley’s New York and Toronto investment banking division where he managed equity, debt and mergers and acquisitions transactions. Shaun received his MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and he received a nomination from President Reagan to attend the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland as a Canadian.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
see-ellen2001
07:13 PM on 01/25/2012
Come on HP: "....Meets Deaf Premiers". Last I heard the premiers were not deaf. There's lots of proud Deaf people. Stop using this term as an adjective to describe stubborn HEARING persons who refuse to pay attention to the issue. Thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SayBlade
This micro bio intentionally left blank.
09:42 AM on 01/26/2012
Fanned and faved.

Will HP listen?
06:54 PM on 01/25/2012
This article is just one of many using rhetoric to marginalize anyone who questions the Harper Government. The author's use of the word "ideology" is a common tactic to describe any opinion that does not promote Harper's new vision of Canada. How clever, considering Harper is, in fact, the one who is controlled by Ideology. Research the National Citizen's Coalition. The use of "Market-averse socialist thinking" to describe those who do not want to see our healthcare "compete" is such obvious propaganda, it's ridiculous.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
canuckistaneh
Science!
06:38 PM on 01/25/2012
to grasp the opportunity Prime Minister Harper has given them. -----Ahh huh

As a National Post editorial adroitly put it recently, "the entire structure of the Canada Health Act ... is essentially based on extortion." ---- I'm sure it was based on following the rules for universal healthcare

Harper is challenging premiers to compete with one another in the pursuit of health-care excellence, and providing them with the freedom to innovate as they see fit.----- So we are going to see at least several different ways . Shouldn't we have the same care across the entire country ie universal. Will I have to get extra privite insurance to visit other different parts of Canada?


That's just the sort of market-averse, socialist thinking that got us the problems we have today. ---- let the market decide on our healthcare? You mean do it the American way? NO THANKS. I suppose you want to privitize our socialist armed forces, police and fire departments too.

Competition is how federalism is supposed to work. Federalism is a race among the provinces to achieve excellence.----Competition means what each province can do best.ie cancer in bc, heart surgury in Alta, frostbite in Sask, Mosquito bites in Manitoba, etc. Shouldn't they work together? You know "many hands lighten the load".
How about going to other top rated countries, see what they do best and adapt it for Canada.