In a column in Friday's Globe and Mail, Shirley Douglas, in her capacity as spokesperson for the Canadian Health Coalition, warned that Canada is on the road to a two-tier health care system. She pointed to the fact that inaction on the year-old Romanow report's recommendations is allowing the privatization of health care to proceed almost by stealth.
Pay attention, folks, because I'm about to commit heresy. It's entirely possible that, in the long run, some form of private sector participation in health care may be necessary to sustain a system that's gobbling up ever increasing amounts of cash. But if the fundamental principle of universal access regardless of ability to pay is to be preserved, then that involvement must be carefully managed. That can only happen when those responsible for the delivery of health care at both levels of government start working together to look at the whole system in a way that takes the basic policy goals into account.
It seems to me that's what Romanow was arguing for when he recommended the establishment of a national health council and changes to the Canada Health Act. But while politicians paid lip service to Romanow's recommendations, they seem to have stood around waiting for someone else to go first. Meanwhile the Mike Harrises and Ralph Kleins have allowed privatization to proceed in a way that undermines what the majority of Canadians, time after time, have indicated they want.
So I was pleasantly surprised to read that the McGuinty government has proposed legislation to make two-tier health care in Ontario illegal and to establish a provincial version of the national council. The bill they've put forward would make it a crime for someone to pay his way to the front of the line. While the legislation appears to have loopholes, and has drawn criticism from the opposition for being "all spin" with no enforcement mechanisms, it still seems to be a step forward even if largely symbolic. It's at least an attempt to reinforce basic principles before getting into the nitty gritty of implementation.
I have to eat a little crow and admit that I didn't think McGuinty had it in him. After his recent retreats on two key issues, I didn't think I could expect to see this kind of leadership from him, but I think on this issue he's taking a stand that might actually make him some enemies. To me that's a good sign since he seems to be trying to stand up for all of us on this one. So hats off to you, Dalton.
Now do you think we could talk about re-regulating the hydro market? Hey, it can't hurt to ask.
