Background:
Healthcare policy in Canada is governed under provincial authority and jurisdiction. Provinces are responsible for regulating, operating and funding basic health care institutions.
The federal government influences provincial operated healthcare programs and initiatives through the Canada Health Act (CHA). They accomplish this by imposing requirements on the provinces to meet federal standards in order to receive federal transfers under the Canada Health Transfer (CHT) payment program. The CHT is a block transfer of funds that must be used by the provinces and territories to provide health care as set out in the CHA.
The guiding principles of CHA are: universality; comprehensiveness; portability; accessibility; and public administration. The CHA has been supporting health care delivery in Canada since April 1, 1984. The 2004 Health Accord established the annual funding levels under the CHT program until the end of the 2013-2014 fiscal year.
Through the years the field of healthcare has changed dramatically through the technological advancements in detection, diagnosis and treatment. These advancements in diagnosis, treatments and procedures have brought significant benefits to the well being of the residents of Canada but at the same time are major contributing factors to the unsustainable escalating costs of healthcare across the country.
Provincial delivery healthcare systems and the escalating cost of healthcare have drastically affected the provision of healthcare in Canada and have resulted in major inequalities between provinces.
Action Required:
That a complete and comprehensive principled discussion and consultation on healthcare and possible revisions to the Canada Health Act and the Canada Health Transfer program be undertaken with all stakeholders.
Policy Recommendation:
That the Liberal Party of Canada take a leadership role in the undertaking of principled discussion and consultation with stakeholders on Healthcare in Canada, the Canada Health Act and the Canada Health Transfer program to encourage equitable, efficient, and cost effective health care services for all Canadians.
References:
www.mapleleafweb.com/tags/canada-health-transfer
Liberal Party of Canada (Manitoba)
***
The National Policy and Electoral Platform (NPEP) Committee had initiated a review of the current policy process prior to the Spring 2011 federal elections. Part of this review was a pilot exercise for a new resolution format.
The Liberal Party of Canada (Manitoba) Association has piloted a new resolution format based on feedback from previous policy conventions. Your comments on this new format will be greatly appreciated and should be sent to policy@liberal.ca with the subject line “new resolution format”.
I pay $1400 a years for drug coverage, for my wife and myself (we are also pretty healthy). I would willingly pay this amount and more into a government sponsored program that covered all our medical needs. I feel everyone should pay into a government health care plan, based on their income. I don’t feel however that the government should run the program, but setting the guide lines. Then the medical care insurance companies should bid on the right to administer blocks of the program, they will do it more efficientlty than the government.
Health care is much broader than being able to see a Doctor or get treatment in the Hospital, it is about keeping people healthy and active. In order to do the full job it may, in meny instances be more efficient to have and element of private healthcare involved. It is who pays and how it is paid that is the key element here. I don’t think it is desirable to have people needing treatment and in a private clinic and it costing thousands of dollars. I feel people have a responsibility to themselves and to society to share the cost of keeping themselves healthy, just as I feel it is societies responsibility to keep its members healthy.
So who pays? I think people should pay into a government directed health care plan rather than buying suplemental health care for drug, glasses, dental, travel etc.
The Liberal Party has an ethic commitment to publicly funded universal health care.
Also, the Liberal Party must advocate economic growth through health care spending; and must particularly emphasize the incentive to private sector innovation that health care spending provides. Because this spending encourages innovation, the economic benefits of health care spending are greater than the benefits of having a healthy population, and greater than the economic multiplier as typically calculated.
All of the firms in the supply chains for health care supplies and services are encouraged to invest and innovate. This is fixed capital formation and innovation in an area that has strong export market, as well as domestic market. It creates long term jobs and economic growth.
We can no longer allow those few who do not support the single tier universal access system to present spurious economic arguments that it is too costly. It is less costly, and it encourages economic growth in advanced technology markets.
(There are consumer technology spinoffs as well. At the risk of arguing comparatively, we know that much of our consumer technology is a spinoff off procurement of military technology. The same consumer spinoff effect applies to health care technology.)
The Liberal Party has an ethic commitment to publicly funded universal health care.
Also, the Liberal Party must advocate economic growth through health care spending; and must particularly emphasize the incentive to private sector innovation that health care spending provides. Because this spending encourages innovation, the economic benefits of health care spending are greater than the benefits of having a healthy population, and greater than the economic multiplier as typically calculated.
All of the firms in the supply chains for health care supplies and services are encouraged to invest, and innovate. This is fixed capital formation and innovation in an area that has strong export market, as well as domestic market. It creates long term jobs and economic growth.
We can no longer allow those few who do not support the single tier universal access system to make the spurious economic arguments that it is too costly. It is less costly, and it encourages economic growth in advance technology markets.
(There are consumer technology spinoffs as well. At the risk of arguing comparatively, we know that much of our consumer technology is a spinoff off procurement of military technology. The same consumer spinoff effect applies to health care technology.)