Mazankowski’s plan for health care
will hurt us all, says
AFL
Gil McGowan, AFL Staff
The changes being proposed to Medicare by the Mazankowski
commission will weaken the real "Alberta Advantage," not strengthen
it, says Les Steel, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour.
"If the government really wants to stand up for the best
interests of people in this province, then they should throw this thing in the
trash," said Steel, responding to a report released on December 3rd
by the Premier’s Advisory Council on Health.
The Council, chaired by Mulroney-era cabinet minister Don
Mazankowski, is recommending that a special panel be established to de-list an
unspecified number of services currently covered by Medicare.
The report also says that the provincial government should
"encourage" regional health authorities to introduce user fees and
hire more private companies to deliver public health services.
Premier Klein has welcomed Mazankowski’s recommendations
and promised that they will act as a blueprint for health care reform in Alberta
in the coming years.
But Steel and other Medicare supporters say the Mazankowski
report is a recipe for disaster – both for individuals and businesses.
"The Premier and Mr. Mazankowski talk about the need to
control spending," says Steel.
"But this report isn’t really about reducing costs –
it’s about transferring costs to individuals and businesses. It’s also about
paving the way for private companies to make profits on the backs of the
sick."
Steel points out that the current Medicare system acts as a
huge competitive advantage for companies doing business in Alberta and other
Canadian provinces.
As a result of Canada’s universal health care system,
businesses here don’t need to pay for private health insurance for their
employees. This gives Canadian companies an advantage over their American
competitors who see up to a third of their payroll budgets eaten up by insurance
costs.
"The labour movement’s first choice would be to
maintain a fully-funded and comprehensive public health system that’s there
for all Canadians when they need it," says Steel.
"But – make no mistake. If the government de-lists
health services, then unions will have no choice but to bargain for
supplementary private insurance. This will almost certainly drive up costs for
businesses in Alberta – and reduce our competitiveness. Is that the kind of
legacy that Ralph Klein really wants to leave?"
Steel’s concerns about the cost to businesses of de-listing
services have been echoed recently by staunch pillars of the business community.
In October, Jack Davis, chair of the Calgary Regional Health
authority and a long-time Tory insider, conceded that Medicare is a huge boon
for businesses in Canada.
In the comments he made before the Senate’s traveling
health commission, Davis even went so far as to suggest that corporations –
which benefit so handsomely as a result of not having to pay for private health
insurance – should be required to pay a special tax to help cover the cost of
Medicare.
In addition to his concerns about de-listing, Steel says he’s
also troubled by Mazankowski’s emphasis on contracting more and more health
services to the private sector.
"The evidence from around the world is clear," said
Steel. "Whether it’s American-style private health care or British-style
contracting out, privatization doesn’t work. It always leads to higher costs
and reduced quality of care. Given the dismal record of private health care, I
can’t understand why the Alberta government insists on going down this road.
They’re allowing their ideological preferences to blind them to the weaknesses
of private health care."
Steel concluded by criticizing the Council’s
recommendations involving things like user fees, medical savings accounts and
treating health care costs as a taxable benefit.
"In all of these cases, the government is basically
saying that Albertans should pay more for health care – on top of what they
already pay in taxes and health care premiums," says Steel.
"Once again, the people who will be hardest hit by these
schemes will be the ones who can least afford it – the poor and the
sick."
|