Liberals on Quebec healthcare

April 8th, 2010, Michael Ignatieff:

To that end [Ignatieff] welcomed the provincial Liberal budget idea of looking into new ways to finance the health-care system — possibly through new fees. He said the provinces have to be allowed to advance ideas on their own.

“We have to be open to letting the provinces experiment within the framework of the Canadian law,” Ignatieff said. “We have to protect universal access to the health system. The government of Quebec knows it.

“I salute the fact it is launching a debate that is important for all Canadians.”

April 7th, 2010, Carolyn Bennett:

The Zombie of Health Care Policy: User Fees

Dr. Bob Evans has called user fees the ‘zombie’ of health care policy – just when you think that the evidence has killed them dead – it rises again. It is like a bad video game…. user fees keep coming back from the dead.

The government of Quebec has said in the budget speech that it will enter into consultations re this user fee proposal. It should be rejected based upon evidence alone.

I am concerned that the budget document states: ‘In that respect, the Canada Health Act should not impede the search for solutions that will ensure long-term funding for our health care system.’

I would interpret that to mean that they KNOW this is OUTSIDE the act …

The backlash in Quebec has begun…. we need all Canadians to educate themselves and immunize themselves against this ‘zombie’ of health care policy. It may like a simple fix but it is bad policy – bad for health outcomes and bad for the solidarity that we have in Canada to help one another when fellow citizens bear the burden of sickness.

UPDATE: Ignatieff flip-flops… April 14th, 2010, after caucus:

Quebec’s proposal to charge $25 for a visit to the doctor would violate the Canada Health Act, according to Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff who departed sharply Wednesday from earlier indications that he was not opposed to the idea.

“I want to make it very clear that our party, and I personally, am a passionate defender of the Canada Health Act and we understand that provinces are facing substantial challenges facing the financing of their health care systems but we wanted to say that . . . if the government of any province were to introduce user fees it is our belief that that would be in contravention to the Canada Health Act and we would oppose it.”

Comments

comments

  • Mary T

    According to the NP, iggy has flipped again and is now against the fee. Is that a record for changing his mind.

  • Liz J

    That's our Iggy, he's for before he's against, he against before he's for. Sounds like someone who's either not capable of thinking things through after doing some research or someone who's flying by the seat of his pants with prevailing winds.

    He's really disgraced himself in the HOC referring to MP Guergis as “Mrs Jaffer”. That's going to the bottom in the sleaze department for someone who hopes to be PM.

  • east of eden

    It was Paul Martin who killed our health care system. As for provincial premiums, we have that here in Ontario and the money does NOT go toward health care. It was just another Liberal lie.

  • batb

    OT, but I caught you, Stephen, on a panel on CTV's Power Play last evening. You were far too nice, almost deferential. I know they say you win over more people with honey than with vinegar, but I don't want vinegar — just firewater! There were so many answers I could think of for you to give (they escape me at the moment, it was yesterday, after all) which would have put the lefties in their places, all factual, all legitimate responses to their nonsense.

    My advice, Stephen? You might as well be skinned for a sheep as a lamb. Give them what-for!

  • kenn2

    Last I checked, Canada's health care system is working quite well. Canada's current economic health has more to do with past liberal governments, when Martin was finance minister, than anything Harper has done since. (To Harper's credit, he hasn't yet broken anything.)

  • kenn2

    Stephen knows full well that the distortions and fabrications that sustain most of the Canadian right-wing blogosphere will not stand up in the light of day. Of course, you would then call this 'media bias'.

  • batb

    I guess you haven't been following the media circus surrounding Helena Guergis, kenn2. 'Looks like the distortions and fabrications that won't stand the light of day belong to CTV, CBC, and TorStar. All of the hack “journalists” that have been flogging the allegations as truth/fact seem to be backtracking as fast as they can and are looking mighty nervous on camera. At the end of last week, Bobby Fife was displaying a few facial ticks I haven't seen before, and was making a big deal out of “well, these are only allegations” and “we're not sure” yada, yada, yada, after days of acting like the cock of the walk, informing Canadians of Ms. Guergis's wrongdoings, EVEN calling the Ethics Commissioner himself to check into Ms. Guergis's mortgage which, as it turns, out was quite above-board.

    No, kenn2, I know media bias when I see it, hear it, and smell it. It's real, it's unethical, it stinks — and I don't buy it anymore. Literally.

  • kenn2

    Hack journalists, huh? Where there's smoke, there's fire. If there's nothing to the allegations against Ms Guergis, then how about that hack PM who's kicked her out of government and left her to twist in the wind, by (as usual) his silence?

    Not that I'm particularly bothered by the fact that someone like Ms Guergis was a junior minister. In Harper's cabinet, most ministers are just figureheads, they aren't allowed to actually do (or say) anything, so she wouldn't have caused much damage in any case.

    Jeffrey Simpson has Harper's number; the PM's got no clue about accountability, and this alone will unseat him next election.

  • batb

    Dumb-de-dumb-de-dumb-de-dumb, etc.

    Even silence speaks (Hausa Proverb).

    Jesus was silent before Pilate. Did He lose?

    As I'm fond of saying, when Prime Minister Harper comes to a fork in the road, he goes straight ahead.

    As for Jeffrey Simpson, what a tool. He writes for the Probe and Fail, doesn't he?

  • DougM

    Actually Kenn2, when the PM gets information that one of his Minister's may have committed wrongdoing it is his responsiblility to remove them from Cabinet (and perhaps caucus) until it is investigated and they are cleared or not. So Harper did precisely what he was supposed to. That said, you may remember Paul Martin admitting that ADSCAM could not have happened without knowledge from the top, or Chretien, as the PM advocating on behalf of one of his clients – something that is admissable for an MP but not for a Minister. What this all means of course is that it is entirely understandable for you, as a Liberal suportter, to have no idea what principled government might look like. But equally, by the time ADSCAM, the HRDC scandal, the Billion dollar boondoggle, Shawinigate, the Grand Mere Affair, etc etc etc, was over, if the Liberals had strove for the same standard of acountability, there would have been none of them left to sit in the House.

  • DougM

    Actually Kenn2, when the PM gets information that one of his Minister's may have committed wrongdoing it is his responsiblility to remove them from Cabinet (and perhaps caucus) until it is investigated and they are cleared or not. So Harper did precisely what he was supposed to. That said, you may remember Paul Martin admitting that ADSCAM could not have happened without knowledge from the top, or Chretien, as the PM advocating on behalf of one of his clients – something that is admissable for an MP but not for a Minister. What this all means of course is that it is entirely understandable for you, as a Liberal suportter, to have no idea what principled government might look like. But equally, by the time ADSCAM, the HRDC scandal, the Billion dollar boondoggle, Shawinigate, the Grand Mere Affair, etc etc etc, was over, if the Liberals had strove for the same standard of acountability, there would have been none of them left to sit in the House.