|
Liberal Attack Ad:
|
"If Stephen Harper becomes PM you'll have two healthcare options: Be rich. Or don't get sick."
|
Health Minister Pierre Pettigrew:
|
"If some provinces want to experiment with private delivery options, my view is that as long as [provinces] respect the single, public payer, we should be examining these efforts and then compare notes between the provinces."
|
Former Health Minister Anne McLellan:
|
"My view of this is: Does corporate structure necessarily matter in terms of a hospital, as long as when I take my Alberta health card, they take that card and my stay in that hospital and the treatment therein is covered by a publicly funded, publicly administered healthcare plan?"
|
Parliamentary Secretary for Private-Public Partnerships John McKay:
|
"The choice is P3 [private ownership] or nothing... Why does a public entity have to own the hospital? Why does a public entity have to finance a hospital?"
|
Prime Minister Paul Martin:
|
"There really is no room for cheque-book medicare here."
|
Shamelessly dishonest:
So, the Liberals don't support "cheque-book" healthcare? Well, guess what? Neither does Stephen Harper.
Healthcare user fees aren't even on the table here. The real question is this:
Do we want our hospitals owned by private corporations?
Do we?
More Expensive
Private HMOs, insurance companies and hospitals swallow up about 14 cents of every healthcare dollar spent in the United States. In Canada, it's about two.
When you go to a private hospital you get bilked from the moment you step on the property. The land, the building, the equipment; all paid for with borrowed money -- borrowed at much higher, private interests rates.
A few star doctors are paid exorbitant salaries to attract more customers -- not patients, but customers.
And, well, somebody's gotta pay for those executive salaries.
Guess what? That someone, it's you!
Less Reliable
Now, after paying all that money, what happens when a private hospital fills up? In the American healthcare system that doesn't happen very often. For-profit hospitals spend massive amounts of money on extra capacity to make sure they never lose a customer. That's not likely to happen here... unless, see above, we make healthcare far more expensive.
When a public healthcare facility is strained, other hospitals in the same system can share the load. But private hospitals aren't gonna just hand business over to the competition.
Under private medicare our choice is between a far more expensive system, or one where hospitals are overbooked like discount airlines.
And what happens when that first corporate contract comes up? What happens when the company that owns your local hosiptal asks for more money?
Does the hospital shutdown?
Frankly, I don't know. So, you just think about that awhile while we privatize your healthcare.
Coverage Denied
If that isn't disturbing enough, let's talk about 'the profit motive'. Sounds like something out of a cheap crime novel, doesn't it?
Well, it's not that far off.
Private corporations seek to maximize profit. They're legally bound to consider money as their only incentive. So -- like American HMOs -- private Canadian hospitals will have an incentive to deny patients coverage if it'll turn a profit.
Do we really want private, American HMO style medicine? Hospitals that have an incentive to deny care for the most expensive, least profitable treatments?
Do we?
|