The Alberta healthcare system is an issue that is relevant to everybody. Many worry that we are on our way to having a two-tiered system like the United States.
On April 15, an information session was held at the Norsemen Inn, featuring three guest speakers who presented honest and forthright information on the present state of healthcare and where we as Albertans might be heading.
Judy Wasylycia-Leis serves as MP for Winnipeg North and she has strong feelings on the state of our present system. “With the recent news of Alberta healthcare de-listing certain procedures, people are becoming more and more afraid of getting sick or aging.” Alberta has the highest rate of privatized care in the country and with the recent de-listing of services such as chiropractic care and trans-gender surgery, it seems as if we are moving closer to a healthcare format where eventually only those who can afford it will receive quality healthcare.
David Eggen is the executive director of Friends of Medicare. “The recent de-listing of health services is an ominous glimpse into the future,” he said. “Unscrupulous people rallying for privatization are seeking to destroy the system from within.”
If in fact, we are, moving towards a healthcare system like the United States, which, coincidently enough is working towards adapting a model similar to Canada’s, we truly are in for a long road.
In the USA, over 50 million people do not have healthcare coverage. Lack of personal coverage is the number one reason for bankruptcy in America.
Unscrupulous practices are directed at seniors, who often require more services and medication, yet are generally on a fixed income. In the Brian Mulroney tenure, the government tried to de-index CPP benefits. Seniors across the country stood up and gave a voice to their plight. They rallied together, protesting on Parliament Hill. Together, we have a voice and can make a difference, he said.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
CALGARY - As the Stelmach government forges ahead with controversial health budget cuts, a new poll shows a majority of Albertans oppose delisting services, but respondents are split on whether the province should consider reinstating health premiums to boost sagging revenues.
The Leger Marketing survey of 900 Albertans found a "slim majority" --58 per cent of people--oppose Alberta Health's decision to cut chiropractic care and potentially delist other services, while 35 per cent support the move.
The poll also shows 62 per cent of respondents support maintaining present health services and running a deficit until the economy improves. About 30 per cent oppose this idea.
But Albertans are divided on the prospect of bringing back health-care premiums to address the funding issues facing the province's $13-billion-a-year medical system. The poll, provided exclusively to the Herald, found 50 per cent of Albertans oppose reinstating the premiums, while 44 per cent support the idea.
"If you look at the results, the takeaway is that health care is important and people want to take care of the health system," said Marc Tremblay, vice-president of Leger Marketing.
"But there is some division in the population," he added.
The provincewide poll, conducted between April 17 to 22, follows government's decision to cut some medical services in the face of declining oil revenues and a$4.7-billion budget deficit.
Alberta'sApril7budgetends funding for chiropractic care and sex change operations, while scaling back spending on several hospital expansion projects
around the province. About 40 grants for health programs like aboriginal suicide prevention have also been transferred from government to the new medical superboard, which is deciding whether they will continue to receive funding.
The Ed Stelmach government, meanwhile, has suggested more non-essential medical services could be on the chopping block as the province seeks to bring ballooning health spending under control.
Health Minister Ron Liepert said earlier this month he is considering establishing an expert panel to determine what services must be covered under the federal Canada Health Act and which are prospects for delisting.
Tremblay said there are still a lot of unknowns about what government is contemplating, but the Leger poll found a slight majority are against cutting services so patients either pay personally or through insurance.
He noted that of the 58 per cent who oppose delisting services, 40 per cent said they"strongly oppose"cuts. About seven per cent of respondents had no opinion on the issue.
Friends of Medicare, a health lobby group that recently conducted its own poll on issues like delisting, argued Albertans want government to invest in the medical system, not narrow the scope of what it covers.
"The government is playing a dangerous game basing their changes on the presumption that Albertans think we can't afford public health care," said Dave Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare.
But Liepert has said the reforms he is making to health care are necessary to make the public system sustainable, even if this involves some tough decisions like cutting chiropractic care.
Alberta spends about 40 per cent of its total budget on health care.
"We've been clear that regardless of the economic situation, we can't sustain the kind of increases in spending we've had over the past few years," the health minister said in Calgary recently. "It's our job to ensure we're delivering it the most efficient and effective way possible."
Observers said delisting health services can generate significant controversy. But Dr. Tom Noseworthy said the public only wants to pay for services that work and governments can sell cuts on that premise.
"The public knows there's not a limitless bottom to pay for health care," said Noseworthy, a University of Calgary health policy expert. "They understand the concept of efficiency."
But the Leger poll did not find a large appetite among Albertans to bring back health-care premiums to address the funding issues facing the medical system.
The premiums, which cost individuals $528 a year and families $1,056 annually, ended Jan. 1--along with about$1 billion a year in government revenues.
Liepert has not said he is considering reintroducing the premiums.
Tremblay said he was surprised 44 per cent of people in the poll would support government reinstating the premiums. But he said this could be because many employers covered the premiums for workers.
"If it's coming out of my pocket every month, then I'm more likely to say I strongly oppose bringing premiums back," he said.
The Leger poll is considered accurate within plus or minus three percentage points 19 times out of 20.
mlang@theherald.canwest.com
The Leger Marketing survey of 900 Albertans found a "slim majority" --58 per cent of people--oppose Alberta Health's decision to cut chiropractic care and potentially delist other services, while 35 per cent support the move.
The poll also shows 62 per cent of respondents support maintaining present health services and running a deficit until the economy improves. About 30 per cent oppose this idea.
But Albertans are divided on the prospect of bringing back health-care premiums to address the funding issues facing the province's $13-billion-a-year medical system. The poll, provided exclusively to the Herald, found 50 per cent of Albertans oppose reinstating the premiums, while 44 per cent support the idea.
"If you look at the results, the takeaway is that health care is important and people want to take care of the health system," said Marc Tremblay, vice-president of Leger Marketing.
"But there is some division in the population," he added.
The provincewide poll, conducted between April 17 to 22, follows government's decision to cut some medical services in the face of declining oil revenues and a$4.7-billion budget deficit.
Alberta'sApril7budgetends funding for chiropractic care and sex change operations, while scaling back spending on several hospital expansion projects
around the province. About 40 grants for health programs like aboriginal suicide prevention have also been transferred from government to the new medical superboard, which is deciding whether they will continue to receive funding.
The Ed Stelmach government, meanwhile, has suggested more non-essential medical services could be on the chopping block as the province seeks to bring ballooning health spending under control.
Health Minister Ron Liepert said earlier this month he is considering establishing an expert panel to determine what services must be covered under the federal Canada Health Act and which are prospects for delisting.
Tremblay said there are still a lot of unknowns about what government is contemplating, but the Leger poll found a slight majority are against cutting services so patients either pay personally or through insurance.
He noted that of the 58 per cent who oppose delisting services, 40 per cent said they"strongly oppose"cuts. About seven per cent of respondents had no opinion on the issue.
Friends of Medicare, a health lobby group that recently conducted its own poll on issues like delisting, argued Albertans want government to invest in the medical system, not narrow the scope of what it covers.
"The government is playing a dangerous game basing their changes on the presumption that Albertans think we can't afford public health care," said Dave Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare.
But Liepert has said the reforms he is making to health care are necessary to make the public system sustainable, even if this involves some tough decisions like cutting chiropractic care.
Alberta spends about 40 per cent of its total budget on health care.
"We've been clear that regardless of the economic situation, we can't sustain the kind of increases in spending we've had over the past few years," the health minister said in Calgary recently. "It's our job to ensure we're delivering it the most efficient and effective way possible."
Observers said delisting health services can generate significant controversy. But Dr. Tom Noseworthy said the public only wants to pay for services that work and governments can sell cuts on that premise.
"The public knows there's not a limitless bottom to pay for health care," said Noseworthy, a University of Calgary health policy expert. "They understand the concept of efficiency."
But the Leger poll did not find a large appetite among Albertans to bring back health-care premiums to address the funding issues facing the medical system.
The premiums, which cost individuals $528 a year and families $1,056 annually, ended Jan. 1--along with about$1 billion a year in government revenues.
Liepert has not said he is considering reintroducing the premiums.
Tremblay said he was surprised 44 per cent of people in the poll would support government reinstating the premiums. But he said this could be because many employers covered the premiums for workers.
"If it's coming out of my pocket every month, then I'm more likely to say I strongly oppose bringing premiums back," he said.
The Leger poll is considered accurate within plus or minus three percentage points 19 times out of 20.
mlang@theherald.canwest.com
Thursday, April 23, 2009
EDMONTON — The Alberta government revised its controversial drug plan for seniors Thursday after admitting it unfairly targeted middle-income earners in a time of economic uncertainty.
"We received a lot of feedback from seniors," said Health Minister Ron Liepert. "I have no problem saying, look, we didn't get it all right."
In December, the government announced a new drug plan that made drugs free for seniors with an annual income of $21,325 and couples making up to $42,650.
Anyone making more had to pay a deductible for their drug based on a sliding scale, with wealthy seniors having to pay up to $7,500 for their prescriptions before the government began paying.
Under the new model, there are no deductibles. Single seniors making less than $12,000 and couples making less than $24,000 will continue to get their drugs for free.
Those earning more will have to pay 20 per cent of each prescription cost up to a maximum of $15 with higher-income earners also paying a set monthly premium for the now optional drug plan.
Liepert said this will make the drug plan more predictable for seniors and the government.
"Is everyone going to be happy with the plan? Absolutely not," Liepert said. But he said 60 per cent of seniors will be paying less than they do under the current plan.
The new plan will save the government $20 million each year — $10 million less than the rejected plan launched in December — but it will mean seniors will have to shoulder $20 million more of the cost.
David Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said he didn't see any substantial changes. "Means testing means that you're no longer getting the universal care that you need," Eggen said. "The savings here are negligible compared to the bureaucracy this would create."
"We received a lot of feedback from seniors," said Health Minister Ron Liepert. "I have no problem saying, look, we didn't get it all right."
In December, the government announced a new drug plan that made drugs free for seniors with an annual income of $21,325 and couples making up to $42,650.
Anyone making more had to pay a deductible for their drug based on a sliding scale, with wealthy seniors having to pay up to $7,500 for their prescriptions before the government began paying.
Under the new model, there are no deductibles. Single seniors making less than $12,000 and couples making less than $24,000 will continue to get their drugs for free.
Those earning more will have to pay 20 per cent of each prescription cost up to a maximum of $15 with higher-income earners also paying a set monthly premium for the now optional drug plan.
Liepert said this will make the drug plan more predictable for seniors and the government.
"Is everyone going to be happy with the plan? Absolutely not," Liepert said. But he said 60 per cent of seniors will be paying less than they do under the current plan.
The new plan will save the government $20 million each year — $10 million less than the rejected plan launched in December — but it will mean seniors will have to shoulder $20 million more of the cost.
David Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said he didn't see any substantial changes. "Means testing means that you're no longer getting the universal care that you need," Eggen said. "The savings here are negligible compared to the bureaucracy this would create."
Province revises seniors' drug plans after protest
Premiums, copayments income based
By Michelle Lang, Calgary HeraldApril 23, 2009 3:46 PMComments (2)
Alberta is revising a proposed new drug plan for seniors after mounting concerns the initial proposal would have hit middle income retirees hard.
The new Blue Cross plan, set to come into effect July 1 of next year, introduces a system of premiums and copayments based on income that will still see the lowest income seniors pay nothing while higher earners will foot a larger bill.
Health Minister Ron Liepert said today that government revised the proposal after hearing “a lot of feedback from seniors.”
“I have no problem saying we didn’t get it all right, we’re going to adjust and we have adjusted,” said Liepert.
The controversial proposal, announced late last year, would have asked middle and high income seniors to pay a deductible ranging from a few hundred dollars a year to as much as $7,500 annually for the wealthiest seniors.
The proposal led to protests and letter writing campaigns among angry seniors.
Friends of Medicare said the changes announced today address the most pressing concerns.
“The actions of thousands of seniors helped to make the government blink on this seniors pharmacy strategy,” said Dave Eggen, executive director of the lobby group.
“That being said... they refused to back off this idea of using means testing to determine health delivery.”
Under the current system, the lowest income seniors pay nothing for medications. Blue Cross asks the rest of seniors to pay 30 per cent of the cost of their drugs to a maximum of $25 per prescription — no matter their income.
The changes announced today will still exempt the lowest income retirees from drug payments.
But other seniors will now have to pay a monthly premium. On the other hand, the proposal reduces the amount of the current copayment.
A couple with a taxable income of $50,000, for example, will pay a premium of $59 per monthly, plus 20 per cent of the cost of each prescription up to a maximum $15.
Senior couples with the highest incomes, $96,001 and above, will pay a premium of $118 a month, plus the same copayment on the prescription costs.
Premiums, copayments income based
By Michelle Lang, Calgary HeraldApril 23, 2009 3:46 PMComments (2)
Alberta is revising a proposed new drug plan for seniors after mounting concerns the initial proposal would have hit middle income retirees hard.
The new Blue Cross plan, set to come into effect July 1 of next year, introduces a system of premiums and copayments based on income that will still see the lowest income seniors pay nothing while higher earners will foot a larger bill.
Health Minister Ron Liepert said today that government revised the proposal after hearing “a lot of feedback from seniors.”
“I have no problem saying we didn’t get it all right, we’re going to adjust and we have adjusted,” said Liepert.
The controversial proposal, announced late last year, would have asked middle and high income seniors to pay a deductible ranging from a few hundred dollars a year to as much as $7,500 annually for the wealthiest seniors.
The proposal led to protests and letter writing campaigns among angry seniors.
Friends of Medicare said the changes announced today address the most pressing concerns.
“The actions of thousands of seniors helped to make the government blink on this seniors pharmacy strategy,” said Dave Eggen, executive director of the lobby group.
“That being said... they refused to back off this idea of using means testing to determine health delivery.”
Under the current system, the lowest income seniors pay nothing for medications. Blue Cross asks the rest of seniors to pay 30 per cent of the cost of their drugs to a maximum of $25 per prescription — no matter their income.
The changes announced today will still exempt the lowest income retirees from drug payments.
But other seniors will now have to pay a monthly premium. On the other hand, the proposal reduces the amount of the current copayment.
A couple with a taxable income of $50,000, for example, will pay a premium of $59 per monthly, plus 20 per cent of the cost of each prescription up to a maximum $15.
Senior couples with the highest incomes, $96,001 and above, will pay a premium of $118 a month, plus the same copayment on the prescription costs.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Deniors have government on the run
Tories revisit drug coverage as seniors protest changes
By Michelle Lang, Calgary HeraldApril 18, 2009Comments (14)
On the same day seniors protested a government overhaul of Alberta's Blue Cross drug coverage, Health Minister Ron Liepert said he hopes to announce changes to the proposed plan in the coming weeks.
More than 100 people gathered outside Liepert's southwest Calgary constituency office Friday for the rally organized by Friends of Medicare. Carrying signs like"delist Liepert" and "health care crime scene," protesters said the minister's new pharmaceutical strategy will hit middle-income retirees hard.
"It's incredibly discriminatory," said 74-year-old protester Dave Werlin, who suggested the changes will put drugs out of reach for some seniors.
"Many will stop taking their medications . . . As seniors get sick from the lack of available medication, it will cost the health system more(than the changes will save)."
The provincial pharmaceutical plan, announced late last year, will retool how seniors pay for drugs under Blue Cross. Some Albertans will pay significantly more than they do now, although low-income seniors will no longer pay anything under the changes.
It appears, however, government is prepared to make some concessions on its proposal.
Liepert said Friday that a number of factors have changed since the province announced its pharmaceutical strategy, including the economic climate, which seniors say has hit their retirement savings hard.
"The seniors have identified a number of issues they felt we needed to address. We're going to address that," said Liepert, speaking to reporters before the protest.
"Hopefully in the next few weeks we'll be in a position to make some announcements."
Liepert said in February he would take a second look at the proposed plan after seniors groups raised concerns.
Currently, the Blue Cross program asks seniors to pay 30 per cent of the cost of their drugs to a maximum of $25 per prescription.
Under the proposed changes, single seniors with an annual income of less than $21,325 and couples with an annual combined income of less than $42,650 will receive free drug coverage.
But those with incomes higher than those amounts will pay a deductible--ranging from a few hundred dollars for those on the lower end of the scale to as much as $7,500 annually for well-heeled seniors with incomes over $150,000.
The health minister would not discuss what changes he is considering, but some advocates have been arguing the income threshold should be higher.
Dave Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said he's pleased the province is reconsidering the proposal.
"I'm glad they are thinking about it," he said. "Using any means test to deliver public health care is wrong."
Friday's protest comes after more than a week of heated controversy about government's plans for health care, including a budget that cuts chiropractic care and sex-change operations while delaying major health construction projects around the province.
The Alberta government has suggested other procedures could be delisted, as early as this fall.
mlang@theherald.canwest.com
By Michelle Lang, Calgary HeraldApril 18, 2009Comments (14)
On the same day seniors protested a government overhaul of Alberta's Blue Cross drug coverage, Health Minister Ron Liepert said he hopes to announce changes to the proposed plan in the coming weeks.
More than 100 people gathered outside Liepert's southwest Calgary constituency office Friday for the rally organized by Friends of Medicare. Carrying signs like"delist Liepert" and "health care crime scene," protesters said the minister's new pharmaceutical strategy will hit middle-income retirees hard.
"It's incredibly discriminatory," said 74-year-old protester Dave Werlin, who suggested the changes will put drugs out of reach for some seniors.
"Many will stop taking their medications . . . As seniors get sick from the lack of available medication, it will cost the health system more(than the changes will save)."
The provincial pharmaceutical plan, announced late last year, will retool how seniors pay for drugs under Blue Cross. Some Albertans will pay significantly more than they do now, although low-income seniors will no longer pay anything under the changes.
It appears, however, government is prepared to make some concessions on its proposal.
Liepert said Friday that a number of factors have changed since the province announced its pharmaceutical strategy, including the economic climate, which seniors say has hit their retirement savings hard.
"The seniors have identified a number of issues they felt we needed to address. We're going to address that," said Liepert, speaking to reporters before the protest.
"Hopefully in the next few weeks we'll be in a position to make some announcements."
Liepert said in February he would take a second look at the proposed plan after seniors groups raised concerns.
Currently, the Blue Cross program asks seniors to pay 30 per cent of the cost of their drugs to a maximum of $25 per prescription.
Under the proposed changes, single seniors with an annual income of less than $21,325 and couples with an annual combined income of less than $42,650 will receive free drug coverage.
But those with incomes higher than those amounts will pay a deductible--ranging from a few hundred dollars for those on the lower end of the scale to as much as $7,500 annually for well-heeled seniors with incomes over $150,000.
The health minister would not discuss what changes he is considering, but some advocates have been arguing the income threshold should be higher.
Dave Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said he's pleased the province is reconsidering the proposal.
"I'm glad they are thinking about it," he said. "Using any means test to deliver public health care is wrong."
Friday's protest comes after more than a week of heated controversy about government's plans for health care, including a budget that cuts chiropractic care and sex-change operations while delaying major health construction projects around the province.
The Alberta government has suggested other procedures could be delisted, as early as this fall.
mlang@theherald.canwest.com
Albertans want investment in Public Health Care
Alberta Friends of Medicare say the results of a recent poll they commissioned show Albertans don't want health-care services reduced or delisted.
Executive director David Eggen said Premier Ed Stelmach's proposal to reduce health-care costs by ending coverage of some publicly insured medical procedures "flies in the face of what Albertans want.
"Albertans want their public-health system strengthened and not dismantled through delisting or privatization," Eggen said Wednesday. "The public system is the most important social program that Albertans own."
Premier Ed Stelmach said he hadn't had time to review the Friends of Medicare poll, but he is dedicated to building "efficiency and effectiveness in the health-care system."
Every year, health-care funding increases in connection to new drugs, new technologies and new treatments, Stelmach said. "Our goal here is to ensure that it's sustainable for the next generation and the generation after that....We're going to keep working with Albertans to find a balance."
As the province evaluates what services need to be delisted, "the minister will work with health-care professionals, people in the knowledge. This is something that we clearly articulated a year ago when we campaigned, when we said we're going to work with health-care providers to build efficiency and effectiveness in health care to be sustained into the future."
Stelmach shied away from discussing whether one cost-cutting measure could be changing the way nurses, for example, are paid in Alberta. "Seventy-five per cent of costs in the system is paying for services, for people that deliver those services. We want to be fair with everybody and structure it so we work with all of the unions, all of the health-care providers," he said. "Everyone plans such a critical role in the hospital system. ... Everyone is important in delivering the services."
But advocates of public health care say the government has long had a program to reduce the list of insured services and force Albertans to purchase private insurance to cover some procedures.
Eggen says the poll shows that Albertans highly value the health-care system and are willing to fight to defend it. "The public in Alberta is well educated in the consequences of these actions and they haven't been afraid to voice their opinions before," he said.
The poll found that 56.2 per cent of Albertans believe the government has a hidden agenda to privatize the health care system and 67.9 per cent believe delisting services will mean they will have to pay more out of their own pockets for health care.
Another 55.6 per cent said they believe some families won't be able to pay for services and will have to do without services.
Other poll highlights include:
- 75 per cent of Albertans agree that the solution to the problems in health care is improving the current public system, not replacing it with a two-tiered American system.
- 80 per cent oppose the plan to replace publicly operated nursing homes for seniors with assisted living accommodation.
- 70 per cent oppose turning more public health services over to private, for-profit operations.
The poll by Viewpoints Research sampled 1,501 Albertans between Feb. 19 and March 8 and is considered accurate within plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, Eggen said.
Poll Question
Q: To create a balance between maintaining universal health care and controlling skyrocketing costs, public medicare should cover the cost of basic, essential health services and people should buy private insurance to cover the cost of everything else.
Strongly agree: 3.6%
- Agree: 29.7%
- Disagree: 44.4%
- Strongly disagree: 15.2%
- Don't know / Refused: 7.0%
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Executive director David Eggen said Premier Ed Stelmach's proposal to reduce health-care costs by ending coverage of some publicly insured medical procedures "flies in the face of what Albertans want.
"Albertans want their public-health system strengthened and not dismantled through delisting or privatization," Eggen said Wednesday. "The public system is the most important social program that Albertans own."
Premier Ed Stelmach said he hadn't had time to review the Friends of Medicare poll, but he is dedicated to building "efficiency and effectiveness in the health-care system."
Every year, health-care funding increases in connection to new drugs, new technologies and new treatments, Stelmach said. "Our goal here is to ensure that it's sustainable for the next generation and the generation after that....We're going to keep working with Albertans to find a balance."
As the province evaluates what services need to be delisted, "the minister will work with health-care professionals, people in the knowledge. This is something that we clearly articulated a year ago when we campaigned, when we said we're going to work with health-care providers to build efficiency and effectiveness in health care to be sustained into the future."
Stelmach shied away from discussing whether one cost-cutting measure could be changing the way nurses, for example, are paid in Alberta. "Seventy-five per cent of costs in the system is paying for services, for people that deliver those services. We want to be fair with everybody and structure it so we work with all of the unions, all of the health-care providers," he said. "Everyone plans such a critical role in the hospital system. ... Everyone is important in delivering the services."
But advocates of public health care say the government has long had a program to reduce the list of insured services and force Albertans to purchase private insurance to cover some procedures.
Eggen says the poll shows that Albertans highly value the health-care system and are willing to fight to defend it. "The public in Alberta is well educated in the consequences of these actions and they haven't been afraid to voice their opinions before," he said.
The poll found that 56.2 per cent of Albertans believe the government has a hidden agenda to privatize the health care system and 67.9 per cent believe delisting services will mean they will have to pay more out of their own pockets for health care.
Another 55.6 per cent said they believe some families won't be able to pay for services and will have to do without services.
Other poll highlights include:
- 75 per cent of Albertans agree that the solution to the problems in health care is improving the current public system, not replacing it with a two-tiered American system.
- 80 per cent oppose the plan to replace publicly operated nursing homes for seniors with assisted living accommodation.
- 70 per cent oppose turning more public health services over to private, for-profit operations.
The poll by Viewpoints Research sampled 1,501 Albertans between Feb. 19 and March 8 and is considered accurate within plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, Eggen said.
Poll Question
Q: To create a balance between maintaining universal health care and controlling skyrocketing costs, public medicare should cover the cost of basic, essential health services and people should buy private insurance to cover the cost of everything else.
Strongly agree: 3.6%
- Agree: 29.7%
- Disagree: 44.4%
- Strongly disagree: 15.2%
- Don't know / Refused: 7.0%
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Editorial in the Edmonton Journal
Instead of cuts, Liepert should increase health-care spending
Delisting services boosts costs for businesses, consumers; threatens economy
By David Eggen and Diana Gibson, The Edmonton JournalApril 19, 2009
Alberta Health Minister Ron Liepert has been very economical with the truth on the health-care budget. He picked one of the few lines in the budget that is up, while the overall budget for Health and Wellness has actually been cut.
Infrastructure spending has been cut by almost $1 billion from what had been budgeted in the capital plan and is down more than $600,000 from last year. The total Health and Wellness budget did not get the 3.7-per-cent increase needed to account for inflation and population growth. And now, delisting insured services has been raised.
While nations around the world are increasing spending to counter the recession, Alberta is cutting. As part of its stimulus plan, China announced it would spend $123 billion by 2011 to establish universal health care for the country's 1.3 billion people, on the premise that spending would put more money directly in Chinese consumers' pockets. Even the United States, so infamous for its poor health care, has anted up for increased health spending this year.
Instead of stimulus spending, the Alberta conservative government is kicking the economy into what could be a serious tailspin. And if the budget announcements were not bad enough, Liepert says he plans to delist more services and may cut additional health-care infrastructure spending, including much needed hospitals and long-term care beds.
Last month, Alberta lost more than 14,000 jobs, a trend that is likely to continue. The $913-million cut from the capital budget will put 10,500 construction workers out of work. What better place for them than building health-care facilities that will be much needed as our population ages? Alberta is still recovering from shortages created by the last downturn. The lack of long-term care beds continues to cause backlogs and delays in hospital emergencies which have real costs.
The infrastructure cuts have other costs as well. Currently, infrastructure can be built at bargain prices. Delaying construction may mean that the costs are much higher. Knowing the need is there and having the workers in need of jobs, it is financially prudent to build that infrastructure now and staff it now.
Other jurisdictions are also trying to bolster the economy by putting as much money as possible into the hands of consumers and businesses.
Liepert is doing the opposite, increasing business costs and taking money out of the pockets of consumers. Delisting and de-insuring services amounts to a direct transfer of costs from the province to businesses and individuals.
Any service that is delisted or de-insured will be added to the long growing roster of privately insured services paid for by employers, causing rates to go up. Private insurance costs are already rising at rates in excess of inflation.
It would also take money from consumers. Only about half of Albertans are covered by workplace health benefits. For those who are not covered, costs will also shoot up. The cap will be taken off of what professionals can charge and they will raise fees to cover the loss of patients.
Vision care is one of the services that has already been de-insured. This resulted in a 17-per-cent jump in vision care costs in one year alone.
Transferring costs out of the public health-care budget into private insurance is not a path to sustainability. Australia provides a good lesson on that front. In Australia, the subsidies necessary to get people to enrol in the private health insurance cost more than if those services had been kept in the public system.
This is not the time for Liepert to make his bottom line look better at the cost of Alberta's employers, especially small business which would be hit hardest. Those already struggling may be forced to lay off workers as costs become prohibitive.
Alberta has choices for public health care. A pointless $4.5 billion in subsidies were announced this year alone for oil and gas drilling, despite the fact the both conventional oil and conventional gas peaked in Alberta years ago. Also, according to government figures, Alberta is forgoing between $10 billion and $18 billion in tax revenues every year compared with other provinces. If there is anything that is not sustainable, it is the tax cuts and drilling subsidies.
Investment in health care and the province's health-care budget will need to increase as our population grows and ages. Polls show that Albertans want public health care, not tax cuts, but what they get is tax cuts and health-care cuts. A Nanos research poll showed that more than 55 per cent of Western Canadians support deficit financing and two-thirds say it is important "... that the government increase investment in public services like health care, social services, the justice system and education during a downturn." In addition, 71.1 per cent of participants favoured "government investing in health care, social services and education," compared with 19.9 per cent who wanted "government financial support for businesses in the automotive, forestry or mining industries."
David Eggen is executive director of Friends of Medicare and a former NDP MLA for Edmonton-Calder. Diana Gibson is research director of the University of Alberta's Parkland Institute
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Delisting services boosts costs for businesses, consumers; threatens economy
By David Eggen and Diana Gibson, The Edmonton JournalApril 19, 2009
Alberta Health Minister Ron Liepert has been very economical with the truth on the health-care budget. He picked one of the few lines in the budget that is up, while the overall budget for Health and Wellness has actually been cut.
Infrastructure spending has been cut by almost $1 billion from what had been budgeted in the capital plan and is down more than $600,000 from last year. The total Health and Wellness budget did not get the 3.7-per-cent increase needed to account for inflation and population growth. And now, delisting insured services has been raised.
While nations around the world are increasing spending to counter the recession, Alberta is cutting. As part of its stimulus plan, China announced it would spend $123 billion by 2011 to establish universal health care for the country's 1.3 billion people, on the premise that spending would put more money directly in Chinese consumers' pockets. Even the United States, so infamous for its poor health care, has anted up for increased health spending this year.
Instead of stimulus spending, the Alberta conservative government is kicking the economy into what could be a serious tailspin. And if the budget announcements were not bad enough, Liepert says he plans to delist more services and may cut additional health-care infrastructure spending, including much needed hospitals and long-term care beds.
Last month, Alberta lost more than 14,000 jobs, a trend that is likely to continue. The $913-million cut from the capital budget will put 10,500 construction workers out of work. What better place for them than building health-care facilities that will be much needed as our population ages? Alberta is still recovering from shortages created by the last downturn. The lack of long-term care beds continues to cause backlogs and delays in hospital emergencies which have real costs.
The infrastructure cuts have other costs as well. Currently, infrastructure can be built at bargain prices. Delaying construction may mean that the costs are much higher. Knowing the need is there and having the workers in need of jobs, it is financially prudent to build that infrastructure now and staff it now.
Other jurisdictions are also trying to bolster the economy by putting as much money as possible into the hands of consumers and businesses.
Liepert is doing the opposite, increasing business costs and taking money out of the pockets of consumers. Delisting and de-insuring services amounts to a direct transfer of costs from the province to businesses and individuals.
Any service that is delisted or de-insured will be added to the long growing roster of privately insured services paid for by employers, causing rates to go up. Private insurance costs are already rising at rates in excess of inflation.
It would also take money from consumers. Only about half of Albertans are covered by workplace health benefits. For those who are not covered, costs will also shoot up. The cap will be taken off of what professionals can charge and they will raise fees to cover the loss of patients.
Vision care is one of the services that has already been de-insured. This resulted in a 17-per-cent jump in vision care costs in one year alone.
Transferring costs out of the public health-care budget into private insurance is not a path to sustainability. Australia provides a good lesson on that front. In Australia, the subsidies necessary to get people to enrol in the private health insurance cost more than if those services had been kept in the public system.
This is not the time for Liepert to make his bottom line look better at the cost of Alberta's employers, especially small business which would be hit hardest. Those already struggling may be forced to lay off workers as costs become prohibitive.
Alberta has choices for public health care. A pointless $4.5 billion in subsidies were announced this year alone for oil and gas drilling, despite the fact the both conventional oil and conventional gas peaked in Alberta years ago. Also, according to government figures, Alberta is forgoing between $10 billion and $18 billion in tax revenues every year compared with other provinces. If there is anything that is not sustainable, it is the tax cuts and drilling subsidies.
Investment in health care and the province's health-care budget will need to increase as our population grows and ages. Polls show that Albertans want public health care, not tax cuts, but what they get is tax cuts and health-care cuts. A Nanos research poll showed that more than 55 per cent of Western Canadians support deficit financing and two-thirds say it is important "... that the government increase investment in public services like health care, social services, the justice system and education during a downturn." In addition, 71.1 per cent of participants favoured "government investing in health care, social services and education," compared with 19.9 per cent who wanted "government financial support for businesses in the automotive, forestry or mining industries."
David Eggen is executive director of Friends of Medicare and a former NDP MLA for Edmonton-Calder. Diana Gibson is research director of the University of Alberta's Parkland Institute
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Medicine Hat News
Albertans not happy with health changes, poll suggests
A recent provincial poll suggests Albertans do not support where the provincial health system is headed as government talks of more service cutbacks.Premier Ed Stelmach and Health Minister Ron Liepert said this week the province is reviewing what procedures they will continue to pay for and where there may be cuts. But poll results released by the Friends of Medicare (FOM) shows Albertans want their government to invest in public health care.The survey of 1,500 Albertans, released Wednesday, was conducted in February and March as part of FOM’s Canadian Health Coalition Campaign. Questions focused on topics such as delisting services, extra billing and the private delivery of public health services. The feedback was clear: Albertans want their public health system strengthened, not dismantled, says FOM executive director David Eggen.“It’s very timely right now with this delisting business and I wanted the government to look at the voice of the people in Alberta and hopefully put that into the mix when they’re making these big decisions they seem to be making right now,” he said of the report. It seems many decisions are coming out of central caucus, Eggen added.“Here is a specific voice from the people in Alberta, talking about what they want to see.”Asked how they felt about turning more public health-care services over to private, for-profit clinics and hospitals, 33.8 per cent of those surveyed opposed and 35.5 strongly opposed the move. Almost 70 per cent believe the growth of these clinics will take doctors, nurses and technologists out of public hospitals and increase wait times for most people. Many of those surveyed were also concerned government may have a hidden agenda for private, for-profit health care not being shared with Albertans.Almost 60 per cent of those surveyed oppose allowing private health clinics to charge patients directly for more services, such as doctor consultations, minor surgeries or other walk-in procedures.Seniors’ care was another concern for surveyed Albertans. About 80 per cent oppose replacing publicly operated nursing homes for seniors with more privately-owned, for-profit seniors facilities that provide lower levels of care. The results showed division over the replacement of regional health boards with one superboard. Almost 40 per cent support the move while almost 50 per cent oppose. The remaining 10 per cent did not respond.Almost half of all those surveyed agreed with the statement that the move to a single health board will mean less local control over health-care decisions in their area. More than 70 per cent agreed with the statement “the best way to shorten wait times and solve other major problems in health care is to improve our universal public health-care system, not replace it with a two tiered, American-style private approach.” Approximately 70 per cent said they were satisfied with the quality of health care available in the province.Asked what is the most important issue the Alberta government should be working on now, 35.7 per cent of surveyed Albertans said creating jobs and building a stronger economy. Improving public health care was second at 23.7 per cent, followed by avoiding debt and ensuring high quality, accessible education.The responses from Albertans were encouraging for the FOM to continue to defend our public health-care system, said Eggen.
A recent provincial poll suggests Albertans do not support where the provincial health system is headed as government talks of more service cutbacks.Premier Ed Stelmach and Health Minister Ron Liepert said this week the province is reviewing what procedures they will continue to pay for and where there may be cuts. But poll results released by the Friends of Medicare (FOM) shows Albertans want their government to invest in public health care.The survey of 1,500 Albertans, released Wednesday, was conducted in February and March as part of FOM’s Canadian Health Coalition Campaign. Questions focused on topics such as delisting services, extra billing and the private delivery of public health services. The feedback was clear: Albertans want their public health system strengthened, not dismantled, says FOM executive director David Eggen.“It’s very timely right now with this delisting business and I wanted the government to look at the voice of the people in Alberta and hopefully put that into the mix when they’re making these big decisions they seem to be making right now,” he said of the report. It seems many decisions are coming out of central caucus, Eggen added.“Here is a specific voice from the people in Alberta, talking about what they want to see.”Asked how they felt about turning more public health-care services over to private, for-profit clinics and hospitals, 33.8 per cent of those surveyed opposed and 35.5 strongly opposed the move. Almost 70 per cent believe the growth of these clinics will take doctors, nurses and technologists out of public hospitals and increase wait times for most people. Many of those surveyed were also concerned government may have a hidden agenda for private, for-profit health care not being shared with Albertans.Almost 60 per cent of those surveyed oppose allowing private health clinics to charge patients directly for more services, such as doctor consultations, minor surgeries or other walk-in procedures.Seniors’ care was another concern for surveyed Albertans. About 80 per cent oppose replacing publicly operated nursing homes for seniors with more privately-owned, for-profit seniors facilities that provide lower levels of care. The results showed division over the replacement of regional health boards with one superboard. Almost 40 per cent support the move while almost 50 per cent oppose. The remaining 10 per cent did not respond.Almost half of all those surveyed agreed with the statement that the move to a single health board will mean less local control over health-care decisions in their area. More than 70 per cent agreed with the statement “the best way to shorten wait times and solve other major problems in health care is to improve our universal public health-care system, not replace it with a two tiered, American-style private approach.” Approximately 70 per cent said they were satisfied with the quality of health care available in the province.Asked what is the most important issue the Alberta government should be working on now, 35.7 per cent of surveyed Albertans said creating jobs and building a stronger economy. Improving public health care was second at 23.7 per cent, followed by avoiding debt and ensuring high quality, accessible education.The responses from Albertans were encouraging for the FOM to continue to defend our public health-care system, said Eggen.
Albertans don't want health-care services reduced: poll
EDMONTON — Alberta Friends of Medicare say the results of a recent poll they commissioned show Albertans don’t want health-care services reduced or delisted.
Executive director David Eggen said Premier Ed Stelmach’s proposal to reduce health-care costs by ending coverage of some publicly insured medical procedures “flies in the face of what Albertans want,” according to a poll of Albertans earlier this spring.
“Albertans want their public-health system strengthened and not dismantled through delisting or privatization,” Eggen said Wednesday. “The public system is the most important social program that Albertans own.”
Premier Ed Stelmach said he hadn't had time to review the Friends of Medicare poll, but he is dedicated to building "efficiency (and) effectiveness in the health-care system."
Every year, health-care funding increases in connection to new drugs, new technologies, and new treatments, Stelmach said. "Our goal here is to ensure that it's sustainable for the next generation and the generation after that....We're going to keep working with Albertans to find a balance."
As the province evaluates what services need to be delisted, Stelmach said, "The minister will work with health-care professionals, people in the knowledge. This is something that we clearly articulated a year ago when we campaigned, when we said we're going to work with health-care providers to build efficiency and effectiveness in health care to be sustained into the future."
Stelmach shied away from discussing whether one cost-cutting measure could be changing the way nurses, for example, are paid in Alberta.
"Seventy-five per cent of costs in the system is paying for services, for people that deliver those services. We want to be fair with everybody and structure it so we work with all of the unions, all of the health-care providers," he said. "Everyone plans such a critical role in the hospital system.... Everyone is important in delivering the services. So the minister is charged with the responsibility of working with everybody."
Health Minister Ron Liepert stepped back from the delisting controversy Wednesday saying he is not about to get out an axe and start chopping.
"I have never said we're going to delist. What I am suggesting is that we have an expert panel take a look at what is covered, but also what could be covered or what shouldn't be covered in the future. It's more of a review around what should public health-care cover and what it shouldn't."
Liepert says he has asked Alberta Health to come up with a proposal that sets out what types of officials should sit on the panel. He said he would not be opposed to having out-of-province members on the review committee.
But advocates of public health care say the government has long had a program to reduce the list of insured services and force Albertans to purchase private insurance to cover some procedures.
Eggen says the poll released Tuesday shows that Albertans highly value the health-care system and are willing to fight to defend it.
“The public in Alberta is well educated in the consequences of these actions and they haven’t been afraid to voice their opinions before,” he said.
The poll found that 56.2 per cent of Albertans believe the government has a hidden agenda to privatize the health care system and 67.9 per cent believe delisting services will mean they will have to pay more out of their own pockets for health care.
Another 55.6 per cent said they believe some families won’t be able to pay for services and will have to do without services.
Other highlights of the poll include:
- 75 per cent of Albertans agree that the solution to the problems in health care is improving the current public system, not replacing it with a two-tiered American system.
- 80 per cent oppose the plan to replace publicly operated nursing homes for seniors with assisted living accommodation.
- 70 per cent oppose turning more public health services over to private, for-profit operations.
The poll by Winnipeg’s Viewpoints Research sampled 1,501 Albertans between Feb. 19 and March 8 and is considered accurate within plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, Eggen said.
Sample poll questions:
Q: To create a balance between maintaining universal health care and controlling skyrocketing costs, public medicare should cover the cost of basic, essential health services and people should buy private insurance to cover the cost of everything else.
Strongly agree: 3.6%
Agree: 29.7%
Disagree: 44.4%
Strongly disagree: 15.2%
Don't know / Refused: 7.0%
Q: Private for-profit clinics help those who can afford to pay. If private care increases, the public system will suffer and people like me will get worse care.
Strongly agree: 19.3%
Agree: 41.0%
Disagree: 30.6%
Strongly disagree: 4.9%
Don't know / Refused: 4.1%
dhenton@thejournal.canwest.com
EDMONTON — Alberta Friends of Medicare say the results of a recent poll they commissioned show Albertans don’t want health-care services reduced or delisted.
Executive director David Eggen said Premier Ed Stelmach’s proposal to reduce health-care costs by ending coverage of some publicly insured medical procedures “flies in the face of what Albertans want,” according to a poll of Albertans earlier this spring.
“Albertans want their public-health system strengthened and not dismantled through delisting or privatization,” Eggen said Wednesday. “The public system is the most important social program that Albertans own.”
Premier Ed Stelmach said he hadn't had time to review the Friends of Medicare poll, but he is dedicated to building "efficiency (and) effectiveness in the health-care system."
Every year, health-care funding increases in connection to new drugs, new technologies, and new treatments, Stelmach said. "Our goal here is to ensure that it's sustainable for the next generation and the generation after that....We're going to keep working with Albertans to find a balance."
As the province evaluates what services need to be delisted, Stelmach said, "The minister will work with health-care professionals, people in the knowledge. This is something that we clearly articulated a year ago when we campaigned, when we said we're going to work with health-care providers to build efficiency and effectiveness in health care to be sustained into the future."
Stelmach shied away from discussing whether one cost-cutting measure could be changing the way nurses, for example, are paid in Alberta.
"Seventy-five per cent of costs in the system is paying for services, for people that deliver those services. We want to be fair with everybody and structure it so we work with all of the unions, all of the health-care providers," he said. "Everyone plans such a critical role in the hospital system.... Everyone is important in delivering the services. So the minister is charged with the responsibility of working with everybody."
Health Minister Ron Liepert stepped back from the delisting controversy Wednesday saying he is not about to get out an axe and start chopping.
"I have never said we're going to delist. What I am suggesting is that we have an expert panel take a look at what is covered, but also what could be covered or what shouldn't be covered in the future. It's more of a review around what should public health-care cover and what it shouldn't."
Liepert says he has asked Alberta Health to come up with a proposal that sets out what types of officials should sit on the panel. He said he would not be opposed to having out-of-province members on the review committee.
But advocates of public health care say the government has long had a program to reduce the list of insured services and force Albertans to purchase private insurance to cover some procedures.
Eggen says the poll released Tuesday shows that Albertans highly value the health-care system and are willing to fight to defend it.
“The public in Alberta is well educated in the consequences of these actions and they haven’t been afraid to voice their opinions before,” he said.
The poll found that 56.2 per cent of Albertans believe the government has a hidden agenda to privatize the health care system and 67.9 per cent believe delisting services will mean they will have to pay more out of their own pockets for health care.
Another 55.6 per cent said they believe some families won’t be able to pay for services and will have to do without services.
Other highlights of the poll include:
- 75 per cent of Albertans agree that the solution to the problems in health care is improving the current public system, not replacing it with a two-tiered American system.
- 80 per cent oppose the plan to replace publicly operated nursing homes for seniors with assisted living accommodation.
- 70 per cent oppose turning more public health services over to private, for-profit operations.
The poll by Winnipeg’s Viewpoints Research sampled 1,501 Albertans between Feb. 19 and March 8 and is considered accurate within plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, Eggen said.
Sample poll questions:
Q: To create a balance between maintaining universal health care and controlling skyrocketing costs, public medicare should cover the cost of basic, essential health services and people should buy private insurance to cover the cost of everything else.
Strongly agree: 3.6%
Agree: 29.7%
Disagree: 44.4%
Strongly disagree: 15.2%
Don't know / Refused: 7.0%
Q: Private for-profit clinics help those who can afford to pay. If private care increases, the public system will suffer and people like me will get worse care.
Strongly agree: 19.3%
Agree: 41.0%
Disagree: 30.6%
Strongly disagree: 4.9%
Don't know / Refused: 4.1%
dhenton@thejournal.canwest.com
Ron Liepert is already taking flak.
Alberta's health minister had been musing that some tough decisions need to be made about which health-care services remain publicly funded and which should be picked up by private insurance plans.
Barely had the words left his mouth before the Friends of Medicare were putting out a petition calling on him "to cease and desist from further dismantling our public health-care structure."
Such dramatic responses aren't unexpected when a politician dares suggest the system needs changing.
But in fairness to Liepert, delisting services was just one of the measures he said his department is looking at during a wide-ranging discussion with the Sun's editorial board.
"In fact, there are some things you might want to add that actually save the system money," he said, pointing out the government has recently included services such as midwifery, which not only improves health outcomes for new moms, but cuts visits to emergency rooms and frees up much-needed hospital beds.
Other changes include health teams to cut the load on doctors and better utilizing pharmacists' skills.
"It's not going to be one thing you do that leads to efficiencies, it's going to be 100 things" he said.
But Liepert won't deny the notion of removing some services from public funding remains the most contentious of the changes.
"The goal is that the health-care system does cover the necessary essentials, but doesn't cover everything for everybody, but we've got some work to do yet to get there," he said.
"One of our difficulties over the years is no one has had the courage to take that on."
No longer. The government removed some services in last week's budget, the most high-profile of which were sex-change surgeries and chiropractic treatments.
Premier Ed Stelmach said yesterday others will be made public by the fall.
Liepert also mused about private insurance picking up the slack, which led Friends of Medicare Director David Eggen to accuse the Tories of "pursuing privatization for the sake of politics and ideology, not for better health outcomes and certainly not to save money."
But Liepert insists that with only a 6% increase to the Alberta Health Services budget this year compared to double digit hikes over the last decade, "we can no longer afford to cover everything we're covering."
Cuts aside, there's a need to fix the business model of health care to cope with the roller coaster ride of an economy based on oil and gas revenues, he said
"We should be devising a plan our grandchildren can afford. If we're going to allow ourselves to go up and down with the humps and the bumps, we're not going to devise a long-term sustainable health-care plan."
He got some back-up yesterday in a report released by the School of Public Policy at the U of C.
In The Fiscal Sustainability of Alberta's Public Health Care System, authors Livio and Rosanna Di Matteo point out that from 1975 to 2007, per capita health spending grew at almost double the rate of total government revenue growth.
It could climb as high as $14,215 by 2030 and consume as much as 86% of total government revenues.
"At some point, tough decisions will have to be made," the authors write, including choosing what other government programs can be allowed to grow more slowly, and what health programs can be privatized.
Liepert doesn't mince words.
"We need to make sure we have a clear understanding of what the public system is, fund it accordingly, make it the best in the world and I think it will work fine," Liepert said.
As much as his opponents don't even want to talk about it, this is a discussion Albertans who care about health care should welcome.
ROY.CLANCY@SUNMEDIA.CA
Alberta's health minister had been musing that some tough decisions need to be made about which health-care services remain publicly funded and which should be picked up by private insurance plans.
Barely had the words left his mouth before the Friends of Medicare were putting out a petition calling on him "to cease and desist from further dismantling our public health-care structure."
Such dramatic responses aren't unexpected when a politician dares suggest the system needs changing.
But in fairness to Liepert, delisting services was just one of the measures he said his department is looking at during a wide-ranging discussion with the Sun's editorial board.
"In fact, there are some things you might want to add that actually save the system money," he said, pointing out the government has recently included services such as midwifery, which not only improves health outcomes for new moms, but cuts visits to emergency rooms and frees up much-needed hospital beds.
Other changes include health teams to cut the load on doctors and better utilizing pharmacists' skills.
"It's not going to be one thing you do that leads to efficiencies, it's going to be 100 things" he said.
But Liepert won't deny the notion of removing some services from public funding remains the most contentious of the changes.
"The goal is that the health-care system does cover the necessary essentials, but doesn't cover everything for everybody, but we've got some work to do yet to get there," he said.
"One of our difficulties over the years is no one has had the courage to take that on."
No longer. The government removed some services in last week's budget, the most high-profile of which were sex-change surgeries and chiropractic treatments.
Premier Ed Stelmach said yesterday others will be made public by the fall.
Liepert also mused about private insurance picking up the slack, which led Friends of Medicare Director David Eggen to accuse the Tories of "pursuing privatization for the sake of politics and ideology, not for better health outcomes and certainly not to save money."
But Liepert insists that with only a 6% increase to the Alberta Health Services budget this year compared to double digit hikes over the last decade, "we can no longer afford to cover everything we're covering."
Cuts aside, there's a need to fix the business model of health care to cope with the roller coaster ride of an economy based on oil and gas revenues, he said
"We should be devising a plan our grandchildren can afford. If we're going to allow ourselves to go up and down with the humps and the bumps, we're not going to devise a long-term sustainable health-care plan."
He got some back-up yesterday in a report released by the School of Public Policy at the U of C.
In The Fiscal Sustainability of Alberta's Public Health Care System, authors Livio and Rosanna Di Matteo point out that from 1975 to 2007, per capita health spending grew at almost double the rate of total government revenue growth.
It could climb as high as $14,215 by 2030 and consume as much as 86% of total government revenues.
"At some point, tough decisions will have to be made," the authors write, including choosing what other government programs can be allowed to grow more slowly, and what health programs can be privatized.
Liepert doesn't mince words.
"We need to make sure we have a clear understanding of what the public system is, fund it accordingly, make it the best in the world and I think it will work fine," Liepert said.
As much as his opponents don't even want to talk about it, this is a discussion Albertans who care about health care should welcome.
ROY.CLANCY@SUNMEDIA.CA
Delisting of health back on agenda
Tories consider forming panel to look at cuts
By Renata D'Aliesio And Michelle Lang, Calgary Herald April 15, 2009 3:01 AM
In the strongest sign yet that the Alberta government could soon delist more medical services, Health Minister Ron Liepert said Tuesday the province is examining the creation of an expert panel to review what procedures the province will pay for--and what the public must shoulder.
One week after the province announced it would no longer pick up the tab for chiropractic care and sex change operations, both Liepert and Premier Ed Stelmach raised the prospect more non-essential services could be cut as soon as this fall.
Stelmach said his health minister will talk with Albertans and the new medical superboard about delisting services before cabinet makes a decision on any changes.
"Keep in mind that in a lot of the services that we offer, many of them are outside the Canada Health Act,"Stelmach told reporters at the legislature.
"I'm not saying that we have to look at all the services, but we're going to have to ensure that we preserve our public health-care system for the future."
Liepert said the Canada Health Act is not clear on what procedures the government must fund and the province is contemplating asking a group of experts to examine "what is medically necessary, what is essential, what needs to be covered, what doesn't need to be covered."
Pro-medicare groups and unions slammed talk of delisting services and the possibility of an expert panel, arguing the government is returning to the contentious Klein-era health reforms.
They noted former premier Ralph Klein established a panel following the 2002 Mazankowski report to review provincial coverage of services like podiatry.
"Mr. Liepert laid his cards on the table today," said Dave Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare.
"He wants to get away with as much as he can in terms of privatizing and delisting."
The United Nurses of Alberta said Stelmach should not delist any procedures, noting the Conservatives did not raise the possibility of health cuts during last year's provincial election.
"It's a huge betrayal of the public interest and trust," said Heather Smith, president of the nurses' union.
The debate comes one week after the province's$13-billion health budget announced Alberta slashed funding for two procedures.
Alberta Health is discontinuing subsidies for patients' chiropractic care, saving the provincial purse around $53 million annually, and won't continue funding gender reassignment surgeries, which cost government about $700,000 a year.
On Tuesday, about two dozen people went to the legislature to protest the decision on the sex change operations.
Opposition parties accused the Conservatives of discriminating against Alberta's transgendered population, but Liepert said the tight budget necessitated difficult decisions.
"There were some very tough decisions that had to be made, everything from cancelling some programs around youth suicide prevention to programs around certain surgeries," he said.
The possibility of delisting nonessential medical services has been discussed in Alberta for years.
A major review of the medical system, conducted by former deputy prime minister Don Mazankowski, recommended establishing an expert panel to review funding for services that aren't considered medically necessary.
In 2003, the advisory panel suggested reducing or eliminating funding in several areas.
The Klein government, however, did not follow through on the panel's recommendations.
The issue of delisting non-essential services resurfaced earlier this year when Employment Minister Hector Goudreau was quoted as saying government wants to delist about 30 services like podiatry.
On Tuesday, Liepert said he couldn't elaborate on the possibility of creating an expert panel because the idea is in the early stages.
Ultimately, Stelmach said cabinet, not the panel, will have the final say on any changes.
"The decision rests with cabinet and that's where we're going to show leadership," he said.
Calgary Liberal MLA Dave Taylor suggested government is raising the prospect of delisting medical services to scare Albertans and pave the way for tax increases.
But NDP Leader Brian Mason urged Albertans to take the Stelmach government's delisting talk seriously.
"They can cry poverty right now and say, 'We have to do it for financial reasons,' but in fact they've been wanting to do this for a long time," Mason said.
The health minister said his goal is to ensure the health care system is sustainable for the future.
While final figures won't be available until June, Liepert said Tuesday the health superboard's operating deficit for last year will be about $500 million -- about $200 million smaller than earlier estimates.
Alberta Health transferred about $200 million in operating funding to the superboard last year in addition to its regular budget. Government officials said the funds were to deal with cost pressures and insisted they were not for the projected deficit.
rdaliesio@theherald.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Tories consider forming panel to look at cuts
By Renata D'Aliesio And Michelle Lang, Calgary Herald April 15, 2009 3:01 AM
In the strongest sign yet that the Alberta government could soon delist more medical services, Health Minister Ron Liepert said Tuesday the province is examining the creation of an expert panel to review what procedures the province will pay for--and what the public must shoulder.
One week after the province announced it would no longer pick up the tab for chiropractic care and sex change operations, both Liepert and Premier Ed Stelmach raised the prospect more non-essential services could be cut as soon as this fall.
Stelmach said his health minister will talk with Albertans and the new medical superboard about delisting services before cabinet makes a decision on any changes.
"Keep in mind that in a lot of the services that we offer, many of them are outside the Canada Health Act,"Stelmach told reporters at the legislature.
"I'm not saying that we have to look at all the services, but we're going to have to ensure that we preserve our public health-care system for the future."
Liepert said the Canada Health Act is not clear on what procedures the government must fund and the province is contemplating asking a group of experts to examine "what is medically necessary, what is essential, what needs to be covered, what doesn't need to be covered."
Pro-medicare groups and unions slammed talk of delisting services and the possibility of an expert panel, arguing the government is returning to the contentious Klein-era health reforms.
They noted former premier Ralph Klein established a panel following the 2002 Mazankowski report to review provincial coverage of services like podiatry.
"Mr. Liepert laid his cards on the table today," said Dave Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare.
"He wants to get away with as much as he can in terms of privatizing and delisting."
The United Nurses of Alberta said Stelmach should not delist any procedures, noting the Conservatives did not raise the possibility of health cuts during last year's provincial election.
"It's a huge betrayal of the public interest and trust," said Heather Smith, president of the nurses' union.
The debate comes one week after the province's$13-billion health budget announced Alberta slashed funding for two procedures.
Alberta Health is discontinuing subsidies for patients' chiropractic care, saving the provincial purse around $53 million annually, and won't continue funding gender reassignment surgeries, which cost government about $700,000 a year.
On Tuesday, about two dozen people went to the legislature to protest the decision on the sex change operations.
Opposition parties accused the Conservatives of discriminating against Alberta's transgendered population, but Liepert said the tight budget necessitated difficult decisions.
"There were some very tough decisions that had to be made, everything from cancelling some programs around youth suicide prevention to programs around certain surgeries," he said.
The possibility of delisting nonessential medical services has been discussed in Alberta for years.
A major review of the medical system, conducted by former deputy prime minister Don Mazankowski, recommended establishing an expert panel to review funding for services that aren't considered medically necessary.
In 2003, the advisory panel suggested reducing or eliminating funding in several areas.
The Klein government, however, did not follow through on the panel's recommendations.
The issue of delisting non-essential services resurfaced earlier this year when Employment Minister Hector Goudreau was quoted as saying government wants to delist about 30 services like podiatry.
On Tuesday, Liepert said he couldn't elaborate on the possibility of creating an expert panel because the idea is in the early stages.
Ultimately, Stelmach said cabinet, not the panel, will have the final say on any changes.
"The decision rests with cabinet and that's where we're going to show leadership," he said.
Calgary Liberal MLA Dave Taylor suggested government is raising the prospect of delisting medical services to scare Albertans and pave the way for tax increases.
But NDP Leader Brian Mason urged Albertans to take the Stelmach government's delisting talk seriously.
"They can cry poverty right now and say, 'We have to do it for financial reasons,' but in fact they've been wanting to do this for a long time," Mason said.
The health minister said his goal is to ensure the health care system is sustainable for the future.
While final figures won't be available until June, Liepert said Tuesday the health superboard's operating deficit for last year will be about $500 million -- about $200 million smaller than earlier estimates.
Alberta Health transferred about $200 million in operating funding to the superboard last year in addition to its regular budget. Government officials said the funds were to deal with cost pressures and insisted they were not for the projected deficit.
rdaliesio@theherald.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Saturday, April 11, 2009
This has been annoying us for a long time
Medicare advocacy groups have in recent months noticed a sharp uptick in telephone calls from Canadians wondering why they are receiving so many bills from their family doctors. Letters inquiring if patients want to pay annual block fees for uninsured services are also appearing in mailboxes with greater frequency, further adding to people's confusion about just what is and isn't covered anymore under medicare.
“Here in Alberta, I'm getting calls quite regularly about clinics charging for sick notes and facility fees or bills to cover clerical things,” says David Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare in Alberta. “It's been an ongoing story in Alberta since early this summer. … Has the scope of insured fees narrowed so much that doctors have to make the extra up through other fees?”
A similar story has been unfolding in Ontario, where it's been estimated that more than 2 million letters asking for block fee payments have been sent to patients on behalf of about 1000 doctors.
“We've seen an increase in calls and complaints about it,” says Natalie Mehra, director of the Ontario Health Coalition. “The fees are exorbitant in some areas. People are getting letters out of the blue and don't understand it.”
Proponents of universal health care are concerned that the trend of doctors levying more fees on patients is not only causing confusion, but is making people hesitant to visit their doctors.
“In the spirit of medicare, which is supposed to be about not being charged at the point of access to medically necessary services, [these fees] are a real problem,” says Dr. Danielle Martin, chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare. “And there are more and more of them sprouting up, from the very minor to the very major.”
Some doctors, however, claim that Canadians have for too long been the beneficiaries of poorly run medical billing systems. Historically, physicians have been notoriously lax when it comes to billing patients for uninsured services, such as writing sick notes or completing fitness certificates. Increasingly, doctors are relinquishing this responsibility to companies that claim their billing services can increase annual physicians' incomes by as much as $20 000 while reducing their workloads by about 30 minutes a day.
Healthscreen Solutions Inc., a company that offers an uninsured billing service called CallerMD, has experienced tremendous growth in the past year. For the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2008, it reported revenues of $2.6 million, a 275% increase from the same quarter last year.
“We're talking $15 for most of these services,” says Dr. Bruce Rosenberg, vice-president of business development for Healthscreen Solutions Inc. “You hear people saying doctors are gouging their patients, but I don't see how that's gouging. I think that's a great bargain.”
Rosenberg, a family physician in St. Catharines, Ontario, claims that standardizing billing of uninsured services also benefits patients, because some doctors, freed from the burden of billing, have begun offering more uninsured services.
Practice Solutions Ltd., a subsidiary of the Canadian Medical Association, offers software products and a direct mail service for improving collection rates of uninsured services. Some 200 physicians have signed on for the company's block billing service since its inception in 2007.
“The block funding model is just a method of payment,” says Tim Smith, the company's vice-president. “It gives patients options. You can pay as you go or pay with an annual fee.”
But many Canadians, it seems, are none too pleased to be presented with this option. Patient advocacy groups report fielding far more complaints from people invited to pay an annual block fee than from those billed for individual services. Block fees are typically around $200 but vary from practice to practice, depending on the number of uninsured services offered. Rosenberg claims less than 10% of Healthscreen's patients opt to pay a block fee.
Still, some patient advocacy groups, such as the Ontario Health Coalition, want them banned.
“These amount to user fees, and the fees are not returned to people who don't use the services,” says Mehra. “Physicians are prohibited from extra billing, and this is just a loophole for them to pay for their overhead without proper tracking of usage. Patients are afraid not to pay because they think it will mean less access to their doctors.”
Other health care experts believe it's important to distinguish between fees for medically unnecessary services, such as the renewal of a prescription by telephone, and fees for services that may be uninsured but are nonetheless vital to the provision of medically necessary procedures.
Marie-Claude Prémont, an expert in health care law and a teacher at École Nationale d'Administration Publique in Montréal, Quebec, refers to the latter type as accessory fees. Some doctors, for example, require that patients pay to see a dietician before having a colonoscopy or charge a fee for cleaning colonoscopes.
These fees are the true barriers to accessible health care, says Ms. Prémont, not the ones for services that patients want but don't absolutely need. “There is no reason why the public should pay for your cosmetic surgery or if you need a check-up so you can go hiking in Tibet.”
Patients may be facing more fees in general because a shift from hospital-to community-based health care has occurred without a corresponding shift in how services are funded. Many medical procedures, such as knee and hip replacements, were once offered only in hospitals, where accessory services are covered by global budgets. Now they are increasingly being offered in clinics that only receive funding for insured services.
“We can't say to a physician that it's wrong to charge for an uninsured service,” says Martin, a family physician. “But we can't forget what the spirit of the public system is supposed to be about, which is when you show up in need of health care, you don't get asked to open your wallet. These things are nibbling away at the edges of that.” — Roger Collier, CMAJ
“Here in Alberta, I'm getting calls quite regularly about clinics charging for sick notes and facility fees or bills to cover clerical things,” says David Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare in Alberta. “It's been an ongoing story in Alberta since early this summer. … Has the scope of insured fees narrowed so much that doctors have to make the extra up through other fees?”
A similar story has been unfolding in Ontario, where it's been estimated that more than 2 million letters asking for block fee payments have been sent to patients on behalf of about 1000 doctors.
“We've seen an increase in calls and complaints about it,” says Natalie Mehra, director of the Ontario Health Coalition. “The fees are exorbitant in some areas. People are getting letters out of the blue and don't understand it.”
Proponents of universal health care are concerned that the trend of doctors levying more fees on patients is not only causing confusion, but is making people hesitant to visit their doctors.
“In the spirit of medicare, which is supposed to be about not being charged at the point of access to medically necessary services, [these fees] are a real problem,” says Dr. Danielle Martin, chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare. “And there are more and more of them sprouting up, from the very minor to the very major.”
Some doctors, however, claim that Canadians have for too long been the beneficiaries of poorly run medical billing systems. Historically, physicians have been notoriously lax when it comes to billing patients for uninsured services, such as writing sick notes or completing fitness certificates. Increasingly, doctors are relinquishing this responsibility to companies that claim their billing services can increase annual physicians' incomes by as much as $20 000 while reducing their workloads by about 30 minutes a day.
Healthscreen Solutions Inc., a company that offers an uninsured billing service called CallerMD, has experienced tremendous growth in the past year. For the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2008, it reported revenues of $2.6 million, a 275% increase from the same quarter last year.
“We're talking $15 for most of these services,” says Dr. Bruce Rosenberg, vice-president of business development for Healthscreen Solutions Inc. “You hear people saying doctors are gouging their patients, but I don't see how that's gouging. I think that's a great bargain.”
Rosenberg, a family physician in St. Catharines, Ontario, claims that standardizing billing of uninsured services also benefits patients, because some doctors, freed from the burden of billing, have begun offering more uninsured services.
Practice Solutions Ltd., a subsidiary of the Canadian Medical Association, offers software products and a direct mail service for improving collection rates of uninsured services. Some 200 physicians have signed on for the company's block billing service since its inception in 2007.
“The block funding model is just a method of payment,” says Tim Smith, the company's vice-president. “It gives patients options. You can pay as you go or pay with an annual fee.”
But many Canadians, it seems, are none too pleased to be presented with this option. Patient advocacy groups report fielding far more complaints from people invited to pay an annual block fee than from those billed for individual services. Block fees are typically around $200 but vary from practice to practice, depending on the number of uninsured services offered. Rosenberg claims less than 10% of Healthscreen's patients opt to pay a block fee.
Still, some patient advocacy groups, such as the Ontario Health Coalition, want them banned.
“These amount to user fees, and the fees are not returned to people who don't use the services,” says Mehra. “Physicians are prohibited from extra billing, and this is just a loophole for them to pay for their overhead without proper tracking of usage. Patients are afraid not to pay because they think it will mean less access to their doctors.”
Other health care experts believe it's important to distinguish between fees for medically unnecessary services, such as the renewal of a prescription by telephone, and fees for services that may be uninsured but are nonetheless vital to the provision of medically necessary procedures.
Marie-Claude Prémont, an expert in health care law and a teacher at École Nationale d'Administration Publique in Montréal, Quebec, refers to the latter type as accessory fees. Some doctors, for example, require that patients pay to see a dietician before having a colonoscopy or charge a fee for cleaning colonoscopes.
These fees are the true barriers to accessible health care, says Ms. Prémont, not the ones for services that patients want but don't absolutely need. “There is no reason why the public should pay for your cosmetic surgery or if you need a check-up so you can go hiking in Tibet.”
Patients may be facing more fees in general because a shift from hospital-to community-based health care has occurred without a corresponding shift in how services are funded. Many medical procedures, such as knee and hip replacements, were once offered only in hospitals, where accessory services are covered by global budgets. Now they are increasingly being offered in clinics that only receive funding for insured services.
“We can't say to a physician that it's wrong to charge for an uninsured service,” says Martin, a family physician. “But we can't forget what the spirit of the public system is supposed to be about, which is when you show up in need of health care, you don't get asked to open your wallet. These things are nibbling away at the edges of that.” — Roger Collier, CMAJ
Alberta's super expensive super health board
Despite restructuring, costs are up and wait times longer
Dateline: Monday, April 06, 2009
by Gillian Steward
You really have to wonder about people who give themselves a 20 per cent raise when the organization they run is $1.7 billion short of what it needs to balance the books. That is indeed what the directors of the new Alberta Health Services Board, otherwise known as the super board, did on March 25.
They must have taken lessons in arrogance from the executives at AIG, the American insurance behemoth that imploded from its own greed, took billions in taxpayers' money and then paid out exorbitant bonuses and perks to executives.
How else could the members of the super board come to believe that they are entitled to earn $50,000 a year, as well as $750 for each meeting they attend? Their chairman, Ken Hughes, earns $75,000 annually and $1,000 per meeting.
Most of these men and women have well-paying day jobs in the business sector. If they don't want to advise a publicly funded health entity for a reasonable fee they should look elsewhere for pocket money. Perhaps they could join the board of EnCana or Nexen.
Few of the 15 people appointed to the super board have experience in providing front-line health care. One lives in New Jersey and earns a living consulting for private health-care providers.
It was almost a year ago that Premier Ed Stelmach's government decided to dismantle the nine regional health authorities in Alberta and replace their administrative functions with the super board. The new board is nested in the provincial government's Health and Wellness ministry, which is run by eagle-eyed Calgary MLA Ron Liepert, and it's responsible for everything from hospitals to diagnostic services to physicians in every corner of the province.
Yet another re-organization in the health-care sector, we were told, would create all kinds of efficiencies that would result in better care for patients at a more reasonable cost. However, most of the 15 people appointed to the super board aren't that experienced when it comes to providing front-line health care. One of the members lives in New Jersey and earns a living consulting for private health-care providers. The member from Red Deer is a home builder and land developer. Another member is the past president of the TSX Venture Exchange. Hughes, the chairman, is president of Alpine Insurance and Financial Inc. He was the Tory MP for High River during the Mulroney days, so he also receives a pension for his five years in office.
You can find the entire list of members on the Alberta Health and Wellness website. Believe me, reading all the details will only raise more questions about why these people were chosen and why they deserve to be paid at least $50,000 a year for their advice.
Jim Dinning was a volunteer chair of the Calgary Health Region. He didn't get paid at all for the hours and hours he put in. His employer, TransAlta, was happy to subsidize his time away from the office.
The Alberta Conservatives have long believed that a business model needs to be applied to our public health-care system. They try over and over again. However, managing a complex health care system is simply not the same as running a business.
Remember when Bud McCaig, a legend in the Calgary business community, moved into the chair in the early days of the Calgary Health Region? He tried to centralize all health-care decision-making and services at the Foothills Medical Centre (FMC). The other hospitals (the ones that were left after the rest were either blown up or closed) were turned into factory-like branch plants that took their orders from FMC.
The policy didn't work, because hospitals are not like factories. They require on-site decision-makers capable of creating a community of caregivers who focus on patients, not the demands of head office.
Now it seems the province is trying to apply this model to the whole province: one head office run by insulated and well-paid business types who will direct the operations of hundreds of branch plant operations throughout Alberta.
Is it really any surprise that while the board has spent a year organizing itself — hiring a new executive director from Australia, approving large severance packages for the preceding board, studying fancy charts, spending $80 million on the province-wide merger — health care in Calgary is now actually harder to come by?
According to the Calgary Herald, the super board's own figures show 50 per cent more local patients are waiting for placement in long-term care compared with last spring. At the same time, waiting lists for surgery in Calgary have grown about 18 per cent in the past year and a half. And the number of patients sleeping in hospital hallways because of bed shortages increased about 23 per cent from last year.
The Herald also reports that Calgary hospital emergency wait times were 30 per cent longer in February compared with the same month last year. Emergency patients now face a median 16.6-hour wait to be transferred to a hospital room.
In addition, the super board has discovered that operating and capital deficits from the health regions have ballooned to $1.7 billion. They gave themselves a raise anyway. That will no doubt provide great comfort to all the people waiting in emergency for 16 hours, and all the health-care workers desperately trying to look after them.
Gillian Steward is a Calgary writer and journalist, and former managing editor of the Calgary Herald.
Despite restructuring, costs are up and wait times longer
Dateline: Monday, April 06, 2009
by Gillian Steward
You really have to wonder about people who give themselves a 20 per cent raise when the organization they run is $1.7 billion short of what it needs to balance the books. That is indeed what the directors of the new Alberta Health Services Board, otherwise known as the super board, did on March 25.
They must have taken lessons in arrogance from the executives at AIG, the American insurance behemoth that imploded from its own greed, took billions in taxpayers' money and then paid out exorbitant bonuses and perks to executives.
How else could the members of the super board come to believe that they are entitled to earn $50,000 a year, as well as $750 for each meeting they attend? Their chairman, Ken Hughes, earns $75,000 annually and $1,000 per meeting.
Most of these men and women have well-paying day jobs in the business sector. If they don't want to advise a publicly funded health entity for a reasonable fee they should look elsewhere for pocket money. Perhaps they could join the board of EnCana or Nexen.
Few of the 15 people appointed to the super board have experience in providing front-line health care. One lives in New Jersey and earns a living consulting for private health-care providers.
It was almost a year ago that Premier Ed Stelmach's government decided to dismantle the nine regional health authorities in Alberta and replace their administrative functions with the super board. The new board is nested in the provincial government's Health and Wellness ministry, which is run by eagle-eyed Calgary MLA Ron Liepert, and it's responsible for everything from hospitals to diagnostic services to physicians in every corner of the province.
Yet another re-organization in the health-care sector, we were told, would create all kinds of efficiencies that would result in better care for patients at a more reasonable cost. However, most of the 15 people appointed to the super board aren't that experienced when it comes to providing front-line health care. One of the members lives in New Jersey and earns a living consulting for private health-care providers. The member from Red Deer is a home builder and land developer. Another member is the past president of the TSX Venture Exchange. Hughes, the chairman, is president of Alpine Insurance and Financial Inc. He was the Tory MP for High River during the Mulroney days, so he also receives a pension for his five years in office.
You can find the entire list of members on the Alberta Health and Wellness website. Believe me, reading all the details will only raise more questions about why these people were chosen and why they deserve to be paid at least $50,000 a year for their advice.
Jim Dinning was a volunteer chair of the Calgary Health Region. He didn't get paid at all for the hours and hours he put in. His employer, TransAlta, was happy to subsidize his time away from the office.
The Alberta Conservatives have long believed that a business model needs to be applied to our public health-care system. They try over and over again. However, managing a complex health care system is simply not the same as running a business.
Remember when Bud McCaig, a legend in the Calgary business community, moved into the chair in the early days of the Calgary Health Region? He tried to centralize all health-care decision-making and services at the Foothills Medical Centre (FMC). The other hospitals (the ones that were left after the rest were either blown up or closed) were turned into factory-like branch plants that took their orders from FMC.
The policy didn't work, because hospitals are not like factories. They require on-site decision-makers capable of creating a community of caregivers who focus on patients, not the demands of head office.
Now it seems the province is trying to apply this model to the whole province: one head office run by insulated and well-paid business types who will direct the operations of hundreds of branch plant operations throughout Alberta.
Is it really any surprise that while the board has spent a year organizing itself — hiring a new executive director from Australia, approving large severance packages for the preceding board, studying fancy charts, spending $80 million on the province-wide merger — health care in Calgary is now actually harder to come by?
According to the Calgary Herald, the super board's own figures show 50 per cent more local patients are waiting for placement in long-term care compared with last spring. At the same time, waiting lists for surgery in Calgary have grown about 18 per cent in the past year and a half. And the number of patients sleeping in hospital hallways because of bed shortages increased about 23 per cent from last year.
The Herald also reports that Calgary hospital emergency wait times were 30 per cent longer in February compared with the same month last year. Emergency patients now face a median 16.6-hour wait to be transferred to a hospital room.
In addition, the super board has discovered that operating and capital deficits from the health regions have ballooned to $1.7 billion. They gave themselves a raise anyway. That will no doubt provide great comfort to all the people waiting in emergency for 16 hours, and all the health-care workers desperately trying to look after them.
Gillian Steward is a Calgary writer and journalist, and former managing editor of the Calgary Herald.
They are shutting down our hospitals
Hospital expansion shelved
Health Minister Ron Liepert confirmed Wednesday that Medicine Hat Regional Hospital will not be expanding as planned.In a press conference one day after the release of the provincial budget, Liepert addressed some specific capital projects that have been in limbo while control of the province’s health-care system transitioned from the former regional health authorities to Alberta Health Services (AHS). He said findings from the 15-week service optimization review of all health service delivery in the province (completed by McKinsey and Co. in late 2008) did not mesh with “earlier desires that were put in place” for the Medicine Hat Regional Hospital expansion project. “Medicine Hat was one of the communities that McKinsey really asked some strong questions about, relative to the model that was being proposed,” said Liepert.Liepert committed to meeting with Medicine Hat MLAs and community leaders within the next 30 days to make a plan for the next step. The $280 million previously set aside for the project remains, but it could be closer to five years, rather than three, before the government may be in a position to flow the funding forward, he explained. The province has allocated $10 million for the new phase of initial planning, Liepert added.“I’ve got to tell you that just because something was proposed several years ago, it doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re bound to that into the future,” he said. “I’m not going to be known 20 years down the road as the guy that just simply built hospitals, I’m going to make sure that what we’re building is the right stuff.”The comments were devastating to former Palliser Health Region board chair Carol Secondiak, who spent years fighting for the project.“It’s been planned and planned and planned to death. But when times were good, we got nothing. Now it’s bad and we still get nothing,” said Secondiak. “That was my point and my board’s point from the beginning.”Meanwhile, the former long-term care building has been unoccupied for five years because the ambulatory care tower was to be in its place. Secondiak says so much money has been spent planning and reviewing the project, which government previously listed as a priority. It is unclear how the status changed.Mayor Norm Boucher says with the decrease in construction costs, now is the time to move forward with the hospital expansion. And with the growth of our community — not to mention Brooks mothers who have to come to Medicine Hat to deliver their babies — an increase in facility space and specialized treatments is becoming more pressing. Part of the proposed expansion project is the possibility of a detox centre, a facility Medicine Hat remains one of the only Alberta communities of this size to go without, he noted.While Liepert said municipalities are responsible for recruiting physicians to their areas, Boucher says municipalities need facilities — or future facilities — to make them attractive.“I can sell until I am blue in the face that Medicine Hat has quality of life that is unmatched in all of Alberta but I can’t help them on the health side, this falls under the provincial government,” said Boucher.Physicians considering setting up family practices in Medicine Hat may choose another community because they see more potential when there is development and plans underway.Medicine Hat MLA Rob Renner says Liepert has given his assurance there will be final determinations made on what is within scopes for the hospital project within 60 days.“That’s encouraging because then we’ll have a much better idea on exactly where Alberta Health Services stands with respect to this project,” said Renner.If they are to proceed with detailed planning, everyone should be in agreement with what the final product will look like and what services will be required, he added.Liepert also confirmed Wednesday the Bow Island Hospital remains under review to determine what services should be available in the future. Asked for a timeline for when details on these findings would be announced, Liepert said AHS has much on their plate but hope to do so as quickly as possible.Palliser Friends of Medicare (FOM) president Jan Bunney has heard government plans to offer limited services and serve as a transfer point for high-needs patients being transferred between facilities.Secondiak called it the “beginning of the end for small hospitals”.Cypress-Medicine Hat MLA Len Mitzel did not return calls Wednesday
Health Minister Ron Liepert confirmed Wednesday that Medicine Hat Regional Hospital will not be expanding as planned.In a press conference one day after the release of the provincial budget, Liepert addressed some specific capital projects that have been in limbo while control of the province’s health-care system transitioned from the former regional health authorities to Alberta Health Services (AHS). He said findings from the 15-week service optimization review of all health service delivery in the province (completed by McKinsey and Co. in late 2008) did not mesh with “earlier desires that were put in place” for the Medicine Hat Regional Hospital expansion project. “Medicine Hat was one of the communities that McKinsey really asked some strong questions about, relative to the model that was being proposed,” said Liepert.Liepert committed to meeting with Medicine Hat MLAs and community leaders within the next 30 days to make a plan for the next step. The $280 million previously set aside for the project remains, but it could be closer to five years, rather than three, before the government may be in a position to flow the funding forward, he explained. The province has allocated $10 million for the new phase of initial planning, Liepert added.“I’ve got to tell you that just because something was proposed several years ago, it doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re bound to that into the future,” he said. “I’m not going to be known 20 years down the road as the guy that just simply built hospitals, I’m going to make sure that what we’re building is the right stuff.”The comments were devastating to former Palliser Health Region board chair Carol Secondiak, who spent years fighting for the project.“It’s been planned and planned and planned to death. But when times were good, we got nothing. Now it’s bad and we still get nothing,” said Secondiak. “That was my point and my board’s point from the beginning.”Meanwhile, the former long-term care building has been unoccupied for five years because the ambulatory care tower was to be in its place. Secondiak says so much money has been spent planning and reviewing the project, which government previously listed as a priority. It is unclear how the status changed.Mayor Norm Boucher says with the decrease in construction costs, now is the time to move forward with the hospital expansion. And with the growth of our community — not to mention Brooks mothers who have to come to Medicine Hat to deliver their babies — an increase in facility space and specialized treatments is becoming more pressing. Part of the proposed expansion project is the possibility of a detox centre, a facility Medicine Hat remains one of the only Alberta communities of this size to go without, he noted.While Liepert said municipalities are responsible for recruiting physicians to their areas, Boucher says municipalities need facilities — or future facilities — to make them attractive.“I can sell until I am blue in the face that Medicine Hat has quality of life that is unmatched in all of Alberta but I can’t help them on the health side, this falls under the provincial government,” said Boucher.Physicians considering setting up family practices in Medicine Hat may choose another community because they see more potential when there is development and plans underway.Medicine Hat MLA Rob Renner says Liepert has given his assurance there will be final determinations made on what is within scopes for the hospital project within 60 days.“That’s encouraging because then we’ll have a much better idea on exactly where Alberta Health Services stands with respect to this project,” said Renner.If they are to proceed with detailed planning, everyone should be in agreement with what the final product will look like and what services will be required, he added.Liepert also confirmed Wednesday the Bow Island Hospital remains under review to determine what services should be available in the future. Asked for a timeline for when details on these findings would be announced, Liepert said AHS has much on their plate but hope to do so as quickly as possible.Palliser Friends of Medicare (FOM) president Jan Bunney has heard government plans to offer limited services and serve as a transfer point for high-needs patients being transferred between facilities.Secondiak called it the “beginning of the end for small hospitals”.Cypress-Medicine Hat MLA Len Mitzel did not return calls Wednesday
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Fight for your hospital
Chiropractic cut from coverage
Sex-change surgery also delisted to put a combined $42 million toward seniors' home care, Liepert says
By Jodie Sinnema, The Edmonton JournalApril 8, 2009
Albertans will no longer be able to claim chiropractic care starting this summer, after the government delisted chiropractor services from its provincial health plan.
The cut, which will save approximately $53 million, will mean patients will be out up to $200 each year.
The province also cut coverage for gender reassignment surgery or sex-change operations, a move that will save $700,000, leaving about 20 patients each year on the hook for procedures that cost anywhere between $18,000 and $70,000.
"We want to ensure that we look after the most vulnerable in society and at the same time we have the cost pressures of what we can afford and what we can't afford, and so some tough decisions have to be made," Health Minister Ron Liepert said.
He said he had to find $42 million to boost home-care for seniors, and the cuts to chiropractic care and for sex changes was the solution. "This is not about whether the service is a required service or a desired service. This is about making tough choices in the budget. We can't cover everything."
Chiropractors knew the cut was being discussed, but have no plans to lobby the government to change its decision.
"We're a little disappointed, obviously," said Dr. Clark Mills, president of the Alberta College and Association of Chiropractors. "We're confident Albertans value chiropractic and its benefits."
"I think it is now in the hands of Albertans," Mills said. "If it is something they wanted embedded in health care, they will have to make that case."
Mills said delisting chiropractic service seems to be the trend in Canada, with both B.C. and Ontario making similar decisions in the past. Those provinces saw an initial drop in patients turning to chiropractors, but that turned around quickly. Quebec and the Atlantic provinces offer no coverage.
Mills said he suspects seniors and people with low incomes might cancel appointments. He imagines they might return for care once third-party insurance companies offer more coverage.
NDP Leader Brian Mason said the chiropractic cut may end up costing government more in the long run.
"I think very often that kind of care keeps people out of the health-care system and saves money," Mason said. "I think that's unfortunate."
Alberta Health and Wellness is also pinching money for capital projects, spending $386 million less than last year to upgrade hospitals and continue construction already started. That will force Alberta Health Services to spend $1.5 billion it has sitting in capital reserves, already tied to specific projects.
Even so, the new health superboard is deferring several projects for at least three years, including one to expand the pediatric emergency room at the Stollery Children's Hospital and a long-term care facility in Fort McMurray.
Several other large projects, including the much-anticipated $250-million hospital in Grande Prairie and an $88-million health centre in Sherwood Park, are being reviewed to see if they need to be trimmed back. There is no time frame on when those decisions will be made, but Liepert said he has committed to meeting with MLAs and representatives from the affected communities in the next 30 days to discuss how to proceed.
David Eggen, executive director for Friends of Medicare, said he has a hard time believing that hospitals in Grande Prairie and Medicine Hat will go forward when previous promises never came through. Funding was first promised for the Grande Prairie hospital in the 2007 budget, but the community is still waiting for the money.
"Eventually, you're going to be reducing your quality of health in those centres," Eggen said. "This is a good time to build infrastructure."
No new projects are being funded, leaving the Cross Cancer Institute and the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in Calgary with thousands of new cancer patients each year and a hiring freeze on oncologists.
"That's a serious omission because cancer patients are struggling today on many fronts," Swann said. "It has to be a priority. That's a sine qua non (an essential element) of a good health system that we can care for the most ill, the mothers and babies at one end and cancer patients on the other end. We have to be able to fund those things."
Overall, health maintained its top spot for government spending despite some belt-tightening, taking 42 per cent of the entire budget. Health's operating budget sits at $12.6 billion, an increase of 4.6 per cent from last year. Alberta Health Services will receive $7.7 billion for operations, although the government still doesn't know how deep in deficit the health superboard sits.
Previous estimates put the operating deficit at $700 million.
"Today's announcement underscores the fact that we can't afford to pretend it's going to be business as usual," said Stephen Duckett in a news release, the new president and CEO of the health board.
jsinnema@thejournal.canwest.com
Sex-change surgery also delisted to put a combined $42 million toward seniors' home care, Liepert says
By Jodie Sinnema, The Edmonton JournalApril 8, 2009
Albertans will no longer be able to claim chiropractic care starting this summer, after the government delisted chiropractor services from its provincial health plan.
The cut, which will save approximately $53 million, will mean patients will be out up to $200 each year.
The province also cut coverage for gender reassignment surgery or sex-change operations, a move that will save $700,000, leaving about 20 patients each year on the hook for procedures that cost anywhere between $18,000 and $70,000.
"We want to ensure that we look after the most vulnerable in society and at the same time we have the cost pressures of what we can afford and what we can't afford, and so some tough decisions have to be made," Health Minister Ron Liepert said.
He said he had to find $42 million to boost home-care for seniors, and the cuts to chiropractic care and for sex changes was the solution. "This is not about whether the service is a required service or a desired service. This is about making tough choices in the budget. We can't cover everything."
Chiropractors knew the cut was being discussed, but have no plans to lobby the government to change its decision.
"We're a little disappointed, obviously," said Dr. Clark Mills, president of the Alberta College and Association of Chiropractors. "We're confident Albertans value chiropractic and its benefits."
"I think it is now in the hands of Albertans," Mills said. "If it is something they wanted embedded in health care, they will have to make that case."
Mills said delisting chiropractic service seems to be the trend in Canada, with both B.C. and Ontario making similar decisions in the past. Those provinces saw an initial drop in patients turning to chiropractors, but that turned around quickly. Quebec and the Atlantic provinces offer no coverage.
Mills said he suspects seniors and people with low incomes might cancel appointments. He imagines they might return for care once third-party insurance companies offer more coverage.
NDP Leader Brian Mason said the chiropractic cut may end up costing government more in the long run.
"I think very often that kind of care keeps people out of the health-care system and saves money," Mason said. "I think that's unfortunate."
Alberta Health and Wellness is also pinching money for capital projects, spending $386 million less than last year to upgrade hospitals and continue construction already started. That will force Alberta Health Services to spend $1.5 billion it has sitting in capital reserves, already tied to specific projects.
Even so, the new health superboard is deferring several projects for at least three years, including one to expand the pediatric emergency room at the Stollery Children's Hospital and a long-term care facility in Fort McMurray.
Several other large projects, including the much-anticipated $250-million hospital in Grande Prairie and an $88-million health centre in Sherwood Park, are being reviewed to see if they need to be trimmed back. There is no time frame on when those decisions will be made, but Liepert said he has committed to meeting with MLAs and representatives from the affected communities in the next 30 days to discuss how to proceed.
David Eggen, executive director for Friends of Medicare, said he has a hard time believing that hospitals in Grande Prairie and Medicine Hat will go forward when previous promises never came through. Funding was first promised for the Grande Prairie hospital in the 2007 budget, but the community is still waiting for the money.
"Eventually, you're going to be reducing your quality of health in those centres," Eggen said. "This is a good time to build infrastructure."
No new projects are being funded, leaving the Cross Cancer Institute and the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in Calgary with thousands of new cancer patients each year and a hiring freeze on oncologists.
"That's a serious omission because cancer patients are struggling today on many fronts," Swann said. "It has to be a priority. That's a sine qua non (an essential element) of a good health system that we can care for the most ill, the mothers and babies at one end and cancer patients on the other end. We have to be able to fund those things."
Overall, health maintained its top spot for government spending despite some belt-tightening, taking 42 per cent of the entire budget. Health's operating budget sits at $12.6 billion, an increase of 4.6 per cent from last year. Alberta Health Services will receive $7.7 billion for operations, although the government still doesn't know how deep in deficit the health superboard sits.
Previous estimates put the operating deficit at $700 million.
"Today's announcement underscores the fact that we can't afford to pretend it's going to be business as usual," said Stephen Duckett in a news release, the new president and CEO of the health board.
jsinnema@thejournal.canwest.com
radio news
Mixed reaction to the new budget from Health & Education groups CHQR Newsroom 4/8/2009 The Alberta School Boards Association is giving the budget a mediocre grade. President Heather Wellwood says there are positives in the operational grants given to school boards, and negatives with the remaining backlog of needed schools and repairs to existing facilities. Wellwood says she understands why the Province isn't putting too much into capital expenses, but she says the need for new facilities still exists.Friends of Medicare calls the budget a tight document. Spokesman David Eggen says he'll be watching how funding for health care will be executed, adding the Government can't put health care on the back burner. Eggen says the Province needs to make health care a priority at all times -- good and bad.
Tories delay major health projects
By Michelle Lang, Calgary HeraldApril 8, 2009 8:02 AM
Alberta's colossal $13-billion health budget provides a modest increase in program spending this year, but postpones several big-ticket construction projects that critics maintain are needed to bolster a stressed medical system.
Alberta Health's capital plan, contained in Tuesday's provincial budget, contained no new projects and delayed eight planned initiatives, including several new nursing homes, a north Calgary diagnostic clinic and Edmonton hospital upgrades.
While total health spending -- including capital grants and day-to-day expenses -- will remain at about $12.9 billion this year, the operating budget will grow 4.6 per cent over last year.
The budget for the new provincial superboard, which manages the province's medical system, will increase to $7.7 billion from $7.16 billion last year.
Medical groups, however, worry it won't be enough to fix delays in Calgary emergency rooms, where wait times have been growing in recent months.
"It's not a large increase, so we are going to be faced in health care with some difficult decisions," said Dr. Linda Slocombe, president of the Calgary and Area Physicians' Association.
The superboard said it will review the budget before providing comment, although a statement from the organization noted health-care spending increased by an average of 10 per cent annually during the past five years.This year's budget gives Alberta Health Services about a seven per cent increase.
"Today's announcement underscores the fact that we can't afford to pretend it's going to be business as usual,"said Stephen Duckett, chief executive of the superboard, which was facing an operating and capital deficit of about $1.3 billion for the last fiscal year. "We have a responsibility to manage within our resources."
Tuesday's budget boosts funding for cancer therapy drugs by 20 per cent, while providing $41 million for the government's new continuing care strategy, including more home care money.
"We have a budget that takes care of those who are our high-est priority,"said Health Minister Ron Liepert.
But the capital plan for health defers a variety of projects around the province, from the Barrhead health centre to long-term care facilities in Didsbury, Lacombe and Fort McMurray.
The plan indicates Calgary's $1.4-billion south hospital is on track, but a new diagnostic and treatment centre for the city is being deferred.
Three projects in Edmonton, including a pediatric emergency room expansion project, are also being postponed.
Liepert said the deferrals and reviews are necessary to align facilities with his health reforms and because of construction cost overruns.
But groups like Friends of Medicare said the projects could have provided much-needed economic stimulus.
"Now is the time to build those facilities," said Dave Eggen, executive director of the lobby group.
Opposition parties complained the budget provided little clarity on the super-board's complex finances.
Budget documents said Alberta Health Services has about$1.5 billion that it has not yet spent on capital projects. The superboard has previously suggested it's facing a capital deficit.
"Are we getting value for our spending?" asked Dr. David Swann, the Alberta Liberal Leader. "We've never had the books opened to us."
Alberta Health Services' audited financial statements are expected to be made public in June.
mlang@theherald.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Alberta's colossal $13-billion health budget provides a modest increase in program spending this year, but postpones several big-ticket construction projects that critics maintain are needed to bolster a stressed medical system.
Alberta Health's capital plan, contained in Tuesday's provincial budget, contained no new projects and delayed eight planned initiatives, including several new nursing homes, a north Calgary diagnostic clinic and Edmonton hospital upgrades.
While total health spending -- including capital grants and day-to-day expenses -- will remain at about $12.9 billion this year, the operating budget will grow 4.6 per cent over last year.
The budget for the new provincial superboard, which manages the province's medical system, will increase to $7.7 billion from $7.16 billion last year.
Medical groups, however, worry it won't be enough to fix delays in Calgary emergency rooms, where wait times have been growing in recent months.
"It's not a large increase, so we are going to be faced in health care with some difficult decisions," said Dr. Linda Slocombe, president of the Calgary and Area Physicians' Association.
The superboard said it will review the budget before providing comment, although a statement from the organization noted health-care spending increased by an average of 10 per cent annually during the past five years.This year's budget gives Alberta Health Services about a seven per cent increase.
"Today's announcement underscores the fact that we can't afford to pretend it's going to be business as usual,"said Stephen Duckett, chief executive of the superboard, which was facing an operating and capital deficit of about $1.3 billion for the last fiscal year. "We have a responsibility to manage within our resources."
Tuesday's budget boosts funding for cancer therapy drugs by 20 per cent, while providing $41 million for the government's new continuing care strategy, including more home care money.
"We have a budget that takes care of those who are our high-est priority,"said Health Minister Ron Liepert.
But the capital plan for health defers a variety of projects around the province, from the Barrhead health centre to long-term care facilities in Didsbury, Lacombe and Fort McMurray.
The plan indicates Calgary's $1.4-billion south hospital is on track, but a new diagnostic and treatment centre for the city is being deferred.
Three projects in Edmonton, including a pediatric emergency room expansion project, are also being postponed.
Liepert said the deferrals and reviews are necessary to align facilities with his health reforms and because of construction cost overruns.
But groups like Friends of Medicare said the projects could have provided much-needed economic stimulus.
"Now is the time to build those facilities," said Dave Eggen, executive director of the lobby group.
Opposition parties complained the budget provided little clarity on the super-board's complex finances.
Budget documents said Alberta Health Services has about$1.5 billion that it has not yet spent on capital projects. The superboard has previously suggested it's facing a capital deficit.
"Are we getting value for our spending?" asked Dr. David Swann, the Alberta Liberal Leader. "We've never had the books opened to us."
Alberta Health Services' audited financial statements are expected to be made public in June.
mlang@theherald.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Cytology labs to be pulled out of Lethbridge and Medicine Hat
Pap smears will be processed elsewhereBy Susan Zielinski - Red Deer AdvocatePublished: April 06, 2009 8:00 PM
Health Minister Ron Liepert says Red Deer is losing its lab to test pap smears.
During Monday’s question period at the legislature, Liepert said Alberta Health Services has decided that testing in Alberta will be centralized at labs in Calgary and Edmonton.
He expects samples will start being transported to those cities soon.
Red Deer Regional Hospital Centre has seven cytotechnologists who test pap smears and last week a few spoke out against the plan, worried for their jobs and patient safety due to delays and mistakes from increased workload if samples are sent away.
They also argue that removing the lab would separate biopsy testing, which would continue to be done in Red Deer, from pap smears so pathologists can’t immediately compare the results side by side for better analysis.
Alberta Liberal Leader David Swann said he has yet to see evidence from government to support a change in gynecological cytology.
Why aren’t the people in the labs, who know the most, being consulted, he asked.
“I think Albertans are tired of these arbitrary decisions made behind closed doors,” Swann said on Monday from Lethbridge.
David Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said consolidation will be bad for rural Alberta.
“We’re concerned about specialized medical services leaving centres around the province. Centralization of lab testing is problematic specifically because you’re losing a level of expertise in regions that help create a better, bigger capacity for care in places other than Edmonton and Calgary,” Eggen said from Edmonton.
It’s also disturbing that the province is looking at changing cytology without public consultation, he said.
“You can’t not show your cards with something as important as public health care. It’s just not something that you should be secretive about.
“We’re always vigilant to watch for privatization so we would discourage the centralization for the potential it could serve to make it easier to sell off down the road sometime,” Eggen said.
Last week, Red Deer South MLA Cal Dallas said he has contacted Alberta Health Services on behalf of Red Deer cytotechnologists who want to continue to make Red Deer their home.
He said he is concerned for hospital staff, but there’s also the commitment that government has made to look at the health care processes and costs to enhance long-term sustainability of health care.
“I’m torn in a sense,” Dallas said. (Hm, because he must follow tory central command even when it hurts his constituency)
“I recognize the difficulty of the situation, and while I personally would like to see those services stay in Red Deer, whatever decision is made, I will be certain to ensure that there are no health delivery impacts in terms of the quality of health care to the constituents of Red Deer South as a result of any decision that might be made.”
szielinski@reddeeradvocate.com
Health Minister Ron Liepert says Red Deer is losing its lab to test pap smears.
During Monday’s question period at the legislature, Liepert said Alberta Health Services has decided that testing in Alberta will be centralized at labs in Calgary and Edmonton.
He expects samples will start being transported to those cities soon.
Red Deer Regional Hospital Centre has seven cytotechnologists who test pap smears and last week a few spoke out against the plan, worried for their jobs and patient safety due to delays and mistakes from increased workload if samples are sent away.
They also argue that removing the lab would separate biopsy testing, which would continue to be done in Red Deer, from pap smears so pathologists can’t immediately compare the results side by side for better analysis.
Alberta Liberal Leader David Swann said he has yet to see evidence from government to support a change in gynecological cytology.
Why aren’t the people in the labs, who know the most, being consulted, he asked.
“I think Albertans are tired of these arbitrary decisions made behind closed doors,” Swann said on Monday from Lethbridge.
David Eggen, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said consolidation will be bad for rural Alberta.
“We’re concerned about specialized medical services leaving centres around the province. Centralization of lab testing is problematic specifically because you’re losing a level of expertise in regions that help create a better, bigger capacity for care in places other than Edmonton and Calgary,” Eggen said from Edmonton.
It’s also disturbing that the province is looking at changing cytology without public consultation, he said.
“You can’t not show your cards with something as important as public health care. It’s just not something that you should be secretive about.
“We’re always vigilant to watch for privatization so we would discourage the centralization for the potential it could serve to make it easier to sell off down the road sometime,” Eggen said.
Last week, Red Deer South MLA Cal Dallas said he has contacted Alberta Health Services on behalf of Red Deer cytotechnologists who want to continue to make Red Deer their home.
He said he is concerned for hospital staff, but there’s also the commitment that government has made to look at the health care processes and costs to enhance long-term sustainability of health care.
“I’m torn in a sense,” Dallas said. (Hm, because he must follow tory central command even when it hurts his constituency)
“I recognize the difficulty of the situation, and while I personally would like to see those services stay in Red Deer, whatever decision is made, I will be certain to ensure that there are no health delivery impacts in terms of the quality of health care to the constituents of Red Deer South as a result of any decision that might be made.”
szielinski@reddeeradvocate.com
Monday, April 6, 2009
Don't use the recession as an excuse...
CALGARY — Alberta’s government is facing close scrutiny as it prepares to reveal which items will be beefed up, scaled back, or struck out when Alberta’s first deficit budget in 15 years comes down on Tuesday amid mounting job loses, crumbling commodity prices and global market turmoil.
The Tory government plans to dip into some of its savings to pay for programs and build infrastructure and has warned public bodies not to expect fat funding increases in Budget 2009, but Premier Ed Stelmach says the province is in good shape to weather the economic downturn.
Opposition critics, though, contend the province is facing the fallout of frittering away the windfall of a booming economy and are urging the government to wean itself from volatile oil and gas revenues to fund its coffers.
Details of the province’s trimmed spending are set to be unveiled Tuesday as the once debt-free Alberta government settles back into the red with a forecasted $1.4 billion deficit.
The provincial government must send a clear signal Tuesday of how it plans to chart Alberta’s course through the stormy economic seas, said University of Calgary political analyst David Taras.
A creative approach is needed to boost consumer confidence and shore up the “human-needs deficit” that comes hand-in-hand with an economic downturn, Taras said.
“There are a number of decisions they have to make, and none of them are easy,” he said.
“If you get this wrong, then you lose the tremendous opportunity to help people and stimulate the economy when it needs it and to spend in the right places.”
Job creation, bolstered police ranks and new environmental initiatives are some of the pressing responsibilities that can’t be shirked, Taras said. Social agencies, too, face pressure to meet increasing demand.
Health organizations and medical groups will be closely watching Tuesday’s budget, which is expected to contain a smaller increase for health care than in recent years.
Alberta’s medical superboard said last week it’s waiting for the budget to determine whether it will have enough cash to open a 140-bed expansion at Peter Lougheed Hospital in northeast Calgary without closing other units.
Health lobby groups argued a budget that provides no increase in medical spending would likely mean cutting some services given inflationary pressures and population growth.
“We know government is going to be in a tight spot,” said Dave Eggen of Friends of Medicare. “We expect them not to use it as an excuse to cut basic services for health.”
Reports have suggested the province is considering removing about 30 services, such as podiatry, that don’t require coverage under the Canada Health Act.
Health Minister Ron Liepert has tempered expectations about the upcoming budget in recent interviews.
Education institutions, too, are waiting to see how the budget breakdown will affect their bottom lines.
On Thursday, the premier told party supporters that the government is planning a “prudent and realistic” approach as it prepares to manage the public purse under a deficit budget.
“As I said earlier we’re going to dip into our savings but that doesn’t mean we can use all the savings in the first year. No one knows, no one predicts how quickly we will recover. We are in a better position than we were certainly in the 80s, but it’s pretty difficult to get someone that can predict when the turnaround will start.”
Liberal MLA Dave Taylor, the party’s finance critic, views Alberta’s first deficit budget in more than a decade as a sign the province wasted a golden opportunity to save more of its revenues during the boom.
“It’s not like they weren’t warned time and time again, to put some money away for a rainy day, to bring some fiscal discipline into their approach to budgeting and spending,” he said.
Taylor contends the province could have avoided a deficit this year with better fiscal management, but he’s not philosophically opposed to deficit spending or borrowing money for capital projects to stimulate the economy and create jobs during a recession. He said it’s important to ensure deficits don’t become lasting and borrowed money is paid off immediately.
Calgary Herald
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
The Tory government plans to dip into some of its savings to pay for programs and build infrastructure and has warned public bodies not to expect fat funding increases in Budget 2009, but Premier Ed Stelmach says the province is in good shape to weather the economic downturn.
Opposition critics, though, contend the province is facing the fallout of frittering away the windfall of a booming economy and are urging the government to wean itself from volatile oil and gas revenues to fund its coffers.
Details of the province’s trimmed spending are set to be unveiled Tuesday as the once debt-free Alberta government settles back into the red with a forecasted $1.4 billion deficit.
The provincial government must send a clear signal Tuesday of how it plans to chart Alberta’s course through the stormy economic seas, said University of Calgary political analyst David Taras.
A creative approach is needed to boost consumer confidence and shore up the “human-needs deficit” that comes hand-in-hand with an economic downturn, Taras said.
“There are a number of decisions they have to make, and none of them are easy,” he said.
“If you get this wrong, then you lose the tremendous opportunity to help people and stimulate the economy when it needs it and to spend in the right places.”
Job creation, bolstered police ranks and new environmental initiatives are some of the pressing responsibilities that can’t be shirked, Taras said. Social agencies, too, face pressure to meet increasing demand.
Health organizations and medical groups will be closely watching Tuesday’s budget, which is expected to contain a smaller increase for health care than in recent years.
Alberta’s medical superboard said last week it’s waiting for the budget to determine whether it will have enough cash to open a 140-bed expansion at Peter Lougheed Hospital in northeast Calgary without closing other units.
Health lobby groups argued a budget that provides no increase in medical spending would likely mean cutting some services given inflationary pressures and population growth.
“We know government is going to be in a tight spot,” said Dave Eggen of Friends of Medicare. “We expect them not to use it as an excuse to cut basic services for health.”
Reports have suggested the province is considering removing about 30 services, such as podiatry, that don’t require coverage under the Canada Health Act.
Health Minister Ron Liepert has tempered expectations about the upcoming budget in recent interviews.
Education institutions, too, are waiting to see how the budget breakdown will affect their bottom lines.
On Thursday, the premier told party supporters that the government is planning a “prudent and realistic” approach as it prepares to manage the public purse under a deficit budget.
“As I said earlier we’re going to dip into our savings but that doesn’t mean we can use all the savings in the first year. No one knows, no one predicts how quickly we will recover. We are in a better position than we were certainly in the 80s, but it’s pretty difficult to get someone that can predict when the turnaround will start.”
Liberal MLA Dave Taylor, the party’s finance critic, views Alberta’s first deficit budget in more than a decade as a sign the province wasted a golden opportunity to save more of its revenues during the boom.
“It’s not like they weren’t warned time and time again, to put some money away for a rainy day, to bring some fiscal discipline into their approach to budgeting and spending,” he said.
Taylor contends the province could have avoided a deficit this year with better fiscal management, but he’s not philosophically opposed to deficit spending or borrowing money for capital projects to stimulate the economy and create jobs during a recession. He said it’s important to ensure deficits don’t become lasting and borrowed money is paid off immediately.
Calgary Herald
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald
Thursday, April 2, 2009
I just had to include this picture of Ted Morton out "huntin' hippies". Perhaps the April Fool's day post is the best place!
April Fool's gags
770 News Calgary
Posted 4/1/2009 5:00:00 PM
April Fool's hit the news industry and the internet and as usual there's no shortage of fake news stories, gag product announcements and bad jokes. Some are funny, some are lame attempts at being funny. Here's a few I found worth highlighting:
The Calgary Sun had fun with a story suggesting a DNA database could track unscooped dog doo. The story adds dog owners would be required to provide a sample of their dog's droppings when applying for their annual license.
Metronews reported Calgary Alderman Brian Pincott is disappointed with the city's one percent drop in power consumption during Saturday's Earth Hour. The article quotes Pincott suggesting he'd like to see Enmax turn off the power once a month for one hour until Calgary catches up with other cities.
Friends of Medicare issued a release stating the Stelmach government has announced plans for a Universal Pharmacare Plan for all Albertans. The release quotes an unknown government official saying, "What were we thinking? Clearly a Pharmacare plan is what was needed ... "
Virgin Mobile claimed to unveil a revolutionary phone service that detects bad breath. In a press release, Virgin claimed you could determine whether you had bad breath by calling a certain number and blowing into the phone. It's a new twist on the gag that had telephone customers helping the phone company 'blow out' the phone lines.
Ice cream maker Ben & Jerry's created a fake web site, Cyclone Dairy, which claims only to sell milk from cloned cows. But in a press release, Ben & Jerry's explained it does hope the prank will raise awareness of the ethical and health issues surrounding cloned livestock.
Posted 4/1/2009 5:00:00 PM
April Fool's hit the news industry and the internet and as usual there's no shortage of fake news stories, gag product announcements and bad jokes. Some are funny, some are lame attempts at being funny. Here's a few I found worth highlighting:
The Calgary Sun had fun with a story suggesting a DNA database could track unscooped dog doo. The story adds dog owners would be required to provide a sample of their dog's droppings when applying for their annual license.
Metronews reported Calgary Alderman Brian Pincott is disappointed with the city's one percent drop in power consumption during Saturday's Earth Hour. The article quotes Pincott suggesting he'd like to see Enmax turn off the power once a month for one hour until Calgary catches up with other cities.
Friends of Medicare issued a release stating the Stelmach government has announced plans for a Universal Pharmacare Plan for all Albertans. The release quotes an unknown government official saying, "What were we thinking? Clearly a Pharmacare plan is what was needed ... "
Virgin Mobile claimed to unveil a revolutionary phone service that detects bad breath. In a press release, Virgin claimed you could determine whether you had bad breath by calling a certain number and blowing into the phone. It's a new twist on the gag that had telephone customers helping the phone company 'blow out' the phone lines.
Ice cream maker Ben & Jerry's created a fake web site, Cyclone Dairy, which claims only to sell milk from cloned cows. But in a press release, Ben & Jerry's explained it does hope the prank will raise awareness of the ethical and health issues surrounding cloned livestock.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)
