Letter to the Editor - The Edmonton Senior
January 31, 2012
Mr. Colin Smith, Editor
The Edmonton Senior
Financial Bldg.,
#200, 10621—100Ave.,
Edmonton, AB T5J 0B3
E-Mail: abrnews@shaw.ca
The January issue of the Edmonton Senior ran a full page advertisement for the Wild Rose candidates. The ad claimed, first of all, that the party would uphold the five key principles of the Canada Health Act. The ad is disingenuous at best, lacking candor.
The Website of this fledgling party would say otherwise and needs to be read and read between the lines. There, it does not uphold the five CHA principles, which are: public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility. The departure from these principles would put at risk equalization payments to the province, putting at risk even basic services.
The second point of concern is the promise to scrap the present Senior’s Drug Plan for Albertans. While the present plan needs some work, and citizen input, it is a far cry from a “Hardship Benefit,” which suggests that someone, or some new department, will evaluate our “need” and make decisions accordingly. This is risky territory and a paternalism beyond the Conservative plan as it stands or federal concepts currently being promulgated.
It is true that there is a need for more intentional safety inspections for seniors’ care centres. The language used in this ad, however, tells readers that the Wild Rose intent is to “strengthen”, not create, such inspections; expand home care, and “assisted living accommodations”, and assist people in remaining in their own homes. These are laudable plans which cannot come to fruition if health care is privatized. International studies reveal that private health care costs more than public health care. We have only to look to the United States to see the risks of private health care. With privatization the present standards, never mind enhanced standards, cannot be maintained.
The prologue to the five key principles of the Canada Health Act states: “In order that a province may qualify for a full cash contribution referred to in section 5 for a fiscal year, the health care insurance plan of the province must, throughout the fiscal year, satisfy the criterion in section 8 to 12 respecting the following matters.” It then defines each of the five criteria.
The criterion for universality states that “the health care insurance plan of a province must entitle one hundred percent of the insured persons of the province to the insured health services provided for by the plan on uniform terms and conditions.”
A “Hardship Benefit” for some adjudged to be those Albertans experiencing “hardship” is both arbitrary and would not meet a criterion of universality. With less monies available due to higher payments to private for profit clinics and facilities neither can the five criteria of the Canada Health Act be upheld. Better home care and resources for remaining in one’s home are to be desired. Decent and safe care in lodges and extended care facilities ought to be a given, rather than a nebulous promise! We are, after all, citizens, not consumers or stakeholders. We deserve the best health care possible and honesty regarding it. Only publicly funded care, universally offered, can provide this. It is a matter of justice.
The Rev. J. J. Trudeau
NDP Candidate
Spruce Grove - St. Albert