Kathleen Wynne should say enough is enough.
Why is the Harris-era Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity still receiving nearly $1 million a year in public funding to manipulate the public towards some of the most ludicrous right wing ideas?
Earlier today Roger Martin, former Dean of the Rotman School of Management, delivered an eight-point “working paper” that is the most regressive health care advocacy document we have ever seen in this province.
The paper essentially advocates for the end of Medicare as we know it.
Instead of addressing inefficiencies – and there are many in our present public/private system – it goes after working people and the poor to pay for more of their own health care. That’s hardly our idea of reform.
In one scenario, while it advocates a co-pay amounting to up to three per cent of your annual income to access public health care, it caps families with an income of more than $100,000 per annum to $987. Only those under $10,000 per year would be exempt, leaving many under the poverty line to still pay more.
Is Roger Martin really that big of an idiot, or is the point of the Institute to shout out the most extreme ideas imaginable in the hopes that watered down elements will be found acceptable by comparison?
Roger Martin advocates government treat worker health plans as a taxable benefit.
Is Roger Martin having us on?
This morning the publicly funded Institute for Competitiveness & Prosperity released a working paper on policy opportunities for Ontario’s health care system during Longwood’s Breakfast With The Chiefs speaker series.
Roger Martin, the former Dean of the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, was breezy in his presentation of the paper’s eight big ideas.
Some of it is the predictable low-hanging fruit, such as the need to get on with electronic medical records, reforming primary care delivery and focusing on end-of-life care (which accounts for one-third to one-half of a person’s lifetime health expenditures).
More alarming, three of the recommendations are essentially a manifesto for shifting the cost of health care away from the collective to the individual, and especially to low-income Ontarians.
In the brief question period after Martin’s presentation, his argument for co-payment on health care costs failed to get much attention despite being the most radical. Perhaps the audience felt it so far-fetched it was unlikely to get any traction from government despite coming from an advisor to the Premier.