Tag Archives: Tim Hudak

Social determinants, more than cost of care, key to sustainability

Critics of Medicare often point to Canada’s dubious population health record as evidence of the need for system reform, but seldom do these critics spend much time looking at the social determinants of health or actions by increasingly right-wing governments that take us further from good population health principles.

The most obvious determinant is the growing levels of income inequality in Canada. While still below the levels of inequality in the United States, we are doing our best to catch up by enacting policies that place downward pressure on incomes for the majority while doing little to address the excessive concentration of wealth at the very top.

This February TD Economics notes that while there is significant demand for high skilled workers, both medium and low skilled workers have lost considerable ground in Canada as job opportunities disappear. Given the recent controversies around outsourcing by Canadian banks, TD brazenly reports: “these workers have become increasingly vulnerable to computer automation or outsourcing to low-wage jurisdictions.”

TD notes that Canada has not had quite the same hollowing out of the middle skilled/middle class workers as our southern neighbours due largely to a rebound in government spending following the 1990s era of austerity.

TD is also likely overlooking the importance of union density in preserving what’s left of Canada’s middle class. For the past decade almost one in three Canadian workers have been members of unions, while in the United States union membership has been in sharp decline. In the U.S. that decline will soon leave just one in 10 workers with union representation.

For all the hand wringing about middle class decline and growing inequality, governments appear to be not only failing to stem the tide, but appear to be adding fuel to the fire. Public spending is now under direct attack by governments implementing a new wave of austerity, while Conservatives are working hard to soften public opinion to undermine union and worker rights. In Ontario Tim Hudak’s Conservatives have vowed to make it more difficult for unions to finance themselves by allowing workers to opt out from dues payment and by disallowing automatic dues check off. In U.S. States where this has already taken place, overall family incomes have gone into significant decline. Both government austerity and the attacks on labour raises questions about what happens to the demand for public health care if the key supports for the middle class further decline.

Continue reading

Academics present evidence that austerity really does kill

Ontario is presently entering year two of its austerity program, convinced that it is the only way out of an economic problem that wasn’t even created here.

We have previously highlighted economic arguments that suggest austerity creates a self-defeating “fiscal drag” that compounds debt and deficit problems. Now a new book by a pair of academics on either side of the Atlantic argues that not only is austerity self-defeating, but it is also bad for your health.

In The Body Economic: Why Austerity Kills, David Stuckler and Sanjay Basu present a convincing analysis that austerity policies have made citizens involuntary subjects of a grand experiment in public health. If you recently lived in the UK, Greece, Spain or Italy, you’ve likely recently witnessed very different population health outcomes than if you lived in Sweden, Iceland or Denmark.

The authors argue that this is not the first time this austerity versus stimulus experiment has taken place. In the U.S. States that adopted the depression-era “New Deal” stimulus programs had much better health outcomes than those that refused to do so.

“Economic choices are not only matters of growth rates and deficits, but matters of life and death,” the authors write.

In their peer-reviewed study, the pair of PhDs state that investment in the right programs can not only alleviate human suffering, but can itself spur economic growth. For every $1 invested in public health programs, the net benefit to the economy is $3. By anyone’s standards, that’s a sweetheart deal. Yet ideology prevents us from seeing the evidence before us.

Continue reading

Ombudsman seeking expanded role since 1975 – could this finally be the time?

“There is no effective, independent, investigative oversight of hospital administration. Period.” – Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin, 2008

Ontario has been resisting Ombudsman oversight of its public hospitals for long enough. Marin says he is not the first to demand this oversight – Arthur Maloney called for this extension of the Ombudsman’s scope in 1975, and successive holders of the office have followed suit to successive and unresponsive governments of all stripes.

Last week NDP Leader Andrea Horwath added Ombudsman oversight of health care to her shopping list of initiatives to improve the spring budget.

Given recent experiences with ORNGE and the diluted chemotherapy drug error, one would think that the time has finally come, Ontario the last province to issue such powers.

Marin himself wrote to the Premier in March regarding changes the province was making in the wake of the privatization scandal at ORNGE. Marin pointed out that Bill 11 would create “new bureaucracy of special investigators” which would report to the Minister of Health and Long Term Care, not to Provincial Parliament.

“Far from being watchdogs, they would operate on a ministerial dog leash,” he wrote.

Similarly the position of ORNGE “patient advocate” is even more toothless, reporting not to the public or to Parliament or even the ORNGE board of directors, but to the ORNGE vice-president.

Continue reading

Would the PCs slash health spending even further?

The Ontario PCs have released a new video with finance critic Peter Shurman suggesting the Liberals cannot balance their budget on schedule by restraining health care to 2 per cent and education to 1 per cent.

The timing appears a bit off. The video was released just a day after it was revealed the deficit will be $5 billion lower than expected, coming in a $9.8 billion rather than $14.8 billion for 2012-13.

It’s almost laughable the Tories are still using Don Drummond’s ridiculous projections that we are on our way to a $30 billion deficit when the numbers are clearly heading in the opposite direction.

Unfortunately Shurman doesn’t really provide the detailed answer to his mythical problem, although ominously he suggests a plan of action and the “courage to implement it” is what’s needed. That courage, so we are led to believe, includes more tax cuts.

He complains that the government’s spending plans are only known for three years. That means there are no budget details beyond 2015-16. To Shurman, this is his big “aha!” moment.

Continue reading

Premier Wynne – Important memo re public health care

Memo: To the Honourable Kathleen Wynne, Premier, Province of Ontario
From: Your new pals at OPSEU Diablogue

Dear Premier Wynne –

Imagine our surprise when we discovered in today’s newspaper that the public sector unions are in fact running government. We have to give thanks to PC Leader Tim Hudak for pointing this out, because we had no idea this had taken place.

Anybody who reads our BLOG will note that we have had many recent differences, ranging from your government’s addiction to costly private-public partnerships to the present round of deep cuts to our public hospitals. We know, you don’t call them cuts, you call it restructuring (now that we’re friends perhaps you’ll let us know where this work is being restructured so our members can pursue jobs there).

We thought we would start off with a basic principle – public is better.

Here’s the proof: at the dawn of Medicare in Canada, we spent about the same percentage of our economy on health care as the United States. That percentage has since gone up for both of us, but at a much faster rate in the United States where the majority of health care delivery is in private hands.

In 2010, the most recent year we have comparable international data, the U.S. was spending 17.6 per cent of its economic output on health care – both public and private. In Canada we spent 11.4 per cent. While we could do a lot better, our spending is comparable to countries such as France, Switzerland, Germany and the Netherlands. Incidentally, for all the panic about rising health care costs, Canada also spent 11.4 per cent of its economic output on health care in 2009.

Continue reading

In Brief: Hospital cuts as transfers, Pupatello’s ego gets the better of her

Pop quiz: who wrote this: “Our government expects – as do health care providers – that this change will exacerbate the health conditions of patients with chronic conditions and those who are at risk of developing such conditions. In addition, given preventative care is less costly that emergency or acute care treatment, your policy represents a significant download to provinces and especially Ontario, where the vast majority of refugee claimants reside.” If you guessed Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews, you’d be correct. Matthews’ wrote Federal Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney in December over the impact of cuts to the Interim Federal Health Program for refugees. Tomorrow (Wednesday) opponents of the federal cuts will be meeting outside of Deb Matthews’ downtown Toronto office to ask Ontario to have a heart and provide stop-gap coverage for these disenfranchised refugees left without coverage. Demo starts at 11:30 am near Bay and Wellesley Streets in Toronto.

Windsor Regional Hospital is closing its long-standing Acute Injuries Rehabilitation and Evaluation Centre after the facility lost $300,000 last year. Once a revenue-generator for the hospital, the centre provides assessment and treatment services to people injured in automobile accidents or on the job. Revenues came from WSIB and other private insurance providers. The hospital claims two other private centres have meant that this insurance work done by the hospital has “dried up.” Curiously Windsor lawyer Suzanne Dajczak told the CBC that the closure would mean costs would shift to the patients. “When you’re injured, you’re under stress, finances generally are cut – in the cases that I see, substantially. They usually come when they’re denied and, yes, they’re going to struggle, and it’s going to be more difficult for injured workers” (Emphasis added). Is Ms. Dajczak suggesting that these private clinics may be less supportive of injured worker claims than the public hospital?

Continue reading

Like Canada, growth in U.S. economy not going to workers

As the Ontario Tories gear up to take a run at suppressing the wages of working people north of the border through attacks on unions, defined benefit pension plans and overall public sector compensation, the U.S. Economic Policy Institute shows how dramatic the difference has been between wage and economic growth in that country over a period of nearly 40 years. Clearly, it hasn’t been workers who have been reaping the benefits.

The data shows that during the period 1973 to 2011 the U.S. economy grew in real terms by 80 per cent, but the median worker only took home 4 per cent of that growth in the form of real hourly wages. Total compensation — wages and benefits — grew by 10.7 per cent.

What wage growth there has been is very unequal in distribution.

While those in the top 5 per cent saw real wages grow by 34.1 per cent, those in the bottom 10 per cent would have only realized a 1.1 per cent difference.

If you separate out the modest gains made by working women during this period, real wages for men actually declined for the bottom 60 per cent.

For the most recent period, from 2007-2011 most workers – the bottom 70 per cent – saw real declines in their wages, while those in the top 30 per cent saw modest gains. The top 5 per cent of U.S. workers saw real growth of 2.4 per cent over the recent five-year period.

Real growth represents gains made over and above the rate of inflation.

The rate of inequality is actually growing faster in Canada than in the United States, although levels of inequality remain slightly higher south of the border. There are likely more similarities that differences between workers’ status in the two countries, raising the question why the Tories are pushing an agenda that would see workers’ share of economic growth decline further?

To view an interactive infographic on the issue, click here.

If public sector workers have it so good, how come private sector firms dominate best employer lists?

The Canadian political elite really needs to be much more consistent in their propaganda. They like to whip up antipathy towards public sector workers suggesting they are overpaid and pampered, but they may have overlooked that strategy recently in the rush to give themselves a pat on the back.

Ontario PC leader Tim Hudak uses such sentiment to advocate for public sector wage freezes and more recently has set his sights on attacking modest public sector pension plans.

Hudak is banking on a policy of reducing the modest pension incomes of seniors as a vote getter. Good luck with that, Tim.

But if things were indeed so cushy for public sector employees, you’d think public sector employers would absolutely dominate year-end best employer lists, especially given these lists are made up by the same media conglomerates that peddle this anti-public sector message.

On Monday the Globe and Mail published its top 20 list of Canada’s top family friendly firms for 2013.

Continue reading

Tory health care white paper elicits a big ho-hum

If the Tories thought that yesterday’s new health care white paper was likely to change the channel on the byelection defeats, they likely woke up this morning disappointed.

Despite health care’s long standing ranking as the number one issue among Ontarians, there was little media coverage of the white paper.

Of those that did comment, most appear baffled by the plan.

Health Minister Deb Matthews wondered why the paper had been authored by deputy health critic Bill Walker, and not Christine Elliott, who has far more experience in the health care portfolio.

Continue reading

New Tory health plan is simple – too simple

The new Ontario Tory plan for health care is simple – eliminate the Local Health Integration Networks and the Community Care Access Centres and let between 30-40 “hub” hospitals run the health care system – or at least the bits not run by the municipalities or the doctors.

The new PC Caucus white paper, Paths To Prosperity: Patient-centered Health Care, is thin on specifics and long on rhetoric – much of it borrowed surprisingly from the McGuinty government. Aside from attacks on the LHINs and the CCACs, the broader strokes are not that different from the government’s own plan, including the Triple Aim we continually hear so much about. The “Triple Aim” sets goals to enhance patient quality and satisfaction, improve population health and reduce costs. Who could be against that?

While dumping the LHINs and the CCACs, the Tories would create physician-led “Primary Care Committees” which would link to the hospital hubs. The role of these committees is not clear beyond giving physicians more of a say in how the health system runs and somehow charging them with scrutinizing their own performance. How nice.

While this plan appears to centralize decision-making functions to the hospitals, the Tories counter that this represents a “decentralized and delayered” system. At the same time they sing from the George-Smitherman-Career-Memorial integration songbook. Decentralize and integrate? Confused? We all should be.

Continue reading