Here’s a question (or two) for Gary Mar, who is running for leadership of the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party and who wants to become your premier:
• If it’s true that we all know about Albertans leaving the province to get medical procedures done at private clinics, can you please tell us how many they are?
• Are enough wealthy Albertans crossing the border into B.C. for costly private hip and knee replacements to create a sufficient economic opportunity that we need to reverse our health-care laws to cash in on the trend?
Chances are, the number isn’t all that large. Chances are, the few rich people who can afford to bypass waiting lists here for private clinics in other provinces are being used as a wedge to pry open a niche industry for a larger group of well-to-do here in our province.
But credit Mar for putting the issue on the table. That in itself takes fortitude, which in some quarters passes for leadership.
When Mar suggested there are economic opportunities for private clinics offering some kinds of procedures here, that issue instantly became the top talking point between candidates to lead the party that has ruled our province for the entire lifetime of most Albertans.
Never mind that we haven’t saved one cent of our resource wealth in almost two decades. Forget that Albertans no longer trust the government to protect their interests on the environment, or that many believe the government is actively plotting against them on the issue of electrical power generation, transfer and potential export. Don’t worry that piping raw bitumen to Texas for refining (where the real money is made) looks like a bad idea.
What’s going to divide the vote for the next leader of the Tory party is the top-earning percentile of Albertans who might line the pockets of investors in private health clinics abroad, instead of at home.
It’s been noted before: a very large portion of our public health spending already goes to private businesses. Doctors’ clinics are small businesses, medical labs are privately-owned, diagnostic imaging is often done privately (while billing the public system), many therapists run under their own shingle. The long-term care of the elderly and handicapped is being increasingly privatized.
And our publicly-funded health-care system survives it all.
So why shouldn’t there be a private hospital specializing in doing just knee and hip replacements, for instance?
Mar, and many others, would like an answer to that question (just as we would like to know how many Albertans travel abroad for health care, and what portion of their treatment is tax-paid here).
To partially answer Mar’s question, there isn’t enough evidence that allowing private care options like in our example provides a benefit, beyond to a wealthy few. There isn’t enough evidence that doing this saves the system money or improves Alberta’s health care on the whole. At least, not enough to warrant changing our laws.
So why should Mar put this on the table?
Well, if it’s to take the opportunity to explain the benefits and safeguards of the public option, now’s the time to lay it out. Before the party decides on the leadership, before the public is asked to pass judgment in an election.
At least the leadership race won’t have to replay the same old grudges over poor stewardship of our energy capital, our global environmental record or the fact that one of the world’s biggest economic advantages is (still) being pissed away.
Who would want to lead the Tories after that debate? Best stick to the privatizing of health care.
Greg Neiman is an Advocate editor.