Romanow report falls short on pharmacare and home care, Kirby says

Kirby takes Romanow to task over “old-fashioned” approach to healthcare reform (December 4, 2002) Roy Romanow’s report on reforming Canada’s healthcare system doesn’t adequately address the issue of federal funding for prescription drug coverage and home care, says Senator Michael Kirby. Following up on a speech in Toronto on Monday, Kirby, who authored his own […]

By Doug Watt | December 4, 2002 | Last updated on December 4, 2002
3 min read
  • Kirby takes Romanow to task over “old-fashioned” approach to healthcare reform
  • Romanow report viewed as positive for pension plan sponsors
  • Romanow’s vision of healthcare challenged
  • Despite Romanow’s optimism, advisors recommend “defensive” healthcare planning
  • Romanow says medicare system needs an extra $15 billion from Ottawa
  • New taxes could pay for additional healthcare funding, Senate committee suggests

    Kirby also returned to the issue of funding in today’s speech. On Monday, he accused Romanow of relying on a forecast of “permanent” federal surpluses to pay for his proposals, suggesting that Romanow was ducking the funding issue.

    Kirby’s report recommended introducing a national health insurance premium, ranging from $0.50 to $4 per day for each Canadian, depending on income. Kirby says Romanow has chosen not to address the issue of where the money to pay for his proposals should come from. “The issue is quite simply not dealt with in his report.”

    The senator also takes issue with Romanow’s recommendation that the Canada Health Act be amended to make the provinces accountable for spending federal funds specifically targeted to healthcare. Kirby calls that “unwise and unnecessary” and argues that it will only serve to worsen federal-provincial relations.

    In a speech yesterday in Kingston, Ontario, Romanow argued that greater accountability in health spending is essential.

    “What happened to the $23.4 billion we added to the system just two years ago?” Romanow asked. “Most of it went through a block fund without an accountability framework and without basic agreement on priorities beyond a general intent to increase healthcare expenditures.

    “And where has it gone? What has been achieved from it? How have wait-lists improved, or access been enhanced or quality gotten better? We don’t know because, as the auditor general notes, we have no way of knowing.”

    A conversation about the implications of the Romanow report has already begun in the “Free for All” forum of the Talvest Town Hall. Doug Thornton, CFP, writes, “There can be no doubt that we, as professional financial advisors must redouble our marketing efforts on ‘living benefit’ policies.” Contribute to this conversation or start your own by posting your message in the “Free For All” forum of the Talvest Town Hall on Advisor.ca.

    Filed by Doug Watt, Advisor.ca, dwatt@advisor.ca.

    (12/04/02)

    Doug Watt

  • Kirby takes Romanow to task over “old-fashioned” approach to healthcare reform
  • Romanow report viewed as positive for pension plan sponsors
  • Romanow’s vision of healthcare challenged
  • Despite Romanow’s optimism, advisors recommend “defensive” healthcare planning
  • Romanow says medicare system needs an extra $15 billion from Ottawa
  • New taxes could pay for additional healthcare funding, Senate committee suggests

    Kirby also returned to the issue of funding in today’s speech. On Monday, he accused Romanow of relying on a forecast of “permanent” federal surpluses to pay for his proposals, suggesting that Romanow was ducking the funding issue.

    Kirby’s report recommended introducing a national health insurance premium, ranging from $0.50 to $4 per day for each Canadian, depending on income. Kirby says Romanow has chosen not to address the issue of where the money to pay for his proposals should come from. “The issue is quite simply not dealt with in his report.”

    The senator also takes issue with Romanow’s recommendation that the Canada Health Act be amended to make the provinces accountable for spending federal funds specifically targeted to healthcare. Kirby calls that “unwise and unnecessary” and argues that it will only serve to worsen federal-provincial relations.

    In a speech yesterday in Kingston, Ontario, Romanow argued that greater accountability in health spending is essential.

    “What happened to the $23.4 billion we added to the system just two years ago?” Romanow asked. “Most of it went through a block fund without an accountability framework and without basic agreement on priorities beyond a general intent to increase healthcare expenditures.

    “And where has it gone? What has been achieved from it? How have wait-lists improved, or access been enhanced or quality gotten better? We don’t know because, as the auditor general notes, we have no way of knowing.”

    A conversation about the implications of the Romanow report has already begun in the “Free for All” forum of the Talvest Town Hall. Doug Thornton, CFP, writes, “There can be no doubt that we, as professional financial advisors must redouble our marketing efforts on ‘living benefit’ policies.” Contribute to this conversation or start your own by posting your message in the “Free For All” forum of the Talvest Town Hall on Advisor.ca.

    Filed by Doug Watt, Advisor.ca, dwatt@advisor.ca.

    (12/04/02)