Canadian election

[Skandranon]

It's very simple.  Open up medical services to the private sphere and, under NAFTA, it officially becomes illegal to place restrictions on who can deliver them. 

Actually, that's not quite true. Health care and its delivery are protected under a negotiated addition to the Schedule to Annex II of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Roy Romanow, after his health care report, concluded that Canada's system, "with its mix of not-for-profit and private sector delivery mechanisms" is safe from challenge under NAFTA's national treatment laws. The danger point is if we increase the role of private corporations from providing delivery to providing private insurance, which clearly we aren't going to do.

As long as health care delivery in this country has a single payer and single administrator, i.e. the government, NAFTA can't be invoked to do anything. Our health care has had some private delivery in some areas for some time now, and people have been screaming that NAFTA will be used to invade our system for just about that long. Hasn't happened yet. Now, either NAFTA can be used to do that and they haven't done it yet - in which case the transition hardly follows from Harper's statement - or it can't be used to do it and that's why they haven't done it.

Either way there's no need for overblown fears about the security of the Canadian state and values based on the possibility of exploring alternate delivery methods.

[kandrathe]

On July 25, 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published its final rule related to Section 343 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). Section 343 requires that certain foreign health care workers have their credentials evaluated and certified before they will be allowed to work in their profession in the United States. Although the final rule became effective on September 23, 2003 the DHA created a transition period that will end on July 25, 2004. The final rule applies to temporary and permanent employment based visas as well as Trade NAFTA (TN) health care workers from Canada and Mexico.

The biggest problem I have heard about is increasing restrictions on Canadian health care professionals that work in the US. That combined with curbing J-1 Visas is putting a larger strain on the shortage of health care workers in the US. I would think that it would be more likely due to the demand for quality services that Canadian companies would offer health care services to US citizens, especially in border states. We already use your pharmacies to avoid "over paying" for prescription drugs.

[Chameleon]

I want someone who will waffle, waver and stall for time, like a good Canadian, rathen than signing up the troops to head off to god-only-knows-where.

So, you like having the world laugh at Canada? Was signing up to goto Afghanistan a mistake? Are our peace keepers in Afghanistan, Golan Heights, Haiti, Bosnia?

Why do i say this, because the we can barely send the troops off anywhere due the massive funding cuts to our military imposed by Paul Martin and Liberal for the last 11 years.

We had to borrow uniforms in Afghanistan.
Enemy forces don't need to shoot down our helicopters, they will crash on their own first.
Our guns don't even have enough bullets to fire them.
Our fleet spends most of its time in dry dock because it would cost too much money to put the ships back in the water.

The Conservatives will get my vote, since, Canada is no longer a proud nation of peace keepers, it is become a nation of beggers on the floor looking for scraps from other countries.

[Chaerophon]

So why do we care who 'owns' the corporation?

Because, as we are currently seeing in the case of fee-for-service billing, privatization leads to the primacy of the profit-motive, rather than health care. I don't want health care from a corporation. I want secure, publicly-provided health care from salaried doctors. The federal government has it within their means to provide the same services that were once the hallmark of our system. I'm willing to concede your point about prevention, but I'm not willing to see our most symbolic institution subjected to the whims of the profit motive, which is already the case. Fee-for-service doesn't work for a reason. Further privatization, whether regulated or not, won't make things any better. Allowing American firms into the equation only further ensures the dismantling of our system. I think that I have a fair reason to fear this outcome.

[ShadowHM]

I have often thought that our 'fee for service' model lies at the heart of the problem.

But good luck, Don Quixote, on tilting at that particular windmill. There are few organizations with the power of the C.M.A. And they would fill our minds and hearts with more terror and propaganda than you could imagine if that particular 'right' of theirs were threatened.

I am somewhat familiar with their responses to threats to 'their turf' by dint of being long married to a Chiropractor. I have watched the efforts to limit and/or eliminate patients rights to consult a Chiropractor without the 'gateway' of referral by a Physician. It is only within the past 15 years that there have started to be meaningful partnerships between Physicians and Chiropractors in delivery of heath care to their patients. (Chiropractors do not prescribe drugs.)

And I also believe that the current (at least in Ontario) serious shortage of Family Physicians (who do act, in general, as gateways to the rest of the specialists in medicine) is a direct result of politicking within the C.M.A. and the O.M.A. (here in Ontario) over what fee structures there are. Any time there is a 'raise' proposed for fees, it is not the Family Physicians who get allocated the increase. Elitism is everywhere, eh?

Delivery of good health care is a complex and thorny issue. Much as I would like to see some major reforms to our health care paradigms, I am not sanguine about the chances of meaningful reform in my lifetime.

[Jester]

"I want secure, publicly-provided health care from salaried doctors."

Well, we already have plenty of doctors who fall outside this description. When I pop down to the medicentre to get my cough looked at and the appropriate placebos perscribed, the doctor I see is getting paid per service, not per month.

There are, however, a couple important points:

1) Only the doctor is a "business". He makes money on his own, but there is no investment capital or outside profit, nor is there competition.

2) The payment is entirely public.

Those are the things that I want preserved. I could care less if the doctors are salaried or not.

Oh, and most hospitals are private corporations. They're just funded and regulated publicly.

Jester

[ShadowHM]

Overall Election Results
Party Elected Leading Total Vote Share
LIB 135 0 135 36.71%
CON 99 0 99 29.61%
BQ 54 0 54 12.40%
NDP 19 0 19 15.69%
NA 1 0 1 .13%
OTH 0 0 0 5.47%
Last Update June 29, 5:38:55 AM EDT


Apparently about 60% of eligible voters actually exercised their franchise.


So how do you feel about the results?

For what it is worth, I emailed my Member of Parliament this morning to tell her of my concerns about Health Care and about Electoral Reform, and asking her to ensure that these issues are addressed in caucus.

Edit: Accidently hit the post button too soon. :angry:

[Jester]

Well, we were collectively drinking a lot these past couple weeks, and I was hoping we wouldn't wake up with a hangover (read: Harper as PM). And we didn't. Except for a couple personal notes (Rahim still elected, no Green seats), the election went pretty much as I had been wanting it to for the past few years. Liberal minority, check. NDP picked up seats, check. United conservatives well positioned to take power in a few years, check. Green party on the map, check-ish. Landslide Annie wins her riding, check!

All is well in the land.

Jester

[Skandranon]

The results are more or less what I was looking for. As I said I was going to do, I voted Liberal, part of what turned out to be a Liberal tide across the GTA. Anyway, what government we get won't be good but it won't be all that bad. I figure we'll be voting again in one or two years anyway.

One good outcome I'm hoping for is Harper's resignation. The election clearly showed that Harper cannot gain any traction in urban Ontario and especially Toronto. They need someone to attract the Red Tories back, and I know that as long as Harper's the leader me and others like me will continue to go Liberal.

[channel1]

What's neat is how the distribution of seats worked out like a fiction, or a bad movie.

Here, we have the most right-wing Liberal PM in 50 years, presiding over a party that will need to earn the co-operation of the separatist, left-leaning Bloc, which is unlikely; or more the very left-wing NDP. Even if he can get the NDP on his side, he is still one vote short of being able to guarantee enough votes to carry anything.

And, like the fiction, there is a prince. Chuck Cadman hold one seat, as a "Non-Affiliated". He was screwed out of the Conservative nomination for his riding, after holding it for two terms for the Reform/Alliance (now Conservatives). The guy who stole his Conservative nomination came in a poor fourth.

Come to think of it, this would almost make a GOOD movie. Ya gotta love it. :)

-rcv-

[Refrigerator]

Well, I'm not entirely sure. It could have been worse. After some more conversation and thought, I decided that, compared to the alternatives, I pretty much agree with your opinion and I'm happy with the Liberals for now. But, I'm also very glad that it isn't the ridiculous situation that it was before, with the Liberals having all of the seats but two!
I hope the Liberals will join with the NDP to form a minority government, as I am really skeptical of the Conservatives*, and I live in B.C, so the Bloc really doesn't affect me much...

*Their ad campaign sort of seemed to be: Make a statement about their platform, see if the public likes it, if they don't, then the Conservatives never actually made that statement. <_<


I agree with channel1 on the arrangement of seats, I think it would make a good movie! It could involve threatening letters telling Chuck Cadman to join with the Lib&NDP/Cons&Bloc coalition or ELSE! Then, when he refuses to make a decision right away, they try bribes, then eventually... assassins!

Then Chuck reveals (to the audience) that he's really a top military agent and stops the assassins with amazing kung-fu moves. Or a gun. But that would be too boring. Gotta keep up with the Joneses, y'know...

[JustAGuy]

I just love how all the important decisions in our country now, potentially, come down to the policies of one man, Mr. Chuck Cadman. Fantastic!

We should abandon our current system and go for a dictatorship with Mr. Cadman as our exhaulted leader. ALL HAIL CADMAN!

[Jester]

The PM would have a much easier time netting a stray Bloc or Conservative member than aligning the entire party platform (and therefore the governance of the country) to Mr. Cadman's whims. The Bloc is pretty amenable to compromise if they get something out of it, and the Conservatives (as much as I don't believe a word of it) did promise to give their MPs more freedom to vote the way they want to.

Besides, if Martin loses even a single Liberal backbencher or NDPer, Mr. Cadman's vote isn't worth any more than the rest of the 153 votes he got.

And remember that the Bloc have as many seats as they ever could possibly get, and thus have no incentive to bring down the government. Ironically, the NDP are probably more likely to try something like that, hoping they can pick up seats more in line with their popular support.

Jester

[Guest]

edited