Caron explains that under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, Canada cannot give preference to Canadian companies over U.S. ones, even for the provision of health care services. Therefore, U.S. for-profit health care companies can get the same funding for their services from the federal government as is allocated to the Canadian public system.
“Through the Romanow Commission, Canadians told the federal government that we want a fully-funded, properly resourced and staffed public health care system. By underfunding health care for so long, both the Canadian and the Quebec governments have forced this issue into the courts and both must be blamed for their negligence,” says Barlow.
“This ruling reaffirms that adequate and timely health care is a fundamental right of all Canadians. The federal and provincial governments have an obligation to provide these services within the public system, not have this right undermined by for-profit business. Turning to private companies to fix the problems caused by chronic underfunding is completely unacceptable.”
Barlow demands that Parliament and the provincial legislatures intervene to protect public health care.
“Our system is based on need and not on ability to pay. It is completely unacceptable to Canadians to have a system that allows those with more money to jump to the front of the line,” says Barlow.
“Canadians have consistently opposed a two-tier system. The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that governments must deliver health care in a timely and reasonable manner. Both levels of government have to start putting their money where their mouths are. We demand full implementation of the Romanow Report and a massive reinvestment in public health care to prevent the rise of the private system,” says Barlow.
-30-
For interviews, please contact:
Laura Sewell, Media Officer: 613.233.4487 ext 234; 613.795.8685 (cell); lsewell@canadians.org
--
The Council of Canadians
700-170 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, ON K1P 5V5.
Tel: (613) 233-2773; Toll-free: 1-800-387-7177
Fax: (613) 233-6776
inquiries@canadians.org
www.canadians.org
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on June 11, 2005]
Note: www.canadians.org
Supreme Court Ruling Opens Door To Americanization Of Canada’S Health Care
Posted on Thursday, June 09 at 13:51 by sthompsonContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
---
Dave Ruston
Interesting times.
---
If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan
Remember, while there is excellent care in the US for those who can afford it, 45 million Americans are without any health care insurance at all, and for those who have it it costs a huge amount (I believe I've heard something like $700-900 US a month for a family).
The only silver lining is we can still save the system by funding it and implementing the recommendations of the Romanow Report which deal with problems like long waiting times.
---
Now call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard, and we hit it fast, with a major, and I mean major, leaflet campaign.--Rimmer, Red Dwarf
What part of this are y'all NOT getting?
"The Bar, the Pulpit and the Press Nefariously combine To Cry up an usurpt Pow'r And stamp it Right Devine.? -1695
The Bar !!!!!
Who is Sir Roger Douglas?
Who is/was "The Wednesday Club"?
What is the 'NewZealand Experiment?
And why the hell ain't cha connectin the dots???
At the risk of sounding a bit harsh LOL
Do any of you seriously believe the architecs of "free trade,NWO,et al' get up in the morning , scratch their balls, yawn and wonder,"Gee I wonder what i am going to do to-day?"
This should be an election issue? Are you freakin mad woman?
This should be a REVOLUTION ISSUE!!
Not the revolution of armed insurectin but rather of massive general strikes! Of a learning curve to try and catchup with rather than react to.
Deep Intagration??? for freaksake
It is ALREADY DEEP into ya! and guess where?
Hey !!! I got it Rimmer it!
-Perturbed.
Keep in mind that those who can afford will always get better opportunity, service, care, availability and selection.
Before Canada had national Health-care and most companies didn't have what we now-a-days would consider benefits people did not go to the Hospital until the last possible moment in the vast majority of cases because it cost money that you didn't have. If you had benefits, your premiums always went up. Hospitals had one price for all. No exception. As well, let’s keep in mind that the problem was usually alot worst for that reason.
(Most companies in the U.S. don't have good benefits. Large Corporation are now trying to lower their benefits. Most Americans can't afford to be sick.)
One did not go to the Doctor until it became time to choose between the Doctor and the Hospital. The Doctor was cheaper.
The Doctor charged according to your ability to pay, if the Doctor took people of your financial standing. What he didn't get paid for by those that couldn't pay the cost of services the Doctor charged extra for their services from those they felt could pay. If you could not afford the medication for your aliment then he gave you the salesmen's samples. Let’s not forget that good Doctors made house calls!
After Canada adopted the system of national health care the Government spent millions for the next 10 years on trying to get people to use it because people didn't believe that they where not going to be charged.
How many Doctors are exceptional to command top price for their abilities and service?
Yes, let’s go back to that system or adopt the American and British system that don’t work, instead of holding those well educated people in charge responsible.
---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.
Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.
<br />
Two notables:<br />
<br />
"Four of the seven justices ruled Thursday that the provincial policy violates the Quebec charter. But they split 3-3 on whether it violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, meaning there is no immediate impact on the Canadian health-care system as a whole."<br />
<br />
"In a 4-3 decision, the panel of seven justices said banning private insurance for a list of services ranging from MRI tests to cataract surgery was unconstitutional under the Quebec Charter of Rights, given that the public system has failed to guarantee patients access to those services in a timely way."<br />
<br />
<br />
I think Layton has to react much more strongly, and not just dwell on the past. He needs to say things like: "If this decision is not addressed, we will have irreversible two-tier medecine in Canada." and "The NDP is the party that will make sure there is no two-tier medecine. Can you trust the Liberals to do this?"
---
If you don't like these ideas, I've got others. --Marshall McLuhan