Policy alert - Macleans.ca

Policy alert


Michael Ignatieff promises that a Liberal government would convene a meeting with the premiers within the first 60 days of taking office to discuss the health accords that expire in 2014. Among the topics up for discussion: home care and drug coverage.

Here is the official explanation.


Policy alert

  1. So the policy is to develop a policy – I'd like to hear more about what Ignatieff is going try to do (and what cards he holds, given that he, like every leader, has already signed onto the unsustainable 6%/year increases in transfers). This reminds me of Dion's response to the financial crisis – "we will have meetings!"

    • Cons against meetings with provinces – will dictate health care policy from Ottawa – is that the message?

    • And as poor as it is, it's light years ahead of what most of the alternatives have promised thus far.

      • "This reminds me of Dion's response to the financial crisis"

        Indeed, it reminds me as well. That's also when the horse race started to tighten. Though, it was more just Conservatives losing support then a surge for Dion.

        • And it reminds me that Harper ended up doing the same thing as M. Dion had suggested in the debates.

          • Interesting… over at Canada's old and sad grey lady, Globe and Mail,

            Liberal health care ads may be working

            "The survey of 400 voters conducted Saturday for Nanos Research, indicates that the Conservative Leader's numbers on the leadership index score fell to 91.6 from 105.4.

            “The only new thing that's happened on the campaign in the last day or so are the new Liberal attack ads,” said Nik Nanos, the president of the polling firm. “What this shows is that, yesterday, Stephen Harper was noticeably down. And we know that the Liberal attack ads started. So we're going to have to watch in the next few days to see if it continues."

          • I was just about to say the exact same thing :D

  2. Cons aren't interested in any new health care….they'd rather spend the money on fighterplanes with no engines.

    Or weapons.

  3. Well, 60 days will give Ignatieff ample time to come up with a BQ agreement before sitting down with the provinces.

    The BQ knows what it wants (everything which works best for Quebec, not so much Canada) and the demands won't be long in the coming.

    • Alcan thanks you for your support.

  4. Ignatieff has been out in front on health. He was the first to commit to increased transfer payments and now talks with the provinces as a high priority. The LPC also started running their attack on Harper's commitment to healthcare last week, while the CPC and NDP attacked Ignatieff on a non-existant iPod tax and attendance.

    • HUH? Increased transfer payments? How so?

      Ignatieff has talked about the 6%, which has been the course of action for years and the same 6% steady course has been indicated by Harper.

      Why are you grasping at straws to make your points? There are no points to be had that way.

      Sorry, we're on the Macleans blog site; you will score points no matter what none sense you're yippin about.

      • What Ignatieff wants to do is get to back to the Accord which provided for policy development for increased homecare and a national pharmacare strategy. Talks on these were to start in 2006 but Harper shut the whole thing down. We have a looming crisis in healthcare – we have no time to waste on it.

  5. "Having a meeting" isn't policy.

    BTW, how bad is the Liberal campaign going?

    The Globe reports the CPC with a commanding ELEVEN point lead over the libs and the giddy left leaning reporter and the leftist commenters are ecstatic.

    Yes, it's that bad.

    One would think the CPC was almost losing the the Libs judging by the headline.

    Meanwhile the press is staying carefully away from any discussion about the number of undecided voters and which way they will likely break this election.

    I just can't keep the secret: All indications are the undecideds will overwhelmingly break for the CPC.

    Harper with a majority plus 8 seats.

    • You were saying 10 just a couple of days ago. Given that there's 2 weeks left in the campaign.. bodes poorly for your majority

      • 'If the election were held today, the Conservatives would take 38.8 per cent of the vote and 150 seats, according to ThreeHundredEight.com's updated seat and vote projections for The Globe and Mail. That is still five shy of a majority and three fewer seats than were projected to go Tory one week ago.'

        • Yeah, but 150 seats is up 7 from where they were going into the election.

          The same cannot be said for the Liberals. How are they doing in number seats, Emily?

          Them numbers are probably down, eh, otherwise you would have included them in your reportings of the day!

        • " They [the Liberals] are now projected to win 77, the same number of seats they held when the government fell."


          "But with the large advantage the Conservatives hold out West and roughly half of the seats in Ontario going blue, the Tories are still on track to win more seats than any other party (or combination of two parties). "

          Ignatieff together with the BQ: there they come!

    • I see you lost 2 seats overnight, chet – which ones were they?

  6. "Fixed for a generation" indeed. Although, as an earlier bull meter shows, "generation" is open to debate :)

  7. Geez what would we do without Michael Ignatieff to the rescue…

    • Exaggerating something to absurdity is simply proof of your absurdity.

    • Spend another 5 years wondering when The PM will discuss serious policy, any policy, with the Provinces?

  8. .
    Wow. He sure knows how to rouse the base: 'covene', 'within 60 days', 'premiers' (everyone loves premiers). I did get to the end of the sentence with its actually important issues, without falling asleep.

    C'mon guy, stop the droning Harvard lectures. if you're going to fail, make a good fuss:

    'We're going to take a frackin' battle-ax to that God-damn, brain-damaged, F-35 plan until it looks worse than the Avro Arrow after the American aerospace industry gave Dieffenbaker his orders.'

    • It's a policy with new national direction, chet and DanR; an Ignatieff government , a team of talented MPs, would actually work WITH the provinces to improve healthcare delivery. Harper was unable to do that; it was too much for a one-man-led and controlled gov't; the centre can't hold. Remember his failed promise on wait times?

      • Iggy is trying to be all things to all people My post is directly below yours. Iggy is on the Conservative band wagon on health care just as Harper was.

  9. Did you make that up to go along with the obvious circumstances we have before us today, or did somebody really write all that in 1950? Because if they did, wow.

  10. Iggy said he would convene a First Ministers meeting within 60 days of his being elected. I would have felt better had he said after the next provincial elections.

    The Western Premiers rule the First Ministers agenda along with PQ. This, Iggy knows this so this is his way of endorsing a two tier system regardless of costs just as Paul Martin endorsed it.

    See: PNWER http://albertathedetails.blogspot.com/2011/03/con

    Because health care runs on party lines and not cost and effect one can not help but wonder just where in hell Iggy is at!

    Our present health care costs 10.5% of our GDP and covers 100% of our people whereas the US system is up to 19% of their GDP and is leaving 80 million Americans with no health care coverage. Further cuts to Medicaid in the US will make this disparity even greater.

    The Canada Health Act does not allow sick and accident victims from the US to be treated in Canada yet, Alberta is selling the Alberta service as being better and cheaper than the US alternative.

    It appears at this point in time the NDP is the only one prepared to represent our health care.

    If the Conservatives get their way each family will be faced with 150 to 350 dollars per month for health care premiums and locked into a system where the physicians charge what ever they want; the insurer pays what ever they want and you pay the difference (Think here of your dental coverage)

  11. Alberta and probably BC have been layering the Health Care with property purchases and sales; all the losses go to health care costs Wages for US administrations (Like Capital Health) plus bonus plus termination for multi millions, even billions of layered costs for no other purpose than driving the cost up.

    What is needed first is a list of items that can be included in Health Care costs and what cannot be. Then, go over the past 3 years and audit the health care costs to represent this list.

    Only then can we start a conversation about what things cost and what things should be covered.

    I do not trust either Harper or Iggy to administer this program although we may be better off with Iggy but, i doubt it. Too many lies on both sides. It should not be on any ones agenda until after the provincial elections.

    Then, a definition of health care coverage that is binding across Canada. And, at the same time the responsibilities of insurers put into law.

    eg: They cannot drop your coverage if you hit a major ailment (a practice that is prevalent in the US) and a schedule of fees that can be charged by the health care merchants. Their responsibilities spelled out with patient recourse ingrained.