Read on Twitter
Policy 11 is the clearest definition of two-tier healthcare I have seen in a Cdn major party platform (and I've reviewed over 1000). It's the only one I know to use the term "Private Tier" explicitly.
This is not the same as a "mixed" or "hybrid" systems. (Thread) #ableg https://twitter.com/Citizen004/status/1317849872725241856
This is not the same as a "mixed" or "hybrid" systems. (Thread) #ableg https://twitter.com/Citizen004/status/1317849872725241856
All universal healthcare systems allow some private provision of services, including Canada. This means Canadians with employer-provided insurance and deeper pockets get better care. This is unequal, but not the "tiered" system promoted in Policy 11.
Most mainstream parties frame this hybrid system as a necessary evil, emphasizing the importance of preserving the public component.
Policy 11 promotes the virtues of the private component, and calls for a new/expanded "Private Tier".
This is not the status quo.
Policy 11 promotes the virtues of the private component, and calls for a new/expanded "Private Tier".
This is not the status quo.
Policy framing matters, and it distinguishes the UCP approach. So let's look at the "Rationale" behind Policy 11.
First, but "Healthcare is the greatest budgetary expense." This "fiscal crisis" narrative is distinct from parties pushing a "pandemic" frame.
First, but "Healthcare is the greatest budgetary expense." This "fiscal crisis" narrative is distinct from parties pushing a "pandemic" frame.
The 2nd & 3rd paragraphs imply that the creation/expansion of a "Private Tier" will provide doctors with the "billing fees" they're seeking, thus keeping more docs in Alberta. This aligns with the "fiscal crisis" frame, and promotes market-based solutions to health HR.
The 4th paragraph emphasizes patient "choice" - a term that those on the right use to disparage government over-reach, and those on the left malign as being antithetical to the "public good". Again, we find little consensus over this element of the UCP's rationale.
The 5th paragraph marks the UCP's full embrace of what was once a third rail in Alberta politics. While previous governments had promoted or tolerated privatization, they didn't call it "Private Tier" by name.
The final paragraph brings together these "fiscal crisis," "market solution," and "choice" narratives - uniting them with a nod to economic recovery. Again, this is not a view universally shared by all parties.
Some dismiss Policy 11 as being a one-off - a party resolution that will never make it into the party platform, let alone government policy. Leaving aside Premier Kenney's admission that his government is accomplishing more of its agenda than they promised in the platform...
...it is important to note how closely Policy 11 aligns with the UCP's founding Policy Declaration (2018). In the "Statement of Principles," we find the party's ideological guideposts and political compass.
Open advocacy of two-tier healthcare - with its emphasis on "choice," "fiscal crisis," "market forces" - aligns well with these Principles.
To sum up, Policy 11 does not reaffirm the status quo. It would move Alberta beyond a hybrid system to embracing a "Private Tier."
And it is not something "out of the blue." Premier Kenney's public Health Car Guarantee aside, two-tier healthcare flows logically from UCP principles. https://twitter.com/jkenney/status/1099764451564113920?s=1
So Policy 11 is neither something to accept as consensus policy, nor something to be surprised about coming from a UCP government.
I'm with most experts: we should be seriously debating health care reform. But we should enter those discussions with motives on the table. #ableg
I'm with most experts: we should be seriously debating health care reform. But we should enter those discussions with motives on the table. #ableg
