I watched Jack Layton on CBC’s The National tonight and I was really struck by how the questions he was asked, closely match my own questions. If a Liberal candidate is ahead in one’s riding, isn’t a vote for NDP just a vote for the Conservatives? Why does the NDP keep attacking the Liberals (who were vindicated to a degree in the Gomry inquiry), while leaving the Conservatives — the greater threat to NDP values — largely alone?
A swing-voter myself, and someone considering a strategic vote against the Conservatives in the upcoming election, I have to admit that the NDP probably more closely matches my personal values, moreso than any of the other parties. Then he started talking about Healthcare 
From my perspective as the son of a doctor, it doesn’t seem like Jack Layton understands modern healthcare. When an audience member said that he didn’t agree with the NDP stand on private healthcare (an absolute block of any public funds to it), Mr. Layton went into his common argument that all we need to do to fix healthcare is train more nurses and doctors and “janitors”, and pay them a good wage. He said that the money that a private clinic would use to pay dividends, was extra money that could be given to the healthcare workers.
His plan seems reasonable for a Canada of the mid-20th century, but modern medicine requires a massive investment in technology with costs well beyond the wages of janitors, or nurses, or even doctors. Medical technology (and I’m thinking about medical imaging technology as a good example) is ever improving, just like our personal computers at home. There’s always a newer, better, faster machine available. But while a slow PC may just slow down your framerate in Wolfenstein, having last year’s MRI machine could literally be the difference between life and death in radiation treatment.
The reality is that we live in a free-market economy. Medical technology is built by corporations that require massive investments, and require profits to show to their stockholders. The newest technological innovations cost money; more money then could reasonably be extracted by taxes in this country. When Tommy Douglas first proposed universal healthcare in this country, healthcare consisted of doctors, nurses and janitors. We are so far from that simple vision, and we can’t simply throw more people at the problem. As Canadians, we have to be mature about the fact that we can no longer afford the services we demand of our healthcare system (for free). It’s very easy to blame small percentage cuts to healthcare budgets for the problems we face, and I’m sure that that money is desperately needed. In fact, anyone whose has had to wait in an emergency room lately knows that. But even a massive increase in funding (at the expense of another area of course), could not correct the imbalance. Our free-market society requires a solution that is rooted in that reality. Enter private healthcare.
I think the scariest part of private healthcare for most people is the fear that the moment the wealthy start paying for their medical treatments, the best and the brightest in the healthcare industry will be drawn to the new capital and with good reason. Private clinics will have the latest medical equipment, and the best doctors, nurses, beds, rooms, wait times, elective services, etc. Very quickly, only poorer Canadians will use the public healthcare system. The dream of universal healthcare — the dream that our society will help anybody that is sick — will begin to crack.
But will we be worse off? If we continue to tax Canadians at current levels, we will have the same amount of money, but fewer people to provide services to. Also, the government can impose regulations on the private healthcare section. These can take the form of taxation (recognizing that the private clinics have to be profitable or it’s not worth it for them) or by working with the private clinics to provide a percentage of services to the public. For example, a private MRI clinic could accept paying customers for 4 days a week,and the public for 1 day a week, thus reducing the load/waiting-lists for the public sector by two means: more clinics providing the service (an extra day on the machine) and less people seeking the service (wealthier people will pay to jump the public waiting list). The system will be reigned in by the fact that if the public system finds a way to reduce waiting times, wealthier people will no longer have an incentive to use the private clinics. The private clinics will naturally move on to other services that have longer public wait-times, and by competing with them, help to strengthen the public-service.
I’m not an expert in healthcare; I’m not an expert in government expenditures. But in a country that is bounded by operating in a free-market, we have to compete based in that reality. Healthcare should serve to enable access to services, not deny them.
I still might vote NDP. I do believe they can act as a check to Conservative party, more than the Liberals who are unaccustomed to working in opposition. The NDP’s plan for healthcare could never be advanced to the point that I would have a problem with it. If they are just after more money at this point, I’m sure that money could be used immediately. But I still haven’t heard a realistic plan to fix healthcare from any of the parties. If we want a solution that works within the realities of today, we should be encouraging genuine discussion of every possibility, including privitization. I wouldn’t want to die because the hospital that is treating me doesn’t have the equipment that’s on next year’s budget.
