Canadian medicare is really a medical care insurance plan, run by an arm of government acting as an insurance agency. The government charges the population to recover its costs, and calls this charge a “tax.” But is this really a tax?
Some would argue that it is an insurance premium — if the beast gives milk, chews its cud and moos, it is a cow, regardless of what name you give it. In this case, the premium is bundled in with your income tax. However, honesty and full disclosure require itemization of this “income tax.” (I am not referring to the direct, picayune medicare premiums charged in some provinces.)
The first item would read “income tax” and the second “medicare premium.” You would be required to sum the 2 and pay the total to the receiver general. Then, at least, you would know what medicare actually costs you.
Canadian governments are the equivalents of the private health insurance companies in the United States. In both countries there is a contract between insurer and insured. There is a slight difference in this contract but it is insignificant. In the United States it is explicit. In Canada it is implicit, but nonetheless exists because of our premium (“tax”) payments to government.
In the United States there is considerable support for a “patients' bill of rights” that would give patients the right to sue the insurer as well as the doctor when performance is inadequate [see page 877]. This must also apply in Canada because Canadian government health insurers cannot be less responsible than their private, for-profit counterparts in the United States.
The major problem with Canadian medical care insurance is the lack of timely access to service, as witnessed by our long waiting lists. A patients' bill of rights in Canada would give patients the right to sue the insurer — the insuring arm of government — for long delays in treatment. Adoption of this principle would do more to shorten waiting lists than all the reports from government commissions and inquiries, laid end to end.
This plan would in no way violate the Canada Health Act, nor would it lead to two-tier medicine or promote the privatization of medicine. It would simply compel the government to implement the act's principles instead of paying them lip service.