Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2022
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2022
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
News

What’s next for the Liberals on health?

Lauren Vogel
CMAJ February 02, 2016 188 (2) E29-E30; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-5209
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

It’s been more than 50 days since the federal Liberals won a landslide majority government on the promise of “real change.” Now Parliament is back in session and “Canadians want their government to do different things, and to do things differently,” said Governor General David Johnston in his Dec. 4 speech from the throne.

But when it comes to health reform, policy experts say that many of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s commitments are still too vague to indicate a major departure from federal (or at least Liberal) business as usual.

“To some extent they have backed themselves in a corner,” says Åke Blomqvist, a health economist for the CD Howe Institute. “They have created expectations among Canadians that some dramatic things will happen, but there is hesitation to do something that will incur the hostility of the provinces.”

A new health accord

The speech from the throne, which sets out the government’s priorities for the upcoming parliamentary session, included only one health promise: to “begin work” with the provinces and territories to negotiate a new long-term funding agreement to replace the lapsed 2004 Health Accord.

The tentative language makes sense “coming off a period when the role of the federal government in health care has been gradually wound down,” says Blomqvist. Given the mixed results of the last $41-billion accord, which was hampered by federal inability to hold provinces to account for health outcomes, “perhaps the Liberals are cautious of trying to re-establish a more active role.”

Colleen Flood, Ottawa University Research Chair in Health Law and Policy, says that vague promises don’t inspire confidence that a new accord will include the “carrots and sticks” necessary for change. “Why give the money to the provinces at all unless there’s some vision that you’re aspiring to? This language is all about the process, having the conversation, and not about the outcome.”

Figure

The new Liberal government will have to tackle regulating assisted death and negotiating a health accord in the term ahead.

Image courtesy of KatarzynaBialasiewicz/istock

The Liberals’ promise to invest $3 billion over the next four years for more and better home care is a case in point, Flood says. Without defining what “more” or “better” means, “it’s the same old, same old,” she argues. “The feds commit to put money in before they talk about what they want out.”

Pharmacare

Under the new health accord, the Liberals have promised to join with the provinces to buy prescription drugs in bulk and explore the need for a national formulary. Canada pays some of the highest drug prices worldwide, yet Canadians have relatively poor access to medicines and often can’t afford to fill prescriptions under the current patchwork of public and private drug plans.

Although bulk purchasing can achieve “some savings,” Flood says the Liberals’ plan essentially maintains the status quo. The provinces already cooperate to buy drugs in bulk, but those efforts only cut costs by 1.5% in 2014. “The real savings will come when you’re buying for the entire country, not just the people under public plans,” says Flood.

The College of Family Physicians of Canada and, in an open letter, more than 300 health professionals and academics, are now urging the Liberals to establish a universal pharmacare plan. A national public system like those currently in place to purchase vaccines and blood supply products “would achieve equity of access goals while saving Canadians between $4 billion and $11 billion per year,” stated experts including 11 Canada Research Chairs and 10 recipients of the Order of Canada in the open letter.

Stronger federal leadership on drug reform makes “eminent sense,” even to more conservative economists, says Blomqvist. Short of establishing universal pharmacare, there are still “interesting lessons to be learned from European models, where government agencies purchase and supply medicines not only to federal and provincial programs, but to private insurers as well.”

Assisted death and marijuana

The legalization and regulation of physician-assisted death and recreational marijuana also loom large on Trudeau’s reform agenda, although he only cited the latter as a top priority in marching orders to Health Minister Dr. Jane Philpott.

According to Philpott, work is already underway to create a federal–provincial–territorial task force to design a new regulatory framework for marijuana akin to those for tobacco and alcohol, including harsher punishments for providing the drug to children and driving while high.

Meanwhile, Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould has asked the Supreme Court of Canada to extend the ban on assisted death another six months to give the government time to develop a response. The court found the prohibition unconstitutional and gave Parliament until Feb. 6, 2016, to create new legislation. This leaves little time for a new all-party special committee to discuss the issue before breaking for the holidays until late January.

Health promotion

Most other Liberal health commitments fall into traditional spheres of federal jurisdiction. Promised health promotion initiatives include restricting the advertising of unhealthy foods to children, introducing regulations to ban trans fats and reduce salt in processed foods, updating food labels to include more information on added sugars and artificial dyes, requiring plain packaging for tobacco products and investing $15 million to create national strategies on vaccination and concussion treatment.

As a general statement of the new government’s commitment to its role in public health, these initiatives represent a “sea change” from the past decade, says Bill Jeffery, national coordinator for the Centre for Science in the Public Interest. “There is a bit of ambiguity in the language... but the details will be very important.”

It’s unclear how some commitments will differ from work already started by the former Conservative government. For example, “one could read the commitments about nutrition labeling as meaning exactly what the Conservatives proposed, which I thought was a very expensive waste of time,” says Jeffery. Others initiatives, like restrictions on junk food advertising, may not be legally sustainable, he adds.

Indigenous health

Even more ambitious is the Liberals’ new promise to implement all 94 recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which includes establishing measurable goals to identify and close the gaps in Indigenous health outcomes, providing sustainable funding for existing and new Aboriginal healing centres and integrating Aboriginal healing practices into the Canadian health care system.

“These are supportive things for Aboriginal health,” says Flood, “but without money and a timeline, it’s just more smoke.”

Foreign aid and refugee health

The Liberals’ commitments on foreign aid and refugee health are also a mixed bag. Experts welcome the government’s speedy restoration of both basic and supplemental health benefits to incoming refugees. But they’re more cynical about Trudeau’s promise to refocus foreign aid on “poverty reduction” — something already required by law.

“That is not as clear as it sounds, since parties can disagree on the best way to reduce poverty,” says Stephen Brown, a political science professor at the University of Ottawa. “For instance, is it by promoting the extractive industry [operations that remove metals, minerals and aggregates from the earth], arguing that it creates jobs... or is it by focusing on grassroots development projects?”

It’s also unclear whether new money for refugee resettlement and mitigating climate change in developing countries will come from an already reduced aid budget. “The Harper government cut spending by about $1 billion per year in the past couple of years,” Brown explains. “As far as I’m aware, the Liberals have not made any commitments to increase the overall budget.”

More details on the Liberal health agenda are expected in January, following a meeting of federal, provincial and territorial health ministers in Vancouver.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 188 (2)
CMAJ
Vol. 188, Issue 2
2 Feb 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
What’s next for the Liberals on health?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
What’s next for the Liberals on health?
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ Feb 2016, 188 (2) E29-E30; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-5209

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
What’s next for the Liberals on health?
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ Feb 2016, 188 (2) E29-E30; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-5209
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • A new health accord
    • Pharmacare
    • Assisted death and marijuana
    • Health promotion
    • Indigenous health
    • Foreign aid and refugee health
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Is one-way masking enough?
  • XE, XD & XF: what to know about the Omicron hybrid variants
  • 5 infectious disease topics to watch
Show more News

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Aboriginal health
    • Canadian government
    • End-of-life care & decisions

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2022, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire