The Alison Redford transgressions thread. Update- Redford quits.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

How would privatization help? I need something more than the the typical 'governments are ineffective' line too.

The best health care systems in the world are a mix of public and private care. The problem in this country is that people seem to only be capable of comparing our system or the US system, neither are very good. If a politician dares to bring up the health care system they are immediately accused of wanting a US system where people are left to die in the streets, the poor have no coverage, the rich get a different level of care, etc.

[CaptainCrunch]

Privatization of parts is one options. Probably the first thing to do is an efficiency audit with an eye on cutting into management and shifting costs from administration to delivery.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by nik-

In my mind, when a party makes a ton of noise about saving money by rolling back MLA pay raises, they've lost perspective, or have never had it. It's a drop in the drop in the bucket.

Put enough drops in the bucket and water starts to add up.

Things like MLA pay are tricky though because perception is always that politicians are paid too much, but at the same time, you want to ensure their compensation is fair enough that good people are attracted to politics.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Put enough drops in the bucket and water starts to add up.

Things like MLA pay are tricky though because perception is always that politicians are paid too much, but at the same time, you want to ensure their compensation is fair enough that good people are attracted to politics.

Yeah, if all the drops are the same, but they're not. Once that irrelevant drop is removed what's next? Real decisions.

It's public opinion bluster, it's not a solution.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Put enough drops in the bucket and water starts to add up.

Things like MLA pay are tricky though because perception is always that politicians are paid too much, but at the same time, you want to ensure their compensation is fair enough that good people are attracted to politics.

Any other trite sayings that can solve everything? The reality is that the WRP fiscal plan is all drops of water, and its barely covers the bottom of the bucket. They have more to add than these little bits, but no details on what they would actually be.

Truth be told, that is what killed their chances last campaign. Voters don't only want to hear that you can make a few changes and cuts and suddenly the budget balances, pain free. It is insulting to the intelligence of the electorate. Healthcare is one glaring example. They have these ideas of how they're going to "trim the fat" and save billions of dollars. I think that voters demand more than that, and while not everyone will look, having a policy document that actually details how these massive overhauls would be accomplished is critical.

I know its easy to blame the loss on a couple clowns who made inadvisable statements, or the climate change denial, and those things didn't help. My opinion is that when you're not in office and you basically say "I can fix everything and its not going to hurt at all" people get suspicious. Its not even a question of whether people agree with your positions at that point, we just all know its not that easy. So you have a couple yahoos making these comments, and then when people dig deeper there is all this cloudiness and the PCs have a field day.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

How would privatization help? I need something more than the the typical 'governments are ineffective' line too.

I think the reason is that competition is healthy and typically lowers costs.

If a private company can meet all the provincial standards cheaper than the AHS facility why shouldn't they be able to perform the work and bill the province.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Slava

Any other trite sayings that can solve everything? The reality is that the WRP fiscal plan is all drops of water, and its barely covers the bottom of the bucket. They have more to add than these little bits, but no details on what they would actually be.

Truth be told, that is what killed their chances last campaign. Voters don't only want to hear that you can make a few changes and cuts and suddenly the budget balances, pain free. It is insulting to the intelligence of the electorate. Healthcare is one glaring example. They have these ideas of how they're going to "trim the fat" and save billions of dollars. I think that voters demand more than that, and while not everyone will look, having a policy document that actually details how these massive overhauls would be accomplished is critical.

I know its easy to blame the loss on a couple clowns who made inadvisable statements, or the climate change denial, and those things didn't help. My opinion is that when you're not in office and you basically say "I can fix everything and its not going to hurt at all" people get suspicious. Its not even a question of whether people agree with your positions at that point, we just all know its not that easy. So you have a couple yahoos making these comments, and then when people dig deeper there is all this cloudiness and the PCs have a field day.

I think you overestimate the intelligence of voters. Perhaps one in twenty cares enough about the issues to form even a basic understanding of them. The rest base decisions on sound bites.

[Rerun]

The truth is that because of those two clowns the PC propaganda machine went into action and painted the whole party with the same paint brush, which caused people to re-think their plan to elect an inexperienced party into office. .... especially when there weren't significant problems with the way the current government was governing.

People just decided to stick with the devil they knew rather than take a chance on the PC painted devil they didn't and the PC with their fear mongering gladly helped them along the way.

Btw, it appears that a lot of people are now regretting their decision to change their vote and now see the PC for what they really are.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Slava

Any other trite sayings that can solve everything? The reality is that the WRP fiscal plan is all drops of water, and its barely covers the bottom of the bucket. They have more to add than these little bits, but no details on what they would actually be.

Truth be told, that is what killed their chances last campaign. Voters don't only want to hear that you can make a few changes and cuts and suddenly the budget balances, pain free. It is insulting to the intelligence of the electorate. Healthcare is one glaring example. They have these ideas of how they're going to "trim the fat" and save billions of dollars. I think that voters demand more than that, and while not everyone will look, having a policy document that actually details how these massive overhauls would be accomplished is critical.

I know its easy to blame the loss on a couple clowns who made inadvisable statements, or the climate change denial, and those things didn't help. My opinion is that when you're not in office and you basically say "I can fix everything and its not going to hurt at all" people get suspicious. Its not even a question of whether people agree with your positions at that point, we just all know its not that easy. So you have a couple yahoos making these comments, and then when people dig deeper there is all this cloudiness and the PCs have a field day.

AFAIK the Wildrose can not go into specifics because they have no control at the moment.

If you want to cut costs to health care you need to instruct the board of AHS to find places to cut and present those options to the government for review and decision making.

No political party is knowledgeable enough to provide in depth analysis of departments that they do not control. Asking them to do otherwise is ignoring how the system works.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Privatization of parts is one options. Probably the first thing to do is an efficiency audit with an eye on cutting into management and shifting costs from administration to delivery.

The Healthcare system has serious structural impediments to evolving the way it needs to...it needs a deep overhaul...right down to the chassis...which is tough to do in a system that needs to be continually operating at a high level.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

AFAIK the Wildrose can not go into specifics because they have no control at the moment.

If you want to cut costs to health care you need to instruct the board of AHS to find places to cut and present those options to the government for review and decision making.

No political party is knowledgeable enough to provide in depth analysis of departments that they do not control. Asking them to do otherwise is ignoring how the system works.

See that's where it seems so silly. You're a smart guy, and you know that if you were interviewing someone for a job and they claimed that they could do something you would ask how? If the best they could come up with is "I'd have to see when I get in there" it wouldn't be enough for me to hire them. I think that most people would feel that way.

If after that all we get is the tired line of "trim the fat, cut the red tape, find efficiencies, create synergies" and other tripe, I'm not listening any further. We should do those things, and I guess I'm in favour. Do I actually believe that that kind of thing is the exact right amount to balance the budget and cure all the funding woes of health, education and infrastructure though? Well I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I think the reason is that competition is healthy and typically lowers costs.

If a private company can meet all the provincial standards cheaper than the AHS facility why shouldn't they be able to perform the work and bill the province.

Has it been shown that they can? We need look no further than the healthcare costs of the US to understand that a private system isn't the answer.

Plenty of barriers to entry don't exactly promote healthy competition within the industry. We already have private clinics and private services like MRIs and diagnostics.

What do you suggest privatizing? Because if it is private hospitals, absolutely terrible idea.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Slava

See that's where it seems so silly. You're a smart guy, and you know that if you were interviewing someone for a job and they claimed that they could do something you would ask how? If the best they could come up with is "I'd have to see when I get in there" it wouldn't be enough for me to hire them. I think that most people would feel that way.

If after that all we get is the tired line of "trim the fat, cut the red tape, find efficiencies, create synergies" and other tripe, I'm not listening any further. We should do those things, and I guess I'm in favour. Do I actually believe that that kind of thing is the exact right amount to balance the budget and cure all the funding woes of health, education and infrastructure though? Well I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.

I can't see how they could have the answers though.

They have to be able to direct the boards and managers of departments to present options or be able to hire an auditor and give them the authority to audit departments.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Has it been shown that they can? We need look no further than the healthcare costs of the US to understand that a private system isn't the answer.

Plenty of barriers to entry don't exactly promote healthy competition within the industry. We already have private clinics and private services like MRIs and diagnostics.

What do you suggest privatizing? Because if it is private hospitals, absolutely terrible idea.

The US has privatized paying though which is very different than privatizing delivery.

As far as I know, in Alberta there are private diagnostic systems that you can pay for to get things done faster. I am suggesting that private companies be allowed to bill AHS directly if they can do it for cheaper than AHS and charge the patient nothing.

I don't really like the idea that the rich can pay to bypass the system even though I would probably try to do it myself if I was in the situation.

[Rerun]

One could even go so far as to have short term stay private surgical units/clinics where they perform operations such as hip replacement surgery, and other types of surgery where wait times are enormously long through the public health care system. Since they would specialize in this type of operation wait times would decrease and so would costs. AHC would get billed for these operations and the general public would go there instead of a hospital where they have limited resources (ie operating rooms and staff)

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Why do people assume that moving to a private system (which now will have to include profit) will save money?

Will efficiencies from competition > increased cost for corporate profits

[nik-]

I also don't want a for profit company responsible for my health care.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I can't see how they could have the answers though.

They have to be able to direct the boards and managers of departments to present options or be able to hire an auditor and give them the authority to audit departments.

I just think they have to provide some answers that are concrete. It's not enough to say they can do this without pain for the public and provide no details.

Originally Posted by Rerun

One could even go so far as to have short term stay private surgical units/clinics where they perform operations such as hip replacement surgery, and other types of surgery where wait times are enormously long through the public health care system. Since they would specialize in this type of operation wait times would decrease and so would costs. AHC would get billed for these operations and the general public would go there instead of a hospital where they have limited resources (ie operating rooms and staff)

Why? We already have private operations in some areas and it seems to have no effect on wait times or costs? I think it's fair to say we shouldn't always use the US example... But the example right here in Alberta doesn't seem to be very effective in improving delivery?

It's anecdotal, but I know people who say 'maybe I'll go be a private radiologist and run a clinic because you can make so much money.' Sounds like a great cost cutting measure.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Rerun

One could even go so far as to have short term stay private surgical units/clinics where they perform operations such as hip replacement surgery, and other types of surgery where wait times are enormously long through the public health care system. Since they would specialize in this type of operation wait times would decrease and so would costs. AHC would get billed for these operations and the general public would go there instead of a hospital where they have limited resources (ie operating rooms and staff)

How would wait times decrease under that system? Do you think that a hip replacement is just a simple in and out procedure? Other than the months of preparation for surgery, education, pharmacists, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, nursing care, rehabilitation, home care, potentially social work intervention, dieticians, and complications that arise... Things are not as simple as you are making them out to be. Actually it is quite laughable how simple you are making this out to be.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

How would wait times decrease under that system? Do you think that a hip replacement is just a simple in and out procedure? Other than the months of preparation for surgery, education, pharmacists, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, nursing care, rehabilitation, home care, potentially social work intervention, dieticians, and complications that arise... Things are not as simple as you are making them out to be. Actually it is quite laughable how simple you are making this out to be.

You are making it way more complicated than it is. We are talking about current hospital operating theaters that are booked months in advance because there is a shortage of said theaters and staff to run them.

More operating theaters and therefore more staff means shorter wait times for surgery.


... just curious Mr Mustard.... are you employed by AHS or receive financial remuneration from AHS?