rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Trade deal costs, pharmacare savings: Which did Harper choose?

Please chip in to support rabble's election 2019 coverage. Support rabble.ca today for as little as $1 per month!

Unfilled Prescriptions: The Drug Coverage Gap in Canada's Health Care System, a report by the Mowat Centre, says that universal pharmacare and other strategies could save Canada up to $14 billion a year.

The National Post reports, "Canadians who can't afford their prescriptions add between $7 and $9 billion in costs to the health care system, a new report states. ...Many don't fill prescriptions because they can't afford to, a phenomena exacerbated by the patchwork of coverage in different provinces. Those who can't or won't fill their prescriptions end up back in hospital and the phenomena leads to 'higher mortality'...If universal coverage were combined with other strategies, the Mowat report estimates national pharmacare could save Canadians and their governments a combined $14 billion a year."

The report says that universal pharmacare alone would save up to $11.4 billion a year.

The article highlights, "We spend more annually on prescription drugs than doctors, the report notes. Only hospitals eat up more health-care cash, and yet drugs are not universally or even consistently covered across the country. Spending on pharmaceuticals, which includes government-funded drugs such as chemotherapy and out-of-pocket or insured costs like birth control, hit $27.7 billion in 2012. In 1985, Canada spent about $2.6 billion on pharmaceuticals (about $6 billion in 2012 dollars). ...In 1985, the average Canadian spent less than $100 a year on drugs. In 2012, it neared $800."

In March, health policy researchers stated in the Canadian Medical Association Journal that a universal drug plan could reduce total spending on medications in Canada by $7.3 billion a year and provide coverage to everyone with the total extra cost to government in the range of $1 billion to $5.4 billion.

While universal pharmacare makes sense, the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) does not.

Council of Canadians health-care campaigner Michael Butler has noted, "It is estimated that changes to patent protection for pharmaceutical drugs in CETA could end up costing our public health care system anywhere between $850 million to $1.65 billion annually. This is up to 13 per cent of the total drug costs Canadians pay annually."

He argues, "If CETA is ratified the likelihood of a national pharmacare plan becomes substantially more difficult (if possible at all) as we would also face billions of dollars in lawsuits under the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism. Pharmaceutical corporations that see pharmacare as an infringement on their right to profit from life-saving medications would be well positioned with this provision to stop such an initiative. The recent $500 million ISDS lawsuit under NAFTA against Canada by U.S. pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly highlights the difficulty of making cheaper generic drugs available to Canadians."

Butler concludes, "If we want to implement universal pharmacare, then we must say no to 'free trade' deals like CETA."

And then there's Harper's funding formula for health care.

CBC has reported, "The federal government has guaranteed the provinces an annual 6-per-cent increase in health care funding until 2016-17. After that, increases will be tied to growth in nominal gross domestic product, a measure of GDP plus inflation -- but is guaranteed to be at least 3 per cent." This would amount to a $36-billion cut in total health funding to the provinces over 10 years.

For more on our health-care campaign, please click here.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.

Comments

We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:

Do

  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.

Don't

  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.