Hmmm, maybe all these people waiting for heart surgery should change their names to Jean Cretien.

No cue for him.....

No wonder people are heading south across the border.

Is there a link for this? Just yesterday, one of the guys here at work was emailing me about how he was so glad we had "universal(ly bad)" health care, and that he was afraid of "US style" health care.

At least in the, you can get health care. It is a crap shoot in Canada.

I looked, but there's no obvious link to the item on CBC. Surprise, surprise.

Reasonable question: Why not just make sure the every person in Saskatchewan is covered by Blue Cross or a similar medical insurance plan. Prescription costs are subsidized at 80%. In fact on the premium plan which costs a bit more it is 100%. I think welfare people already have this coverage.

The cost is about $30 per month. Should those who pay that fee responsibly subsidize those who CHOOSE not to?

Taking prescription drugs for high blood pressure reduces the risk you'll need surgery. The same principle applies to lots of other prescriptions and conditions.

Too bad Brad Wall doesn't think the cost and accessibility of such drugs is an issue people are concerned about.

Stephen, you must not have read the Sask Party plan.
http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/features/electionsaskatchewan/story.html?id=65ea4bd4-67fb-4111-98f5-ba044c48473c&k=53328

Ahh...what a wonderful world it would be if all things were paid for or subsidized by others. The problem is that, in Saskatchewan, each taxpayer is already responsible for supporting themselves, their family, one person that won't work and one person that can't work. As the will not and can not tax receiver demographics (welfare and seniors) grow the taxpayers and their families will continue to shrink by percentage and through out migration.

Meaningful tax relief rather than more spending is the way to go.

Throw money at it! Fast as you can! As much and more than is necessary! Change nothing! I don't care if we all go broke! This is Tommy's baby! No I don't drive a fourty year old car, but what are you getting at? More money nowwwwww!

The NDP are not stupid--they will try to secure their votes with the seniors, First Nations and unions and then move on to the general public. I am really interested to see what the voter turnout will be this year. The SaskParty has to be more vocal or they will again lose the election (and Brad should get a new catch phrase instead of "tired and old" . It may be true but he is using it as a crutch in all his public speaking engagements. Both Calvert and Wall underestimate the intelligence of the electorate.

I did know of the SaskParty plan, and of its rejection of the principle of universality.

Health for some, but not for all.

How does Brad Wall tell what your monthly prescription drug bill is just from knowing your annual income or your age?

Re: Calvert's proposed drug plan. The Saskatchewan Drug Plan was originally introduced on September 01-1975. Cost was $2.00 per prescrition, all Sask. residents were covered.
Slight problem! By 1986, the plan's cost was skyrocketing by 46% every year. I couldn't find a reliable source as to what the intital cost was. However if Grant Devine thought it was expensive, it must've been one hell of a lot of money.
After 1986, a deductible was introduced, approx. 80% of costs could be recovered. Cost to the Gov. kept skyrocketing, mostly because of a multitude of new drugs being introduced. And guess what folks. The plan became so flawed, and so expensive, by 2002, the NDP had all but scrapped it, except for low income familes; most of whom qualified for social assistance.
I've overstayed my welcome at the Leader Post and the Star Phoenix. (Because of my anti-NDP stance.) However if anyone out there is in need of publicity, it might be a good idea to send a letter to the ed. that spells out the true nature of "free drugs." And by the by,, "Ridlin" sells for about $20 per tab on the black market. I'll leave the rest to imagination.

Stephen if you make more than 68,000 dollars you can afford blue cross at $15 a month.

http://www.sk.bluecross.ca/personal/bluechoice/core.html
http://www.sk.bluecross.ca/personal/bluechoice/rate.html

If you opt out of doing this then there is the catastrophic drug plan.

By the way the Saskatchewan drug plan doesn't cover all drugs, only some. So if you are prescribed a drug not the list too bad.

Excessive wait times are the logical byproduct of a health care system based on rationing supply instead of meeting demand.

We, the people, either force government to allow private health care, or we shut the hell up and get in the cue.

Stephen knows that this whole "drug plan" is simply a manufactured wedged issue.
It is irresponsible, at best, to invent bad policies because of desperation.
Calvert and his NDP lackies are worse than "old and tired", they are "rotten and stinky": how's that for a new catch phrase?

You just gotta love the NDP two tier health system. If you live in a city where the NDP has the vast majority of seats you get one, two or even three hosptials and, as a bonus, you get municipally funded roads to get to those hosptals. If you live outside of an NDP riding you get no roads and for good measure they may close your nearest hosptial on weekends so you get to drive your sick or injured loved ones 60 miles over bad roads to be turned down for service. How does Lorne sleep at night?

Maybe someone should sue Calvert for breach of constitutional rights of security?

We are all worried about an upcoming election. How about the 500million dollars that is going to flood Saskatchewan in less then 35 days. 140million of that to Regina. Its going to be one hell of a party. Somebodies gotta get me the crime stats for the next two months. How about the L.B.S. sales. Last day for claims was two days ago and all claims will be processed and checks issued with 35 days.

John Gormley had an excellent commentary about the NDP proposed drug plan today. He states that the other THREE existing programs will continue to run. The proposed NDP drug plan has all the same restrictions as the other plans presently in place do (if it isn't in the approved list, you do without or pay). All in all, it's a weak drug program that sounds good to the uneducated or the gullible (my take, not John's), it is implied that the new 'increased' plan is unneccessary and not needed, and SHAME on the NDP for using the elderly as pawns for their own gain.

Good rant John. Kate, post it here if you can.

PD

I'm with mark peters. The ONLY way to ensure affordable health care and drugs for ALL (and from recent harrowing family experience I can tell you we sure as HELL do not have that now) is to allow a free market like we have for dental care, vision care and veterinary care.

Hey Stephen, how about we get the government to provide homes and food for everyone too? Can you imagine a scarier scenario than allowing the government to be responsible for your meals?

Lorne Calvert's name comes up a lot in discussions among French Quebeckers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_French_profanity

Rationed houses, rationed food, rationed medical care; it's a socialist paradise! Who wants a US style housing market anyway, you un-Canadian hard right nut case!?!

This is the major reason I think the prescription drug plan is a dumb idea. To be honest I was disappointed that the Sask Party chose to take the bait and offer their own version of a plan. What is needed is for all available cash for health going to training more nurses - many more, more patient beds, more physicians and retention of the ones we have,reduction of wait times for surgeries and more healthstyle education. Until we can make some significant progress in these we should not be spending any more on drugs than we presently are.

The Sask. Party plan is a change to the Seniors drug plan, nothing more. The reporting on it has been very poor. There will be a means test for seniors, removing those with income of over $64, 000 and they will add kids under 14 to the plan. I think they have missed the mark with more coverage, but at least it will CUT $600,000 from the existing budget and not add $125 million like the proposed NDP plan.

Ken - Those are not the numbers I heard coming out of the Sask Party today. There is a figure that the Sask Party plan will be some 2.5 million per year less than the NDP plan. I think that the costing of both plans needs to be better explained to the public.

What the hell is Brad Wall doing. What we need is a education tax break. Most people are home owners. A tax break would impact the most people possible. It is a savings that is easy to relate to. All Brad has to do is offer this and even Liberals will vote for him. If Wall doesn't wake up the NDP will win again and the Sask. Party supporters will have four years of wondering what just happened

Hey, hundred of people per day are eating government meals, it is called hospital food.
If these meals are as bad in SASK as in AB, you could die of starvation if you have a long stay.

Stephen if you make more than 68,000 dollars you can afford blue cross at $15 a month.

Read the fine print.

Your numbers don't add up, according to the website you yourself cite.

Here is a detailed backgrounder of the SaskParty plan I found on their website.

http://www.saskparty.com/assets/pdf/New%20Ideas/PrescriptionDrugPlan.pdf

It says the SaskParty plan will save $600,000 a year compared to the NDP's current Senior's Drug Plan. It will cost millions less - probably hundreds of millions less - than the NDP's "drugs for all" plan. But it's impossible to say how much for sure, because the NDP didn't provide any costing or detail of their plan.

I believe John Gormley is pegging it at about $700 million over five years. So that's how much the SaskParty plan will save compared to the NDP plan.

And I would expect some of those savings to show up in education tax relief. It's still early in the campaign. The SaskParty isn't going to announce everything the first two days.

This drug plan is for people who don't have a company drug plan. With my plan at work I pay 9.00 total the rest is covered. A lot of people retire before age 65 and they need help. Get with the program.

But it's impossible to say how much for sure, because the NDP didn't provide any costing or detail of their plan.

I believe John Gormley is pegging it at about $700 million over five years. So that's how much the SaskParty plan will save compared to the NDP plan.

No worries, stan--you've earned the approval of the Sask Party for posting the backgrounder you 'found' on their website.

Here's a question, though--what do the Sask Party's 'averages' mean to the person who has to write the cheque to pay the (non-average) bill?

ok4ua, if you retire before 65 then you must have money to get by on. why should I pay for drugs for people whom choose not to work. I have read many of your post and you are just plain stupid. a lefty who thinks that everyone else should pay for your comfort. by the way, 9 dollars for your prescriptions, you must be living off the government nipple.

Ya dumb like a fox. I pay for a drug plan.9.00 deductable.

What knipple are you living off of if you have a job at all?