Dr. Eric Hoskins, Chair of the Advisory Council on the Implementation of National Pharmacare, is accompanied by Vincent Dumez, Member of the Advisory Council on the Implementation of National Pharmacare, during a press conference at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa on Wednesday, June 12, 2019.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick
Is it feasible, desirable and affordable to replace all existing private and public drug insurance plans and set up a new government bureaucracy?The report by Dr. Eric Hoskins and the Advisory Council on Implementation of National Pharmacare addresses a definite need to expand drug coverage to include all Canadians. Dr. Danielle Martin, CEO of Women’s College Hospital in Toronto, called it a “victory for patients.” Dr. Bob Bell, former Ontario deputy health minister under Hoskins, termed it “bold and clever.” Canadian Labour Congress president Hassan Yussuff claimed it was the “unfinished business of medicare.” However, it deliberately overlooks several very important issues.About 10 to 20 per cent of Canadians are uninsured or underinsured for necessary prescription drugs. The rest of the population is covered by a patchwork of public and private plans. The problem is exacerbated by the aging population and part-time workers with few drug benefits. Drug costs are rapidly increasing, yet the average prices for generic drugs was — compared to Canada — about 74 per cent for several European countries only 39 per cent for New Zealand.The Hoskins report lists “comparator countries” — Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. In virtually all, health delivery is national. By contrast, the Canada constitution requires that health be under provincial or territorial jurisdiction. Hoskins acknowledges that it may take some time before all provinces and territories are prepared to opt in. This certainly applies to Quebec, which already has a comprehensive, universal but costly drug plan.Hoskins stresses that “the council recommends the federal government enshrine the principles and national standard of pharmacare in federal legislation separate and distinct from the Canada Health Act.” He argues, “We are also concerned that amending the Canada Health Act might lead to pressure to make other changes.”Why does Hoskins wish to keep his program separate? He recommends modest user fees and also that private insurers be allowed to provide private coverage for co-payments, as well as for drugs not on the national formulary.He fails to mention that all the comparator countries also have a blended public/private health delivery system. These are kept fiscally sustainable with shorter wait times thanks to modest user fees and private coverage of some physician services also covered by the public system — all prohibited by the Canada Health Act. This is a major issue in the ongoing lawsuit of Vancouver surgeon Dr. Brian Day.When medicare was implemented in the 1950s and 1960s, the original intent was for Ottawa to pay for half of hospital and medical care costs. The federal share is now down to about 21 per cent. The Canada Health Transfer is based per capita, regardless of the needs of an older population in areas such as the Atlantic provinces.Hoskins proposes closing the gap between what each province needs and what it now spends. Thus, the pharmacare transfer for Newfoundland and Labrador would be $794 per person, $759 for New Brunswick but $344 for Saskatchewan. He recognizes that provinces and territories demand secure federal funding before signing a new agreement, in other words, “One party should not be able to make unilateral changes to the arrangement.”How should we proceed? First, “filling the gaps of drug coverage” should be implemented soon at an estimated initial cost of $3.5 billion annually. Very expensive drugs for rare diseases should be covered for all Canadians. There should be tighter policing of kickbacks of generic drug companies to pharmacies, which now may be increasing costs to individuals, private and public drug plans.What should be done about persons already covered by private and public insurance plans? Consider that in 2017, there was a total of $29.8 billion spent on prescriptions; $13.4 billion was from public plans, $11.5 billion from private plans and $5 billion out of pocket.Thanks to bulk purchasing, drug prices would supposedly drop, resulting in a savings of $100 per year in drug premiums and for businesses, $750 annually per employee. Businesses would save more than $15 billion from insurance costs and families would save over $5 billion in out-of-pocket costs. However, the marginal cost to Ottawa would be at least $15.3 billion annually by 2027. This at a time when the federal deficit is already about $20 billion per year.Hoskins is vague as to how his program would be funded. He does not try to recoup any of the savings from businesses now relieved of paying for drug plans. To avoid tax increases and deeper indebtedness, Ottawa should also study and borrow ideas from successful blended systems in the comparative countries. It should then amend and modernize much of the Canada Health Act.Both Hoskins’ report and a total reassessment — after 35 years — of the Canada Health Act should be on the agenda when the premiers and territorial leaders meet in Saskatoon from July 9-11 for the Council of the Federation.Dr. Charles Shaver is an Ottawa internal medicine specialist and past-chair of the general internal medicine section of the Ontario Medical Association.Letters to the editor should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. The editorial pages editor is Gordon Clark, who can be reached at email@example.com.CLICK HERE to report a typo.Is there more to this story? We’d like to hear from you about this or any other stories you think we should know about. Email firstname.lastname@example.org.