TORONTO SUN COLUMN: Looking at global options to improve Canadian health care

Canadians have long felt a sense of pride in our health-care system — often comparing a free hospital visit here to the stifling bills our southern neighbours sometimes receive for the same treatment. However, when we use a wider lens that captures health-care systems available to many of our global peers, particularly in Europe, it becomes clear we don’t have much to be proud of.

In fact, nearly every other developed country that offers universal health care performs better than Canada.

Sure, many of us have had positive encounters with Canada’s health-care system, but there is a growing list of Canadians who are falling through the cracks, who are waiting months or years for appointments with specialists and who don’t have family doctors. It’s a problem poised to get even worse.

Canada has a growing population and we are faced with a significant aging population, both of which are already putting additional pressure on existing health-care providers.

And yet, politicians right across the country seem unable or unwilling to confront these challenges with any meaningful reforms.

That’s why SecondStreet.org launched a new documentary: Health Reform Now. It gives a voice to Canadians who have been let down by the health-care system and it speaks to experts and health-care providers to point to meaningful reforms — ones that are widely used in Europe to provide better care to patients.

One such reform would be implementing activity-based funding, a policy the Montreal Economic Institute and Fraser Institute have recommended for years.

Right now, hospitals in Canada are funded in large block grants, with one large lump sum providing the entire year’s operating budget. What that means, in practice, is that every patient a hospital treats is a drain on that budget. So the incentive is entirely backwards in terms of getting more people through the doors and into treatment.

What activity-based funding does is reverse that incentive structure. Instead, funding would follow the patient, meaning if a patient is treated, the health-care facility would be given a set fee to pay for that treatment. In practice, this means the more patients a hospital helps, the more dollars the hospital receives from the government.

This isn’t a new concept either. Rather, most countries that operate universal health-care systems follow a similar funding formula, tying tax dollars to treatment and results. Canada is a holdout here and there don’t seem to be any coherent arguments as to why.

We have seen the difference a simple reform like this can make in delivering health care to folks who need it. For instance, the Quebec government has used this funding policy to increase MRI scans by 22% while the cost per procedure decreased by 4%. This is the type of meaningful but simple reform that could be introduced across Canada to reduce wait times and encourage hospitals to be more efficient and patient-centred.

To be sure, there are many other proven reform measures discussed in the documentary that could reduce wait times for patients. Governments owe it to patients to pursue them and provide Canadians with the best health-care system in the world, not one where people get sicker or even die while they are stuck on a waiting list.
It’s time for health reform – now.

Harrison Fleming is the legislative and policy director with SecondStreet.org, a Canadian think tank.

This column was originally published on August 15, 2024.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

You can help us continue to research and tell stories about this issue by making a donation or sharing this content with your friends. Be sure to sign up for our updates too!

Prevention – reduce demand in the first place

If Canadians lived healthier lives, we could reduce demand for emergency services, orthopaedic surgeries, primary care and more. 

For instance, if you visit the Canadian Cancer Society’s website, you’ll read that “about four in ten” cancer cases are preventable. The Heart and Stroke Foundation notes that “almost 80 percent of premature heart disease and stroke can be prevented through healthy behaviours.” A similar number of Diabetes cases are also preventable. 

Many joint replacements and visits to ERs and walk-in clinics could also be avoided through healthy living. 

To be sure, not all health problems can be avoided through healthy living – everyday the system treats Canadians with genetic conditions, helps those injured in unavoidable accidents and more.  

But there is an opportunity to reduce pressure on the health care system through Canadians shifting to healthier lifestyles – better diets, more exercise, etc. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this column. 

Partner with non-profits and for-profit clinics

European countries will partner with anyone who can help patients. 

It doesn’t matter if it’s a non-profit, a government entity or a private clinic. What matters is that patients receive quality treatment, in a timely manner and for a competitive price.  

In Canada, governments often delivery services using government-run hospitals instead of seeing if non-profit or private clinics could deliver the services more effectively. 

When governments have partnered with non-profit and private clinics, the results have often been quite good – Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia are just a few examples of where partnerships have worked well. 

Canada should pursue more of these partnerships to reduce wait times and increase the volume of services provided to patients.  

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see the links above. 

Make cross border care more accessible

In Canada, citizens pay high taxes each year and we’re promised universal health care services in return. The problem is, wait times are often extremely long in our health system – sometimes patients have to wait years to see a specialist or receive surgery. 

If patients don’t want to wait long periods, they often have to reach into their own pocket and pay for treatment outside the province or country. 

Throughout the European Union, we also find universal health care systems. But a key difference is that EU patients have the right to go to other EU countries, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home government. Reimbursements cover up to what the patient’s home government would have spent to provide the treatment locally. 

If Canada copied this approach, a patient waiting a year to get their hip operation could instead receive treatment next week in one of thousands of surgical clinics throughout the developed world. 

Governments benefit too as the patient is now back on their feet and avoiding complications that sometimes come with long wait times – meaning the government doesn’t have to treat those complications on top of the initial health problem. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or this shorter video. 

Legalize access to non-government providers

Canada is the only country in the world that puts up barriers, or outright bans patients from paying for health services locally. 

For instance, a patient in Toronto cannot pay for a hip operation at a private clinic in Toronto. Their only option is to wait for the government to eventually provide treatment or leave the province and pay elsewhere. 

Countries with better-performing universal health care systems do not have such bans. They allow patients a choice – use the public system or pay privately for treatment. Sweden, France, Australia and more – they all allow choice. 

Why? One reason is that allowing choice means some patients will decide to pay privately. This takes pressure off the public system. For instance, in Sweden, 87% of patients use the public system, but 13% purchase private health insurance. 

Ultimately, more choice improves access for patients. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or watch this short clip on this topic. 

Shift to funding services for patients, not bureaucracies

In Canada, most hospitals receive a cheque from the government each year and are then asked to do their best to help patients. This approach is known as “block funding”. 

Under this model, a patient walking in the door represents a drain on the hospital’s budget. Over the course of a year, hospital administrators have to make sure the budget stretches out so services are rationed. This is why you might have to wait until next year or the year after for a hip operation, knee operation, etc. 

In better-performing universal health systems, they take the opposite approach – hospitals receive money from the government each time they help a patient. If a hospital completes a knee operation, it might receive, say, $10,000. If it completes a knee operation on another patient, it receives another $10,000. 

This model incentivizes hospitals to help more patients – to help more patients with knee operations, cataract surgery, etc. This approach also incentivizes hospitals to spend money on expenses that help patients (e.g. more doctors, nurses, equipment, etc.) rather than using the money on expenses that don’t help patients (e.g. more admin staff). 

To learn more about this policy option, please watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this post by MEI.