The story behind SecondStreet.org

Play Video

Consider this simple, “bite-sized” illustration involving two pieces of bread.

John Montague was the 4th Earl of Sandwich. He was a statesman and notorious gambler who, during a 24-hour gambling streak in 1762, instructed a cook to prepare his food in such a way that it would not interfere with his game. The cook presented him with a piece of meat between two pieces of bread — no utensils required and could be eaten with one hand while the other hand was free to continue the game!

Now for reasons I don’t fully understand it’s a safe bet that for the rest of your life you will remember – mostly — how the sandwich came to be.

Did etching that into your mind require some secret memory tonic? No. Rather it required something far simpler yet far more powerful: It required telling a story.

For the past thirty years – most of it with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) – I’ve been working in the advocacy and public policy field mostly tossing around a lot of big numbers and economic jargon but also, importantly, telling a few stories along the way.

My observation has been that storytelling – or at minimum great narratives – lie at the heart of persuasive and lasting communication. And it’s not just public policy. It’s equally true in arts, business, politics or virtually any walk of life for that matter. Stories stick. Stories capture. Stories move hearts and imaginations in ways numbers cannot.

It’s not that economic data and statistics aren’t vitally important, they are, but that we often look past what’s behind those numbers. We look past what the experiences are of the individuals, families and entrepreneurs that make up economic statistics.

Take hospital waitlists for example. There’s lots of data on the number and length of time people wait, but how often are the stories of people on those waitlists told?

This became a frequent conversation with my friend and former colleague at the CTF Mark Milke (who has also worked with the Fraser Institute and other think tanks) that led us to cobble together a business plan for a new organization. SecondStreet.org would be dedicated to policy research but presented through the experiences and stories of the people affected by public policies.

Almost two-and-a-half years later I’m thrilled to see our vision come to life. To our board and our donors who got behind this vision and made it possible … thank-you!

Of course, this is only a beginning. The willingness of Canadians from coast-to-coast to share their stories will be key for our success going forward. They may not all be as entertaining as John Montague’s gambling-inspired invention of 250 years ago, but they will hopefully stick in hearts and minds and importantly, bring life to the research SecondStreet.org will undertake.

So, if you have an interesting story to share about how government policies have affected your life – in a positive way or a negative way – please send me troy@secondstreet.org or our president, Colin Craig colin@secondstreet.org an e-mail. We’d love to hear from you.

Thanks for visiting our new site!

Troy Lanigan
Founder,
SecondStreet.org

P.S. – If you’re wondering how we chose the name “SecondStreet.org” – give this video a watch – click here

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Other Canadians Share Similar Experiences:

Play Video

Don and Jackie, Winnipeg

Play Video

Jerry and Becky, Calgary

Play Video

Troy and Erika, Victoria

Play Video

Jim Jones, Toronto

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.