What's Wrong with Healthcare?

Thinking inside and outside of the healthcare box. After 41 years of family practice, what's happened to Canada's healthcare system?

Friday, December 01, 2006

Dinning Will Win, Alberta Will Lose

It continually amazes me that politicians continue to vault themselves into office by declaring they are a “moderate” by supporting our Universal, publicly funded, monopolistic healthcare system. Is that the proper term for supposedly intelligent people, who have the privilege of tracking and analyzing a healthcare system over a period of thirty nine years, witness an exorbitant increase in cost during that time, witness a corresponding decrease in health outcomes during that same period of time, still claim nothing needs fixing and the status quo “rules”. Einstein had a different word to describe it.
Perhaps I am being too idealistic and severe in my criticism and these fellows are simply being politically astute, and the public misinformed; but whatever the case, once again the strategy will work, even in a more independent Alberta. I will predict Jim Dinning will win the Leadership of the Conservative party of Alberta and be Alberta’s next Premier.
Having reviewed how the voting tabulated last Saturday, and taking region by region candidate placement, it becomes apparent how tomorrows vote will go. By adding the first and second placements of Jim Dinning, we arrive at a figure of 76. If we do the same for Ted Morton we get 48, and with Ed Stelmach we get 13. Now I know that this is a region by region perspective, and that the leadership will be determined by the total number of votes for each candidate, but from what I can see, unless there is some unforeseen occurrence, Jim Dinning will be a shoe-in.
And that is too bad for three reasons:
1) If Mr. Dinning has so little understanding and “vision”, of solutions in healthcare, of which he has had considerable exposure, how can we have confidence in his abilities to deal with infrastructure, incredible growth, environment, Ottawa, etc? On the other hand, if he took his “status quo” position on healthcare just to get elected, what does that say about his honesty, integrity, and character?
2) It will indicate that the people of Alberta are no longer prepared to stand up for Alberta. It will mean we have lost the ability to shrug off criticism and to try new things; in short we, who have been the most independent and innovative in Canada, have bought into the philosophy that we should be followers and not leaders. We have become a province and people that believe conflict should be avoided at all cost, and that principle should give way to the common good.
3) Strong leadership on the right could seriously split the conservative part in Alberta. Like many Albertans during the run up to the last election, I considered voting for the Alliance Party, but did not feel the candidates and their leader were of sufficient experience or strength to be credible. Although I voted conservative, many conservatives simply abstained. In Thursday night’s debate, it became apparent that, as Ted Morton stated, Mr. Dinning seemed to have little tolerance for the views of Ted and his followers. The primary ingredient of a “big tent” organization is that each member has respect for each others views. Referring to those views in negative terms such as regressive or scary is not endearing. If the Alliance party were to find credible candidates and convince a Ted Morton to lead it, the conservative vote in Alberta would be split so significantly, the Liberals would likely win the next provincial election.
So there it is folks. I predict a Dinning win and big trouble ahead for the Conservative Party of Alberta.

2 Comments:

Blogger Lanny said...

Surprisingly, you are more of an idealist than I am. I also watched the program but I assumed it would all be negative due to "political correctness" in society. I was actually pleasantly surprised that there were positives mentioned at all so I was probably more aware of the positives than the negatives when they were raised.

I totally agree, however, that institutions like Weyburn etc are sadly needed in today's society. In the guise of "freedom" and "political correctness", much like our health system, people who require help have been left out in the cold. Much like the cuts to the Weyburn mental hospital in the past to save money, our society's most vulnerable people have been thrown out into the streets to fend for themselves in the name of supposed "humanity". It does remind me of the healthcare system "cost efficiencies" and "innovations" where our most vulnerable people are dying and supported by the "politically correct" in the name of "humanity" as well. Governments and the media have learned very well that social engineering and sugar coating emotionally charged issues will cover their "cost saving" measures.

Dying people in our hospitals to avoid "rich people getting better care" and mentally ill people dying in the cold on our streets to avoid "institutionalization" are the result. It sure sounds good, doesn't it?

8/12/06 6:40 AM  
Blogger Lanny said...

oops.. wrong post. Have to quit drinking first thing in the morning...LOL. I have reposted where it belongs.

8/12/06 9:24 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home