It is the single biggest issue facing the federal government and every provincial government in this country. It swallows up an ever-increasing chunk of Canada's social spending, with billions of dollars of additional funding pumped into it each year. It is consistently identified as voters' biggest priority. And as trite and cliched as it may seem, it defines our country as much as anything else we share.
Paradoxical, then, that the best possible thing for this spring's campaign would be if everyone stopped talking about health care.
It won't happen, of course. Not when the polls tell political strategists that it's the one issue they can't even dream of ignoring. But in a perfect world in which campaigns functioned as genuine exchanges of ideas, and voters could be trusted to take thorough looks at each party's platform before deciding which one constituted the best vision for the country, Tuesday's unveiling of Paul Martin's health-care promises would have been the last we'd have heard on the subject until after June 28.
We all have a pretty good idea, by this point, of where the parties stand on health care. In a different world, that might set the stage for a glorious debate over how to cure what ails it. But that's not on the table, because debate requires markedly different perspectives -- and none of the parties disagrees that the best prescription is increased federal funding.
Sure, their recommended dosages differ slightly. The Liberals are pledging $9 billion, mostly in the form of additional transfer payments, a fund to reduce waiting times, and a $2-billion home-care program. The Conservatives have yet to attach that sort of figure to their platform -- although Stephen Harper has made no attempt to suggest that it's too high, and has himself promised to invest in a new drug plan. And the NDP is offering an enormous grab-bag of commitments, including ensuring that the federal government pays at least 25 per cent of Canada's total health-care costs within two years.
Ultimately, though, the parties are all talking about plugging the system's holes rather than introducing major reforms. There is no great clash of ideas here; only a bit of pointless quibbling about who can best be trusted to spend cash they all agree should be spent.
What makes this stagnant "debate" so frustrating is less the impact that it has on medicare itself (which, depending on your perspective, may not even be in the crisis we've all been breathlessly warned about), but its complete overshadowing of the issues that really should be deciding votes next month.
It's the parties' other policies -- particularly those of the Conservatives and the NDP -- that we should be talking about: Unlike increased transfer payments or hollow pledges to reduce waiting lists, they could profoundly change the country.
Mr. Harper's party may yet form the government. If so, it will purportedly implement the biggest personal tax cuts in modern Canadian history, shrink the size of government, reform the immigration system, pump an immediate $1.2 billion into the military, change our criminal law to prosecute violent 14-year-olds as adults, scrap the gun registry, introduce an elected Senate, relax foreign ownership rules in the telecommunications, broadcasting and airline industries, knock down an array of other trade barriers, and wholeheartedly sign on to the U.S. anti-missile defence program.
At the same time, Jack Layton's New Democrats could well hold the balance of power in a Liberal minority government. That doesn't mean they'd get all their policies through, but among other things they would push hard for a massive investment in affordable housing and public transit programs; a national child-care program; major Senate reform (their platform calls for its outright abolition); some form of proportional representation; a shift in foreign policy priorities toward disarmament, debt forgiveness and expanded foreign aid; a slew of costly and ambitious environmental policies and a "green" approach to all government decisions; tax relief for low-income earners and the elimination of GST on family essentials such as diapers and children's clothes; increased assistance for post-secondary students; and a loosening of marijuana laws beyond even what Jean Chretien had in mind.
Barring another Liberal majority, in other words, Canada may well be facing sea changes in nearly every policy area. And yet, we're still fixated on the one that will remain more or less status quo. If only there were a moratorium on health care talk, and a genuine willingness to on the part of politicians, journalists and voters to delve into other issues in its place, we might be embarking on the most exciting campaign in generations.
