Thursday, January 7, 2016

Medical services poverty program

Readers of an age to receive a monthly Old Age Security cheque will be thrilled to notice a 57¢ increase in January. As I mentioned on Twitter, cautious saving of that amount might allow a splurge next Christmas.

Unfortunately, there may be no cauliflowers for Christmas among seniors in British Columbia. Premier Clark's government just took more than five times the January OAS increase by raising an individual's medical services plan premium from $72 a month to $75. In the current year, MSP premiums will bring in more than 40% of the take from personal income taxes when Christy Clark took control of the Liberal government.

Here is how medical revenues have changed over time.


Recommend this post

10 comments:

  1. “I think most British Columbians recognize that we’re the only province that has medical services premiums. And it’s perhaps time that we fund our health services, as other jurisdictions do, through general revenue.” John Horgan – Voice of BC February 26, 2015.

    By all means sign the petition currently circulating to abolish premiums. But if that doesn’t work, another way to get the premiums abolished is to vote NDP in 2017.

    Having said that, I note even Keith Baldrey recently had the temerity to go way, way, out on a limb and actually ask if it’s time to tie MSP premiums to income levels. It’s a very safe question to ask (in keeping with his characteristic modus operandi) but also in keeping with his habits likely signals he’s been authorized to soften the beaches for Christina Joan’s MSP counter move in her next budget or election platform.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some people may suggest you're being theorist on the comment about Baldrey. But you know Lew, those people would be wrong because you have pointed out exactly what Baldrey would do for his Liberal friends.

      Guy in Victoria

      Delete
    2. Funding MSP from income tax and tying it to income levels would ffectively be much the same thing surely?

      Delete
    3. The premiums can be assigned at a flat rate once over a set income threshold (as they now are), abolished entirely and funded through general revenue, or assigned individually according to income. Name your poison.

      Delete
  2. When you have a government comprised of grifters, con-artists, footpads and child haters, they also do not give a damn about the public at large.

    The BC Liberal Party sole purpose is to enrich those who pay to support the party or in more simple terms; "ya pays ya money and ya get a cut of the action".

    High MSP premiums as well as the phony carbon tax are their to cover government loses from tax gifts to the wealthy. We are governed by sociopaths, who are voted in by sociopaths. Explains everything.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This govt. brags about consecutive balanced budgets. How balanced would they be without 2.4 billion extra revenue annually? How many of the other provinces would balance their budgets if they taxed their citizens the same?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Just the savings on ditching the collection arm of MSP alone would save millions that could be put toward health care. They're going to need it to cover the 3P hospitals being built in this province. Taxation through income is simpler, already in place, cheaper, fairer. Maybe Norm knows or can find out what it costs MSP to have their on billing department, I'm sure its significant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Robert, my guess is, MSP is not collected in-house but rather by yet another Liberal friendly who skims a healthy commission from the seniors for doing so.
      Hawgwash.

      Delete
  5. Somebody should examine the 'SPECIAL AUTHORITY' rules of PHARMACARE that
    are used to deny payment for prescription drugs for which 'SPECIAL AUTHORITY' is required but is not applied for ( by the prescribing physician - most of whom do not even know it is required. It is probably seniors who lose out due to this provision

    ReplyDelete
  6. BC Health and the Ministry /Government are saving millions due to the 'Special Authority"
    requirement that many prescribing physicians fail to apply. As a result many patients are denied re-imbursement by PHARMACARE and I am sure Seniors are those mainly affected.
    j may
    west vancouver

    ReplyDelete

COMMENTING

This is an archive only of items published before April 22, 2016. These and newer articles are available at:

https://in-sights.ca/

If you read an article at this blogger site, you can comment on it at the new site.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.