Fraser Institute
It’s budget season—but more money won’t solve Canada’s health-care woes

From the Fraser Institute
In light of regular reports of hallway health care, regular closures of emergency rooms, and the longest wait times for care on record, it’s understandable that Canadians want dramatic improvements to their health-care system. For governments, particularly during budget season, improvement often means an increase in spending.
However, Canada already ranks among the most expensive universal health-care systems in the world. In 2022 (the latest year of comparable data), and after adjusting for population age in each country, Canada ranked fourth-highest for health-care spending as a share of the economy (11.5 per cent). For per-person spending, Canada ranked ninth. In other words, whichever way you look at it, Canada ranked among the top-third of spenders among 31 universal health-care countries.
That’s a lot of money. But what do Canadians get in return?
Canada ranked near the bottom (28th of 30) on the availability of physicians. Canada also had some of the fewest hospital beds and diagnostic equipment (including CT scanners and MRI units) per person.
Moreover, among nine universal health-care countries surveyed by the Commonwealth Fund, a health-care research organization, 65.2 per cent of Canadian patients reported waiting more than one month for a specialist appointment (8th worst out of 9 countries) compared to 35.7 per cent in top-ranked the Netherlands.
We see the same thing for patients trying to access timely non-emergency surgical care. In Canada, 58.3 per cent of patients reported waiting more than two months (9th worst of 9 countries), far more than in the Netherlands (20.3 per cent), Germany (20.4 per cent) and Switzerland (21.1 per cent).
While Canada clearly struggles on measures of availability and timely access to medical resources, it reported mixed results in other areas. For example, Canada performed well on measures of heart attack survival (ranked 8th of 26). And while Canada had average performance for stroke survivability, it remained a bottom of the barrel performer on safety measures such as obstetric trauma during birth (23rd of 23).
With relatively fewer key medical resources and long waits for non-emergency surgery, patients in Canada face major challenges. And this budget season, while governments may be keen to simply spend more, in reality Canadians do not currently receive commensurate value for their health-care dollars. Without fundamental reform, based on the experiences of other more successful universal health-care systems, it’s unlikely we’ll see improvement.

Mackenzie Moir
Alberta
Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill
The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.
Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.
His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.
On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.
To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.
The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”
Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.
Fraser Institute
Long waits for health care hit Canadians in their pocketbooks

From the Fraser Institute
Canadians continue to endure long wait times for health care. And while waiting for care can obviously be detrimental to your health and wellbeing, it can also hurt your pocketbook.
In 2024, the latest year of available data, the median wait—from referral by a family doctor to treatment by a specialist—was 30 weeks (including 15 weeks waiting for treatment after seeing a specialist). And last year, an estimated 1.5 million Canadians were waiting for care.
It’s no wonder Canadians are frustrated with the current state of health care.
Again, long waits for care adversely impact patients in many different ways including physical pain, psychological distress and worsened treatment outcomes as lengthy waits can make the treatment of some problems more difficult. There’s also a less-talked about consequence—the impact of health-care waits on the ability of patients to participate in day-to-day life, work and earn a living.
According to a recent study published by the Fraser Institute, wait times for non-emergency surgery cost Canadian patients $5.2 billion in lost wages in 2024. That’s about $3,300 for each of the 1.5 million patients waiting for care. Crucially, this estimate only considers time at work. After also accounting for free time outside of work, the cost increases to $15.9 billion or more than $10,200 per person.
Of course, some advocates of the health-care status quo argue that long waits for care remain a necessary trade-off to ensure all Canadians receive universal health-care coverage. But the experience of many high-income countries with universal health care shows the opposite.
Despite Canada ranking among the highest spenders (4th of 31 countries) on health care (as a percentage of its economy) among other developed countries with universal health care, we consistently rank among the bottom for the number of doctors, hospital beds, MRIs and CT scanners. Canada also has one of the worst records on access to timely health care.
So what do these other countries do differently than Canada? In short, they embrace the private sector as a partner in providing universal care.
Australia, for instance, spends less on health care (again, as a percentage of its economy) than Canada, yet the percentage of patients in Australia (33.1 per cent) who report waiting more than two months for non-emergency surgery was much higher in Canada (58.3 per cent). Unlike in Canada, Australian patients can choose to receive non-emergency surgery in either a private or public hospital. In 2021/22, 58.6 per cent of non-emergency surgeries in Australia were performed in private hospitals.
But we don’t need to look abroad for evidence that the private sector can help reduce wait times by delivering publicly-funded care. From 2010 to 2014, the Saskatchewan government, among other policies, contracted out publicly-funded surgeries to private clinics and lowered the province’s median wait time from one of the longest in the country (26.5 weeks in 2010) to one of the shortest (14.2 weeks in 2014). The initiative also reduced the average cost of procedures by 26 per cent.
Canadians are waiting longer than ever for health care, and the economic costs of these waits have never been higher. Until policymakers have the courage to enact genuine reform, based in part on more successful universal health-care systems, this status quo will continue to cost Canadian patients.
-
Crime2 days ago
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
-
Addictions2 days ago
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
-
Aristotle Foundation2 days ago
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
-
Business2 days ago
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
-
Courageous Discourse2 days ago
Healthcare Blockbuster – RFK Jr removes all 17 members of CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel!
-
Business19 hours ago
EU investigates major pornographic site over failure to protect children
-
Health1 day ago
RFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Conservatives slam Liberal bill to allow police to search through Canadians’ mail