Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Alberta

Bureaucratic shuffle not enough to fix health care in Alberta

Published

1 year ago

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith spent a good portion of her yearend interviews discussing upcoming changes to the province’s health-care system including the shift from the single Alberta Health Services to multiple authorities each tasked with overseeing one area of the health-care system. But will the government pair this bureaucratic shuffle with reforms that will actually improve matters for Albertans?

Indeed, Albertans shouldn’t get too excited about reforms to the health-care system’s administrative structure. Back in 2008, Alberta Health Services replaced nine regional health boards, which themselves were amalgamated from 17 authorities created in 1994. Yet wait lists grew continuously over the entire period up to new record highs in 2023.

In 1993, a typical Albertan could expect to wait 10.5 weeks between GP referral and treatment by a medical specialist. By 2008, that wait time had increased to 18.5 weeks and now stands at a remarkable 33.5 weeks (longer than the national median wait of 27.7 weeks).

A lack of money is absolutely not to blame. On the contrary, Alberta’s provincial health-care spending ranked second-highest per person (after adjusting for age and sex) in 2021, while Canada nationally is a relatively high spender among universal health-care countries. At the same time, Canada ranks near the bottom for the availability of medical professionals, medical technologies and hospital resources. And Canadian patients suffer some of the longest delays for access to care in the developed world.

In other words, there’s much more wrong with health care in Alberta than the number of authorities overseeing the governmental system.

So what’s the solution?

Simply put, Alberta should learn from other countries that deliver more timely universal care with comparable spending such as Switzerland, Australia and Germany. For example, in 2020 (the latest year of available data) only 62 per cent of patients in Canada received elective care within four months compared to 72 per cent in Australia, 94 per cent in Switzerland and 99 per cent in Germany.

What do these countries do differently? They all have private competitive providers delivering universally accessible services within the public system, and payment for such care is based on actual delivery of services, known as “activity-based” funding.

Based on details released so far, the Smith government’s bureaucratic shuffle appears to bear little resemblance to these higher-performing approaches pursued abroad. In fact, it looks a lot like the provincial government working from the same old playbook, with another costly exercise to distract Albertans from the real problems in their health-care system. If that’s all this reform amounts to, then we can expect no real improvement for Albertans in need of care or the taxpayers who fund it.

On the bright side, there’s some hope that the Smith government is setting the stage for more meaningful reform. To move toward a higher-performing model with competitive patient-focused delivery, the government must first separate and clearly define the roles of the purchaser of health care and the providers of that care. If moving from one large health authority to multiple authorities is about more clearly defining government’s role as the purchaser and oversight authority for universal health care, with authorities and providers being transparently accountable for delivering timely quality care to patients, then Albertans may be on the road to shorter wait times and higher-quality health care.

But we’ll have to wait and see.

Author:

Nadeem Esmail
Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 2 hours ago

Biden autopen scandal: Did unelected aides commit fraud during his final days in office?

Business / 3 hours ago

Conservatives demand probe into Liberal vaccine injury program’s $50m mismanagement

Business / 6 hours ago

Canada must address its birth tourism problem

Alberta

Median workers in Alberta could receive 72% more under Alberta Pension Plan compared to Canada Pension Plan

Published on July 15, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Joel Emes

Moving from the CPP to a provincial pension plan would generate savings for Albertans in the form of lower contribution rates (which could be used to increase private retirement savings while receiving the same pension benefits as the CPP under the new provincial pension), finds a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Due to Alberta’s comparatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate through a separate provincial pension plan while receiving the same benefits as under the CPP,” said Tegan Hill, director of Alberta policy at the Fraser Institute and co-author of Illustrating the Potential of an Alberta Pension Plan.

Assuming Albertans invested the savings from moving to a provincial pension plan into a private retirement account, and assuming a contribution rate of 5.85 per cent, workers earning the median income in Alberta ($53,061 in 2025) could accrue a stream of retirement payments totalling $454,741 (pre-tax)—a 71.6 per cent increase from their stream of CPP payments ($264,968).

Put differently, under the CPP, a median worker receives a total of $264,968 in retirement income over their life. If an Alberta worker saved the difference between what they pay now into the CPP and what they would pay into a new provincial plan, the income they would receive in retirement increases. If the contribution rate for the new provincial plan was 5.85 per cent—the lower of the available estimates—the increase in retirement income would total $189,773 (or an increase of 71.6 per cent).

If the contribution rate for a new Alberta pension plan was 8.21 per cent—the higher of the available estimates—a median Alberta worker would still receive an additional $64,672 in retirement income over their life, a marked increase of 24.4 per cent compared to the CPP alone.

Put differently, assuming a contribution rate of 8.21 per cent, Albertan workers earning the median income could accrue a stream of retirement payments totaling $329,640 (pre-tax) under a provincial pension plan—a 24.4 per cent increase from their stream of CPP payments.

“While the full costs and benefits of a provincial pension plan must be considered, its clear that Albertans could benefit from higher retirement payments under a provincial pension plan, compared to the CPP,” Hill said.

Illustrating the Potential of an Alberta Pension Plan

  • Due to Alberta’s comparatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate with a separate provincial pension plan, compared with the CPP, while receiving the same benefits as under the CPP.
  • Put differently, moving from the CPP to a provincial pension plan would generate savings for Albertans, which could be used to increase private retirement income. This essay assesses the potential savings for Albertans of moving to a provincial pension plan. It also estimates an Albertan’s potential increase in total retirement income, if those savings were invested in a private account.
  • Depending on the contribution rate used for an Alberta pension plan (APP), ranging from 5.85 to 8.2 percent, an individual earning the CPP’s yearly maximum pensionable earnings ($71,300 in 2025), would accrue a stream of retirement payments under the total APP (APP plus private retirement savings), yielding a total retirement income of between $429,524 and $584,235. This would be 22.9 to 67.1 percent higher, respectively, than their stream of CPP payments ($349,545).
  • An individual earning the median income in Alberta ($53,061 in 2025), would accrue a stream of retirement payments under the total APP (APP plus private retirement savings), yielding a total retirement income of between $329,640 and $454,741, which is between 24.4 percent to 71.6 percent higher, respectively, than their stream of CPP payments ($264,968).

 

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Joel Emes

Joel Emes

Senior Economist, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta ban on men in women’s sports doesn’t apply to athletes from other provinces

Published on July 15, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Alberta’s Fairness and Safety in Sport Act bans transgender males from women’s sports within the province but cannot regulate out-of-province transgender athletes.

Alberta’s ban on gender-confused males competing in women’s sports will not apply to out-of-province athletes.

In an interview posted July 12 by the Canadian Press, Alberta Tourism and Sport Minister Andrew Boitchenko revealed that Alberta does not have the jurisdiction to regulate out-of-province, gender-confused males from competing against female athletes.

“We don’t have authority to regulate athletes from different jurisdictions,” he said in an interview.

Ministry spokeswoman Vanessa Gomez further explained that while Alberta passed legislation to protect women within their province, outside sporting organizations are bound by federal or international guidelines.

As a result, Albertan female athletes will be spared from competing against men during provincial competition but must face male competitors during inter-provincial events.

In December, Alberta passed the Fairness and Safety in Sport Act to prevent biological men who claim to be women from competing in women’s sports. The legislation will take effect on September 1 and will apply to all school boards, universities, as well as provincial sports organizations.

The move comes after studies have repeatedly revealed what almost everyone already knew was true, namely, that males have a considerable advantage over women in athletics.

Indeed, a recent study published in Sports Medicine found that a year of “transgender” hormone drugs results in “very modest changes” in the inherent strength advantages of men.

Additionally, male athletes competing in women’s sports are known to be violent, especially toward female athletes who oppose their dominance in women’s sports.

In February, Andres ranted about why men should be able to compete in women’s competitions, calling for “the Ontario lifter” who opposes this, apparently referring to powerlifter April Hutchinson, to “die painfully.”

Interestingly, while Andres was suspended for six months for issuing death threats, Hutchinson was suspended for two years after publicly condemning him for stealing victories from women and then mocking his female competitors on social media. Her suspension was later reduced to a year.

Continue Reading

Trending

X