Guest Editorial | Mr. Strachan _ Editor’s Note: The following is a copy of a recent editorial broadcast of station CHQM which was submitted to us for publication by the Executive Director of Medical Services Incorporated, “as an excellent expression of a point of view that readers of the Lumber Worker are not exposed to.” In complying with the request to publish the editorial it was felt that because it was a direct attack on Mr. Strachan’s medicare views, it would only be fair to allow him the opportunity to answer the editorial here. There is no doubt that the New Democrats are making government medicare a main plank in their platform for the next election. But there has been great obscurity about just what type of medicare they have in mind. New Democratic leader Robert Strachan has offered a couple of strong hints in recent statements. As usual, the statements are full of the atmosphere that anything the doctors do to provide medicare insurance is part of the doctors’ plot against the public. This line never credits the doctors with such motives as trying to help the public meet medical bills, and to get better medical care by providing regular insurance payments for it on a private, voluntary basis. So when B.C. doctors announced that in August medical care insurance will be available to individuals and families not eligible for existing group plans, Mr. Strachan could see this only as panic and desperation at the threat of state medicare. There is no doubt that doctors hope this extension will help stave off state medicare. But Mr. Strachan ignores that the doctors started providing this sort of insurance to groups many years before there was state medicare agitation, and have been steadily expanding its range ever since. They have long worked toward individual medical insurance, as an extension of group medical insurance available through 11 approved plans. People outside these groups—generally determined by employment— couldn’t get non-profit group coverage which the plans offered. Now they will be able to get it as individuals or families. Only those unable to afford to pay premiums will be ineligible. To provide coverage for them, the doctors propose that the government pay premiums for them as a social welfare measure. How does Mr. Strachan Wants Socialized interpret this? It is a demand for “a subsidy from the taxp: Yet where is the subsidy? How does the payment of fees for thos afford it by the government differ from individual payment of who can afford it. : Yet in the same press release, Mr. Strachan makes it obvious: he is proposing would introduce a massive system of making some ¢ subsidize the medical care costs of many others. 7. _ Having created a false claim of “subsidy,” Mr. Strachan says that 6 percent fee increase which doctors intend to start in January “proves that we can no longer afford the luxury of a multitude of high cost private plans, and under no circumstances can the taxpayer be asked to subs these uneconomic plans.” F Who says the plans are so uneconomic? They are non-profit, collect premiums and they pay doctors’ bills at fees considerably Jower than doctors charge to individuals. Is there a hint here that Mr. Strachan would achieve economy by holding down doctors’ fees under a government plan? If that is the thought, why not hold down all costs by holding down wages in industry and business? Mr. Strachan’s statement continues: “One province-wide plan, BASED ON ABILITY TO PAY, is now a matter of urgency if people are to have comprehensive medical care available to all of them.” What this means, simply, is that people will pay for medical coverage according to their incomes, not according to the coverage they receive. Quite obviously, Mr. Strachan’s plan is to tax the public and pay everybody's doctor bills. Since people will pay on the basis of ability, clearly this will mean additional sales tax, or income tax, or some tax which takes more from some people than from others. In short, some citizens in B.C. will end up sub- sidizing others’ medical bills. What Mr. Strachan is proposing, obviously, is not a form of government medical care insurance, but a form of socialized medicine—where the gov- ernment forces one citizen to subsidize another’s medical bills through taxation. Here Mr. Strachan States Why By R. M. STRACHAN, M.L.A. Leader of the Opposition The editorial by Radio Station CHQM on my recent statement on the new M.S.I. plan follows on the lines of previous anti-medicare editorials from this station which appears to be acting as a public relations outlet for M.S.1. It is difficult to make much sense of the editorial because of its inconsistencies and lack of factual information. For example, I am chided for see- ing the M.S.I. move as a move to defeat medicare, and then they say, “There is no doubt that doctors hope this exten- sion will help stave off state medicare.” I am also accused of creat- ing the term ‘subsidy’ to de- scribe the request of M.S.I. that premiums for those who cannot afford the exhorbitant rate of $14.25 per month for a family be paid out of the general revenue of the prov- ince. The actual fact is that the B.C. Medical Association has been distributing a booklet to patients for some time now PROMOTING this idea and right in,the doctors’ own booklet this system is de- scribed aS a government ‘subsidy’! The term has also been used recently by the Alberta Medical profession to describe the same type of scheme there. CH@M also appears to be unable to see that there is a difference between giving a subsidy to uneconomie plans and PRIVATE PROFIT- MAKING _ INSURANCE COMPANIES who are also in this field, and being our brother’s keeper by spread- ing the cost of medicare throughout the whole popu- lation. The editorial then poses the question, “Who says the plans are uneconomic?” Here’ is the answer taken from an editorial in the “News-Letter” of Trans-Can- ada Medical Plans, the parent body of the private plans in Canada. This was printed in the B.C. Medical Journal of May, 1960, and it listed argu- ments for and against medi- care. Under “reason in fa- vour” the following appear- ed: “The administrative costs of private agencies could be lowered by government pro- grammes with a broader base and no competition.” : Who says private plans are uneconomic? Why, the pri- vate plans themselves! They know that their administra- tive costs, including sales staff and public relations - men, are extra costs for the patient. Again in the editorial we | see that hoary old allegation that government medicare means “additional” taxation. The fact is that the present private plan premium is a form of “taxation,” and only if we have to subsidize pri- vate plans will we need a true “additional” tax. If we abolish these private pre- miums and pay for one prov- ince-wide plan, we will all pay. less per year for our medicare coverage than we do now. The procf of the pudding is in the eating and here is proof. A farnily of four with no taxable income in Alberta pays a total premium of $159 per year (including the gov- ernment subsidy). The same family in B.C. has to pay It’s still $171 per year under the new M.S.1. plan, while in Sas- katchewan the total payment for this family would be only 338. Actually the CHQM edi- torial was notable more for what it did not say than for what it did say. It did not, for example, give the cost figures I mention above. In iconformity with the usual public relations selling technique, the editorial nat- urally did not explain the major deficiencies of the new M.S.1. plan which are hidden in the fine print of the con- tract between patient and M.S.1. In this fine print we find that M.S.I. can cancel your coverage on one month’s no- tice and then reinstate you at’ higher premiums and under any other restricted terms they might want to impose. If your illness lasts 12 months then your contract is automatically cancelled, just when you need it most. The most serious clause in the fine print, however, is the following: “II. Conditions of Service C. The attending physi- cian and surgeon shall obtain the authorization See “STRACHAN” — Page 6 HOLIDAY IN THE CARIBOO RUTH LAKE LODGE HOUSEKEEPING CABINS BESIDE THE WATER "RON RILEY Box 16, Forest Grove, B.C. $20 - $30 Weekly Swimming - Fishing “HEADS YOU WIN” For 34 years that old master craftsman, Harry Williamson, has been quietly turning out the superb logging boots that gave rise to our well-known slogan. . Publication date of the next issue of the WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER is August 15. Deadline for ad copy is August 1, and for news August 2. THE WESTERN CANADIAN 4 BULL Published Twice Monthly on the First and Third Thursdays by INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA (AFL-CIO-CLC) Regional Council No. 1 Editor . . . Grant MacNeil REGIONAL OFFICERS: ents ® ... Jack Moore ... Jack MacKenzie : . Jack Holst . Bob Ross President 1st Vice-President 2nd Vice-President 3rd Vice-President : Secretary-Treasurer ; snueawce, Bred. Fieber International Board Members Joe Madden, Walter F. Allen Address all communications to: FRED FIEBER. Secretary-Treasurer 2859 Commercial Drive, Vancouver, B.C. TR. 4-5261 - 2 $2.00 per annum G. A. Spencer Authorized as Second Class Maul, Post Office Dept., Ottawa, and for Payment of Postage in Cash. : 27,500 COPIES ‘PRINTED IN THIS ISSUE Subscription Rates : Advertising Representative “HEADS YOU WIN” Today he’s still doing just that. Maybe we haven't been shouting it from the housetops lately, but when it comes down to sheer quality of material and construction — not to mention that we’re GLAD to be of service — there’s a feel to HEAD’S Boots any logger worth his salt will recognize with his eyes shut. We've got new bosses too . look after the selling, and Harry’s still in the key corner . . Walter Chalmers to working his old magic . . . so why don’t you drop by and take a good long look at HEAD’S — an old firm with new vigour, still making .. . BOOTS THAT CAN STAND UP IN ANY COMPANY — AND WIN! W. J. HEAD BOOT & FACTORY LTD. 21 EAST HASTINGS STREET VANCOUVER 4, B.C.