Should Michael Ignatieff own healthcare? Not in Canada.
The Globe and Mail makes an almost convincing argument as to why it is Ignatieff should take ownership of the healthcare issue in Canada. It’s originally a liberal/NDP issue. Michael Ignatieff is in command, barely but in command, of the liberals. Therefore, it should default to being his issue. The Globe rightly points out it doesn’t fit Stephen Harper if you follow along party lines, what with conservatives–at least, if you look south of the border for your definition of conservatives–opposed to anything government regulated on basic principle. But what the Globe and Mail leaves out, and this is what surprises me, is that Ignatieff isn’t in much of a better position to take ownership of it. If anything, he’s in a worse position than Harper.
Prior to his career in politics, Stephen Harper wasn’t a whole lot different from the average Canadian. Sure, he might have been president of the National Citizens Coalition, but he was still subject to the same rules and regulations as everyone else living in Canada. Still fell under the jurisdiction of the very healthcare system he may or may not still want to turn inside out. He, his wife, his kids, were all subject to it–and would therefore be perhaps a little better qualified to have an opinion on exactly what to do with it.
Michael Ignatieff? His healthcare consisted of pretty well full coverage, most likely, while he was living in Boston. Likely paid for both by his employer and, if that wasn’t good enough, out of pocket. Prior to that, he found himself living in the UK. Where he again, most likely had some form of private insurance in addition to, if he ever used at all, the public option as exists across the pond. He has had no experience, either positive or negative, with Canada’s healthcare system since the 1970’s. Certainly he returned to Canada in 2005, and also entered politics at that point–he would be in waiting for Stephane Dion’s eventual implosion before taking charge of the liberal party, but he’s still had no actual experience with the healthcare system as faced by average Canadians. So to expect him to fit into the issue his party has traditionally taken ownership of in the past is, perhaps, a bit of a stretch.
If any one of the three would be the most likely to fit into the healthcare issue, and I cringe to publish this realization, it would almost have to be Jack Layton. Not that I’d be interested to see what he’d do with any kind of actual power, but he seems the most likely candidate for a defense of Canada’s current healthcare system both in and out of Canada. And, in fact, it might make slightly more sense than the Globe’s suggestion that simply because Ignatieff is the liberal leader, it should be his issue–the NDP was, after all, the originating entity that brought about healthcare. So, to exercise the Globe’s logic a bit farther, the issue of healthcare in Canada is actually an NDP issue. And, as such, should be written rather firmly into Jack Layton’s platform come next election. Stephen Harper should steer clear of it–it’s far too liberal for him, as should Ignatieff–it’s far too “Canadian” for him. Or, better yet, why don’t we just not make it an election issue at all. After all, it’s not like previous elections have brought about any real significant changes to it since the 1980’s or so.
