Life is a journey, Enjoy the trip

Category: Politics (Page 1 of 16)

Universal Pharmacare and Basic Income – With examples!

My recent health issues gave me a chance to highlight several issues that many have heard about but can’t pin a real-world example on. Universal pharmacare and universal basic income

Post heart attack as I was discharged I was given a list of 7
prescriptions that I had to fill. The total cost of these scripts was around 300 dollars. All of these prescriptions were for a 1 month supply. Most of these I’ll be having to take for at least a year. several I may have to take for the rest of my life.

I am fortunate that I now have a health plan with my employer that pays 80% of the cost back to me. It normally takes 4-5 days to get money back in my bank account once I submit the receipts from my pharmacy.

Fortunately, it’s a 3 pay month so I have some savings that I can use the cover these meds.

The heart attack occurred Tuesday night so I missed 3 days at work and I may be off a few days more before transitioning to light duties. In my case, I’ll be on the help desk phones.

Because of my full-time role, I will be paid for these days so there will not be a shortfall in the budget.

If this heart attacked had occurred 4 months early, it would be a very different situation.

Coming out of the hospital I would be looking at a similar bill for prescription drugs, but since I was a contract employee, I had no health plan. I would have to wait at least a month if not longer to get any month back from the provincial health plan trillium, provided I had already exceeded my deductible for the quarter. In my case, I was nowhere close to reaching that deductible number.

Having the heart attack on Tuesday night means I would not have been paid for 3 days of work, and I would feel pressured to go back to work to make ends meet.

This situation is a perfect example where universal pharmacare and a basic income would be literally a lifesaver to many.

People who feel pressure to go back to work to make ends meet are more than likely to end up back into the healthcare system which costs more of us in the end. Sometimes being proactive will cost less in the end than being reactive.

With a federal election happening Monday, I can’t help but comment. Yes, health care is primarily a provincial issue but the federal level of government does provide quite a bit of funding, and these two issues should be addressed for all Canadians.

The Liberals (federal and provincial) have talked and promised about both these issues for years with no action. The federal and provincial Conservatives would never entertain either of them. More and more I feel the Liberals and Conservatives are two sides of the same coin.

This and several other reasons are why I am voting NDP.

We have tried other ideas and seen governments fail to act on them. It becomes an endless cycle. Why not trying something different?

Social media is making things worse by manipulating Canadians with lies and misinformation. We’ve seen this with Brexit, Trump and Covid.

It’s time to think about big change. Just as billions in resources were poured into help Canadians get through the pandemic. Other big issues can be tackled.

If the present systems are not working, let’s try something new.

The world has changed, just as it always has. We need to look beyond our comfortable worldview. We have proven before we can change things and make a better place for all Canadians.

If your answer starts with “Yes, but” then you are not keeping an open mind. Seriously clear any existing biases you have and look at the policies from each party with an eye for making everyone’s life better, not just yours.

 

 

Jobs now task force – nature of work

In part 1, I touched on the unrealistic recommendation The Jobs Now Task Force had for transit improvement.  If you can’t get council and other partners to fund this, it is not going to happen.

Onto part 2.

Let us go back to some of the other recommendations, in particular items 3 and 4.

  1. Develop a sustainable business plan to get London’s 13,000 jobs filled. The Mayor’s Office has been leading the Jobs Task Force. We recommend that the Mayor’s Office continue to drive the process with the support of other Task Force members, City Council, and community leaders. The creation of the London Jobs Board and getting public transit to London’s industrial areas are important first steps in meeting the Mayor’s 13,000 filled-jobs target. Our work, however, must not end here. A sustained effort is called for. To that end the Task Force recommends that our next step be the creation of a 4-year business plan focused on meeting the 13,000 filled-jobs goal, with the delivery of that plan to City Council in time for review and debate during Council’s 4-year Budget process this Fall.
  2. Have London’s media hold the City’s feet to the fire for meeting the 13,000 jobs-filled goal. Turning around London’s job decline is essential to the future well-being of our City. We need to start tracking progress towards the goal of 13,000 more employed, celebrating when we reverse the current down-slide and pushing our civic leaders when we fail to make progress. The media has an important role to play in the achievement of that goal by holding London’s City Council, City Staff, and the area’s economic development agencies to account.

 

For some of the details, I again point to Economist Mike Moffatt’s excellent summary

All of my comments below are my own observations, as before If I have made a mistake I’m happy to hear where I’m wrong.  A shout out to others including Scott Collyer @ScottatEmpyrean who has raised these concerns as well in the past.

To speak to #3. Develop a sustainable business plan to get London’s 13,000 jobs filled.

A city itself cannot create jobs, it can only give a favorable environment for companies to make these jobs happen. The report also focuses on manufacturing jobs.  Manufacturing is not the only sector in town that has been losing jobs.  All sectors should be considered.

Another quote from the report.

A mismatch of skills versus job market requirements, although the importance of this factor is difficult to pinpoint since most openings require only a good work ethic and ability to learn on the job.

Frankly, the above content is simply “bull” and insulting. Ask anyone looking for work today will tell you the bar is set so high.  Employers want a laundry list of skills right away. If you also look at the shortage of professional type jobs (white-collar) this comment is even more insulting.  To see what I mean, see the comments following this CBC London story. You will see dozens of people expressing the same frustrations about employer’s unwilling to give people a change or searching for the ‘perfect’ candidate for months instead of spending a bit to train someone.  This is a very common thing and I’m disappointed this did not seem to be addressed in the report.

As to recommendation #4 Have London’s media hold the City’s feet to the fire

Absolutely agree, I think the questions needs to be more like.

How will you address the other sectors other than manufacturing that are losing jobs?

How will you address the high amount of contract / part time and jobs that do not pay a living wage?

Again looking forward to hearing from our local leaders about how to address this.  Or will there be an uncomfortable silence and the rest of this report will gather dust on a shelf like so many before?

 

 

Jobs now task force and transit

I read in the news that the Mayors “Jobs Now Task Force” has released their report. The members of that group include London Economic Development Corporation, the London Chamber of Commerce, Western University, Fanshawe College, London Region Manufacturing Council, and Knighthunter

To say I was disappointed would be an understatement.  Many have already commented on things the task force seems to have missed for people trying to find work in London.

Economist Mike Moffatt goes over some of the fundamental flaws of this report in far better detail than I ever could, but in this post, I want to drill down on one area of the recommendations, that being transit.

Recommendation #2 in the report is as follows.

“Get better public transit in place for our south and east industrial areas before the end of this calendar year. The lack of reliable service is a major reason why more than 1,000 production line jobs in those areas are unfilled. The problem has been identified and studied for years. For London, bus service that gets workers to our plants on time is an essential requirement for filling jobs. As such, this must be an immediate priority for London Transit and London’s City Council.”

Now I may not be a financial or economic wizard, but I do know a thing or two about operations and I am a bit of a transit nerd….. So let me throw out a possible scenario. If I’m wrong on any of these items, please let me know and I’m happy to correct things.

London Transit (LTC) has started to slowly make changes annually to improve services to those industrial areas.  The big stumbling block is money.   The LTC has also said they would require quite a jump in funding from the city just to maintain existing service. A fare increase (the first in 10 years) is also being looked at.

For a moment lets imagine the LTC is given the green light to extend service to these areas.  What would that look like?  To get workers to the plants on time as per the recommendation the service has to run when shifts start and stop.  Many plants run shifts from 5 am to 11 pm (I’m not going to include the overnight shifts for this example).  So the routes servicing those areas will have to run from 5 am to midnight to give workers time to get to the plants and leave at the end of their shifts.

But wait there is more. 

The majority of the workers do not live on those routes servicing the industrial areas.  They will have to transfer once and sometimes twice to other bus routes depending on where they live in the city.  This means all the other bus routes will have to have their start and stop times extended.

These factors will result in additional costs for the LTC, including payroll costs as drivers will be needed for the longer times and possibly addition equipment (buses are not cheap).  Also, note in this scenario I have not even talked about if additional routes to the industrial areas are required.  Additional routes mean more costs both capital and payroll.

This is all in addition to what the LTC current budget is which is one of the lowest funded transit systems by cities of our size in the province.

As to the timing, there is no way a change with that sort of scope could be completed by the end of the year, particularly if additional equipment is needed.  The LTC does amazing work but this would be quite a large ask.

The funding announcement recently made by the provincial government does not include any funding for additional service to these areas. And the funds assigned cannot be reallocated.

Several questions to the Mayor and the Task Force.

Was anyone at London Transit consulted on this? If not why?

Will council move to increase the LTC’s budget to accommodate this additional service as recommended in this report?

I and many other citizens of London are looking forward to hearing some answers to these questions.

 

 

« Older posts

© 2026 StuartClark.ca

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑