I found myself at a walk-in clinic at our local hospital this past week and - wow - was that an interesting experience! I'm tempted to rant for a bit about how inefficient the registration process was, or how frustrating it was to wait for nearly 5 hours when there were only 8 people ahead of me in line. Seriously?
But that wasn't the most interesting part of my visit to the clinic. The most interesting part was the conversation amongst the 25 or so people in the waiting room that day.
I should probably set the stage by noting that I live in a small Nova Scotia town, where there's a severe shortage of family docs. Most of the people waiting had family doctors until recently, but then their docs got sick or retired or moved away and they weren't able to find new ones to take them on.
Needless to say, the long wait fostered a good deal of discussion about the challenges facing our health care system, and about past and present unsuccessful attempts to address them. Everyone had an opinion about what's wrong but the general consensus seemed to be that there was too little funding, and too much greed and incompetence on the part of politicians, bureaucrats, land developers, university administrators and others. Interestingly, almost no one faulted doctors who chose to go elsewhere to make more money.
After an hour or so, I felt compelled to defend the many politicians and bureaucrats I know personally, who are diligently working to fix the problems with our system. I also reminded my fellow patients that vast majority of Canadians - citizens and residents alike - get free health care when they need it - which isn't the case south of the border.
The trouble is the problems are complex and voters are fickle and forgetful. For example, when our current premier was running for office, he promised voters his government would amalgamate 9 existing health authorities into one in order to save money and that's pretty much what it did. (The IWK got special treatment.) The move didn't actually save money, of course. It just threw the system into chaos and made things worse, but - hey - it's what the voters wanted. Now, of course, they're angry that the government did something so stupid.
In the course of our conversation, several people wondered why politicians can't just show some leadership and get stuff done. Why indeed?
The truth is politicians don't get re-elected by showing "leadership". Voters don't want leadership when a politician does something that's good for other people but not good for them. And they don't want leadership when it means paying higher taxes, closing schools or hospitals, or refusing to subsidize dying industries in which they or their loved ones are employed.
So, here's what I think. I agree we need real leadership on the part of our elected officials. But I also think voters need to support politicans when they demonstrate such leadership. And we need to remind our elected officials that it's not okay to cave to pressure when vested interests have an issue with smart policy. If we instead demand only that they give us what we want as individuals, well then, frankly, we get the politicians we deserve.
Case in point: Boat Harbour. The pulp mill needs to close if it can't meet environmental standards by the deadline. Full stop. Closing the mill is the right thing to do. Local communities have born the health and environmental costs of living next door to a toxic waste dump for far too long. And Northern Pulp has known it has a deadline for nearly 5 years - as have all of its employees and suppliers. The question is will voters support the government following through on its promise to close the mill if standards aren't met.
Judging by the discussion in the waiting room at the clinic, I think most of us will, but we all need to speak up. Otherwise, opposing the closure will be the only ones our political leaders hear.
But that wasn't the most interesting part of my visit to the clinic. The most interesting part was the conversation amongst the 25 or so people in the waiting room that day.
I should probably set the stage by noting that I live in a small Nova Scotia town, where there's a severe shortage of family docs. Most of the people waiting had family doctors until recently, but then their docs got sick or retired or moved away and they weren't able to find new ones to take them on.
Needless to say, the long wait fostered a good deal of discussion about the challenges facing our health care system, and about past and present unsuccessful attempts to address them. Everyone had an opinion about what's wrong but the general consensus seemed to be that there was too little funding, and too much greed and incompetence on the part of politicians, bureaucrats, land developers, university administrators and others. Interestingly, almost no one faulted doctors who chose to go elsewhere to make more money.
After an hour or so, I felt compelled to defend the many politicians and bureaucrats I know personally, who are diligently working to fix the problems with our system. I also reminded my fellow patients that vast majority of Canadians - citizens and residents alike - get free health care when they need it - which isn't the case south of the border.
The trouble is the problems are complex and voters are fickle and forgetful. For example, when our current premier was running for office, he promised voters his government would amalgamate 9 existing health authorities into one in order to save money and that's pretty much what it did. (The IWK got special treatment.) The move didn't actually save money, of course. It just threw the system into chaos and made things worse, but - hey - it's what the voters wanted. Now, of course, they're angry that the government did something so stupid.
In the course of our conversation, several people wondered why politicians can't just show some leadership and get stuff done. Why indeed?
The truth is politicians don't get re-elected by showing "leadership". Voters don't want leadership when a politician does something that's good for other people but not good for them. And they don't want leadership when it means paying higher taxes, closing schools or hospitals, or refusing to subsidize dying industries in which they or their loved ones are employed.
So, here's what I think. I agree we need real leadership on the part of our elected officials. But I also think voters need to support politicans when they demonstrate such leadership. And we need to remind our elected officials that it's not okay to cave to pressure when vested interests have an issue with smart policy. If we instead demand only that they give us what we want as individuals, well then, frankly, we get the politicians we deserve.
Case in point: Boat Harbour. The pulp mill needs to close if it can't meet environmental standards by the deadline. Full stop. Closing the mill is the right thing to do. Local communities have born the health and environmental costs of living next door to a toxic waste dump for far too long. And Northern Pulp has known it has a deadline for nearly 5 years - as have all of its employees and suppliers. The question is will voters support the government following through on its promise to close the mill if standards aren't met.
Judging by the discussion in the waiting room at the clinic, I think most of us will, but we all need to speak up. Otherwise, opposing the closure will be the only ones our political leaders hear.
Great rant! Every politician promises to GET THINGS DONE as they campaign. Then they arrive in office and find out how complex the problem is, and that the most important job they have is to get re-elected. As one of my software buddies says, all the easy projects are already done.
ReplyDelete