Thread by @Norlaine

How can I explain why Danielle Smith's "public delivery" through for-profit suppliers is not a good thing?

Ok. Let's say a procedure costs $1,000. It's a nice round, easy to work with number. The procedure costs $1,000, which includes wages of doctors, nurses and other
1/15

healthcare professionals as well as support staff. It also includes any medications, materials (like sutures), and that fraction of depreciation on equipment. And it includes general overhead like building maintenance and keeping the lights and heat and water on.
2/15

$1,000 is what it costs. That is, as they say, "at cost". Now, this doesn't include any profit for anyone. There are no investors waiting for dividends. At cost, no profit involved, in-house. Are you still with me here?
3/15

When the UCP signs a contract with a for-profit provider, they are not going to charge $1,000. They are not going to do it without a profit, because they DO have shareholders waiting for dividends. So, what happens?
4/15

The UCP believes so passionately that there should be profit created from healing the sick and injured, that they sign contracts where they agree to pay more than the in-house, public delivery cost. The for-profit is saying, "Oh dear, well we can't do it for $1,000...
5/15

We need to show a profit. This is not a charity, you know! We can do it for $1,200." And the UCP, because they really believe in this say, "Sure, that sounds fair!" and they sign the contract. And then there is $200 that is coming out of the pool of money for healthcare
6/15

for Albertans and going directly into the pockets of investors who may not even live in Alberta, or Canada. So that is taking that money out of the Alberta economy and sending it somewhere else. And it is depleting the money available in the healthcare budget.
7/15

Now, $200 doesn't seem like a lot, does it? But what if there are 10,000 procedures where a for-profit takes an extra $200 off the top, to make their profit?

That's $2 million.

That's $2 million less available for helping Albertans.
8/15

That's $2 million just given away for ideological reasons, taken out of Alberta's economy. And that's not a good thing for Albertans. It's great for the investors. But it is not good for us.

Additionally, the UCP has signed at least 1 contract with a volume floor.
9/15

That means they have promised the for-profit company that they will send a set minimum number of patients to them or, presumably, pay some penalty. So they have locked in this continuous gift of our money to investors.
10/15

Now, $2 million is just what I used to explain the concept. In fact, the current contracts the UCP has with for-profit surgical facilities include $167 Million as that "profit" part of the bill. That's $167 million coming out
11/15

of the healthcare budget for Albertans and effectively just given away. Because Danielle Smith doesn't believe in public health care. This is her backdoor way to make sure the profits flow to private sector.
Read about it here: susanonthesoapbox.com/2023/03/26/a-s…
12/15

But not only is it misuse of public money, but it means there could come a time where the cupboard is empty and there is no money to pay in-house or for profit, and the only way to access healthcare is Albertans will have to dig into their own bank accounts. Which was the
13/15

end goal all along. Danielle Smith likes to talk as though it's the government's money. "Is a trip to the doctor really something the government has to pay for?"
She wants you to forget that it's not her money. It's OUR money. We paid in taxes & we get back in healthcare.
14/15

Please, think about this when you to vote today or Monday. Danielle Smith and the UCP are giving our money away, giving YOUR money away. Not to save lives, but to make investors richer. Is that good fiscal management? Is that good for Albertans?
15/15
#FireTheUCP #Vote