Edmonton Senior 1994
Comment
By Eugene W. Plawiuk
Steve West, Minister of Municipal Affairs, was not just thinking out loud when he let slip that the government intends to privatize Seniors long term care and dependent housing. This is the same Minister who went ahead and privatized all ALCB outlets without a plan and without much concern over the financial return the government would get on the sale of its buildings. He also privatized registry and licensing offices last year with the same lack of concern for employees, or costs involved. When West muses, we can be assured that it is a done deal.
Since the days of Peter Lougheed, the creation of non-profit Seniors housing was a sure fire way for the government to win votes. Shallow political objectives aside, the boom in Seniors housing units benefited not only seniors, especially those on fixed and low incomes, but the construction trades as well as related health and social care workers. Now the threat is that they will be sold off , and unfortunately with this governments record probably to the lowest bidder. They will not be sold to the residents, and it will mean a major change in the way these facilities are managed.
Currently many of these facilities are operated by non-profit housing societies sponsored by Veterans organizations and the Canadian Legions, churches, ethnic associations, fraternal societies, etc. Those that provide housing for the disadvantaged and disabled senior or not, are run by the government, either municipal or provincial or blend of the two. It is these later facilities that are on the way to privatization according to West. And that means they will be sold off, the City will only be able to absorb one or two if any at all. Again it is the poorest and weakest in our society who will pay for these governments financial mismanagement. And pay we will.
The majority of private sector institutional service companies are American conglomerates. They run private hospitals, nursing homes as well as long term care facilities on a for profit basis. Those on fixed incomes have suffered worst under this system in the U.S. Why should it improve here? And it hasn't. Where we have seen American companies take over the running of previously publicly funded institutions in Alberta we have seen a deterioration in service. Now every service costs,. wages and hours are reduced, staff is laid off as service is cutback, in order for the private corporation to make a profit. It is inevitable that fees go up and must now be paid by the patient or their family. And the public still funds private institutions as well as public, don't kid yourself. But they do it on a reduced and fixed budget. If costs increase they are passed on directly to the consumer by the corporate management.
How far will privatization go, how will it be done, and how it will be regulated are questions that beg to be asked because of this minor pronouncement. If it is conducted as the sale of Gainers or the ALCB outlets have been we will still lose money as the Tories try to sell off all the governments' holdings as well as responsibilities. Is it inevitable? No! If seniors, whose voices have been effective in the past, speak out then it is not a forgone conclusion. That the government will attempt to sell off those facilities it operates, is very probable considering Kleins TV chat. Cuts are being made, willy nilly, without a plan, let alone even a semblance of rhyme or reason. And regulation? What regulation? The word is anathema to this government's ideology.
We are dealing with peoples lives not the bottom line. And the state has a responsibility to its citizens. One of those functions is the legislation and enforcement of regulations protecting its citizens, especially from monopolies that dominate the market place. If residential facilities are to be operated let it be by the residents as an non-profit corporation or co-op. Unfortunately the likely hood of the government doing this is the proverbial snowball's chance. They wouldn't consider selling Gainers to its employees. They would rather take a loss and give a loan guarantee, greater than the actual capital put up front by Burns, then admit that they don't have a plan. An agenda yes. One that says sell off the government, cut social programs, deregulate the marketplace. Let trickle down economics take care of the rest , and the poor and disadvantaged can beg for charity. But they don't have a plan! And without one, this could end up being another financial fiasco.
The government is part of the market and has a role to play in it. It is time this government accepted its social responsibilities rather than continuing to abdicate them.
Get your own Free Home Page