PEI Election Watch

PCs -- Growing a platform

The Progressive Conservatives have posted the first parts of their platform in the "as it comes" series of additions.

Liberal Platform to be articulated

The Liberal Party is planning on releasing their entire platform on September the 8th.

In their own words

Here are some sound links to the CBC where each leader tells us in their own words what they stand for

Pat Binns

Robert Ghiz

Gary Robichaud

Conservative Health platform

Pat announced a major spending effort last night at the QEH

CBC reports it as follows The Tories will spend $400 million on the system this year, which amounts to 40 per cent of the total provincial budget. That's $100 million more than four years ago, and Binns said he'll add another $100 million in the next four.

"It's a substantial commitment, but to do the things that are important to Islanders we feel it is necessary, and we believe it is affordable based on the growth in our economy," he said after the announcement.

The funding is qualified: Binns said he is counting on growth in the Island economy, and more cash from the federal government.

This all depends on the economy and the Feds.

Here is the kicker - we can expect the economy to do poorly in the next 4 years as farming, fishing and tourism continue to weaken. Did you know that the Lobster industry has about $100 million in loan guarantees from the Province? Much of the Spring catch remains in inventory and the fall catch has been terrible. How are the boys going to make the payments with a boat costing more than 300,000? What will it be about the next 3 years that will cause this market to boom and pay for more healthcare?

Do we think that the commodity potato business will boom in the advent of over production in the US and a new factor - the upsurge in opinion against junk food. The Atkins diet has already hit earnings in a number of food giants and while McDonald's won their case again about contributing to the obesity crisis - the obesity crisis is only growing in prominence. McDonald's is under siege and most importantly their Kids Meal products are falling off. The Fry is on the downswing folks. So what is it about our potato business that we are so hopeful about that will provide us with the surplus to pay for the 400 million?

Every province is banking on the feds bailing them out in health care. It's a bit like waiting for granny to die with the portfolio not remembering that she might spend most of it in the last 3 years of her life on her own health. Our resource based economy will tip and every sector will ask for help from the Feds - Wheat, limber, potatoes, beef we can see it now. Protection walls are going up all over the world and our model of growing a lot of a commodity and selling it somewhere else will fall over and will be the first priority of the Feds. This will hit the car industry in Ontario as well. The surplus is over and there are no more Fed resources to prop up the old system. If the Feds are smart they will offer only transition resources that will improve the real health of the nation such as a focus on the Early Years and on Telehealth and Home.

The reality is that deficits are going to balloon and that who ever is in power in the next 4 years will be faced with a very unpopular job of making cuts.

It's not the politician's fault. Everything that I am saying here they know and they worry about. It's just that we don't want to hear the truth ourselves. We want it simple - more doctors = better health. It's just not true but we are too lazy to care. We want it upbeat and simple - so that is what they give us. So we get the result that we deserve and we put intelligent and thoughtful people in politics into the role of puppets on our string

A New issue - Farts?

In New Zealand there is a new tax on Sheep farts. Needless to say the farmers are raising stink about it. But it does show how the New Zealanders are thinking about the enviroment as agricultural methane is a huge issue.

Only a matter of time folks before it comes here. You heard it first on Election Watch

Liberals want to end the can ban

Ending the "Can Ban" is a new liberal issue. Now that Seaman's is Pepsi and has gutted the place we don't have to protect our Island bottler.

Is the Can Ban all about protecting the Seaman's workers or is it the right thing to do for our environment?

If we lift the ban, the plant will close. All the jobs that are left will go. Do we want this? Are cans that important?

All those who get money from collecting bottles will lose this opportunity. So we put the recycling centres out of business - great outcome! We need cans so much?

So to get our precious cans we lose a lot of jobs and we destroy the backbone of part of the recycling community that works.

What do we get instead other than cans? Our soft drinks will come mainly in plastic bottles from one or two plants in central Canada. There will be some cans but mainly plastic. Be realistic the bottlers want us to use plastic as it is cheaper for them. Each glass bottle can be recycled many times here on the Island at the plant that exists. The plastic bottle goes into the blue bag and then sits in a mountain in a lot in Montague waiting for a business to grow up to recycle. There is no recycling here for plastic. There never can be because we will never have the volume. So cans and plastic bottles will have to be driven off the Island just as they are trucked in. or they will stay here in mountains.

By the way how are we doing with the blue bag issue?

There are some inconsistencies in the law but is this not an opportunity to make our laws on all disposables viable.

We have a huge rubbish problem on PEI. It seems to be a new Island tradition to throw your fry box and your Tims cup out the window from your car.

A smart politician would promise that we will push back on all containers that cannot be recycled

But no - we NEED OUR CANS and to hell with the larger issues of employment, waste and costs!

Why are we so stupid?

I have had very intelligent discussions with senior Liberals and Conservatives in the past about what is really going on in health. I am convinced that they know as well as I do what is really going on. But it seems today that that we are stuck on how many doctors we should have. Why are we so stupid? What is it about elections that makes us talk such nonsense?

So here are some real issues.

1. Seniors - Direct Costs – As we get older we cost more. A lot more. In 1994, health care spending in Atlantic Canada for those over 65 was $6,126 per person. For those between 45 and 64, it was $1,439 per person . When the two groups are combined it adds up to 75% of health care spending. This increase is driven by higher drug use, more technical intervention, more frequent and longer stay visits to hospitals and more institutional care for those who cannot care for themselves. On Prince Edward Island in 1994 this age group drove $98.00 million of the direct costs to the Health care system or 47% of the budget. By 2010 the sample size that forms this age group will have expanded dramatically. Those 65 and older account for 44% of all days spent in the hospital and one-third of the nation's health care expenditures. What is our plan for seniors? Having more doctors is not connected with this issue.

2. Drug costs - A powerful driver in this trajectory of cost increase is our faith in prescription drugs. The Provincial drug budget is increasing at a rate of 8% compounded a year. The fastest growing sector of cost growth in the healthcare system is drug use. The heaviest users of drugs are seniors. drug costs in Canada have risen 87% in the period 1990-99. Hospital costs have risen 16% and doctors by 30%. Having more doctors does not do anything but to increase this acceleration

Pat's Weblog

It's day three and still not one entry in Pat's Blog

The 7,000?

Here is the CBC Compass clip on the 7,000 without a doctor

Requires Real Player

Wade's Vision

Here is a link to the pdf file on the UPEI website that contains Wade MacLauchlan's piercing views on where we are and where we need to go. What a pity that this type of view is poorly distributed.