The unintended consequences of Pharmacare, Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare, could include the disruption of Canadian’s benefits if employers aren’t effectively communicated with, misspent tax dollars which could be used to fund innovation in medicine and an unequal, provincial approach to implementation that could leave some behind, says Carolyne Eagan, official representative of the Smart Health Benefits Coalition and president of Benefits Alliance.
During deliberations leading up to the passage of Bill C-64, Eagan joined other delegates in testifying in front of a House of Commons committee convened to examine the bill. At the time, the group and others raised a number of concerns, including the fact that although the Minister of Health has said publicly that Canadians will be able to use their coverage, this is not how the bill is actually written.
“It’s very surprising to me that it’s going to the Senate. Thankfully, the Senate has said we want to take a good amount of time to review this and fully understand it. I’m hoping that this point will be raised again for discussion because it was not resolved,” she says.
Proposed amendments
Amendments proposed by Eagan and her colleagues include that the minister allow provinces which don’t opt into the plan, to implement a system which uses both public and employer paid plans. The group also suggested an amendment that did make it into the bill: That is, provinces must receive public reporting – a cost benefit analysis for each province – before the program is expanded.
Advisors fielding calls from clients
As for advisors who serve employer plan sponsors, Eagan says many have already fielded calls suggesting employers could drop dental benefits, following the implementation of the Canadian Dental Care Plan, for example. The same discussions, she says, are already beginning to happen regarding pharmacare.
“We see how people navigate both the public and the employer systems, so we see what works well and we see where the pain points are. One of the biggest pain points, no matter where you live or what type of coverage you have, is the high cost and rare disease drugs,” she says. “Where innovation is coming to Canada, we want to keep that going. We need the funds to help people.”
Regarding birth control and contraceptives, “you want people to be able to make decisions about their body and their life,” she agrees, “but we just think there are so many more people you could help with other conditions and not duplicate those financial resources where they’re not needed.”
Related:
Pharmacare Act passes third reading in House of Commons
Pharmacare legislation lacks transparency and risks Canadians’ coverage says association
National pharmacare: little consideration for insurers' contributions