So it seems the hopes of a united pharmacy professsion in Ontario that looked so promising during the summer have been dashed. After failing to secure the concessions from the government that the coalition was hoping for, the powers that be have decided that our profession will be best served by reverting to the status quo where we all try to look out for our own best interests, even if it means stomping our colleagues into the ground.
The events within Ontario took a particularly nasty turn over the past week with the public dispute between the Ontario Pharmacists' Association and Shoppers Drug Mart. At issue is the fact that SDM has apparently said that it will no longer pay for OPA memberships for their pharmacists.
The OPA released a document disapproving of the decision, and saying that it had not met the requests SDM had for representation because they had to preserve the integrity of the association. Ken Burns published a blog that was just as negative towards SDM, essentially calling them out for acting like spoiled children who for once did not get their way.
Like most things, us common folk really don't get the whole story, so are left to analyze the situation from the bits of information the various parties choose to share. I can understand the position of both sides, but in the end have to side with SDM on this one.
On the one hand, OPA is right in saying that they represent pharmacists, and not corporations. As a professional advocacy association they should be advocating for the profession and be free to move the pharmacy agenda forward based on what is best for the individual members, not necessarily their employers. While SDM does not currently have any members on the board, they will have ample opportunity to gain representation with the next election. As the largest employer of pharmacists in the province, they should have no problems securing seats on the board.
However, there is nothing wrong with SDM cutting the costs of OPA membership as an employment benefit. SDM does not owe the Ontario Pharmacists' Association anything. The OPA has clearly stated that it does not represent SDM, or any other employer or corporate interest. Suggesting that by not giving them money in the form of payment for pharmacist memberships is failing the profession in some way is ludicrous. To my knowledge, SDM has never said that it does not support OPA, or that it does not approve of pharmacists or associates being members. In the face of drastic revenue cuts, it was probably a prudent move on the part of the company, and one of the easier decisions that will have to be made as the effects of Ontario's drug reform steamroll the pharmacy profession over the next few years.
In the end, the association should be stronger. If it truly represents the profession and the individual pharmacists, they will have no problems keeping up their membership base. Relying on half of their membership dues to be collected from a pharmacy corporation may have made the work of the association a bit too easy. If they have to earn the support of the membership rather than rely on the generosity of their employers, they will truly have a mandate to represent the profession and all pharmacists in Ontario.
Personally, the only benefit I have ever received from OPA membership is competitively-priced home and auto insurance. I have watched as OPA twice dropped the ball on effectively representing pharmacists during government drug-system reform initiatives. Let's not forget the creation of the IPO was essentially the result of a backlash against the anaemic efforts of the OPA during the 2006 drug reform.
Rather than chastising Shoppers Drug Mart, OPA should be examining itself in the mirror. If pharmacists perceive a benefit of having an OPA membership they will purchase one. If OPA can't attract pharmacists to be members unless someone else is footing the bill, maybe it's time to have a different association representing our interests.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
How Helen convinced Deb to pass drug reform
Ever wonder how your Ontario government uses the tax dollars that it collects from the hardworking people of Ontario? This is the latest propaganda coming from the Ministry of Health regarding drug system reform in the province. As a citizen and taxpayer of Ontario I am offended that this is how they view us. Is it really necessary to release this condescending piece of amateur animation to convince Ontarians that their ridiculous plan is the "right thing to do?" The only explanation I can think of is that this is how Czar Helen was able to convince the Minister of Health and the Liberal MPP's that her plan would benefit Ontario. Fortunately, I have to think the people of Ontario have a bit higher IQ than the average Liberal MPP and will see this as just another piece of garbage from the Ontario Liberal Government. The next time you hit a pothole on the way to collect your unemployment cheque, keep this video in mind...This is your government working for you.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
The fight continues...
This is a difficult time to be a pharmacist in the province of Ontario. The government has passed regulations that will make it very difficult for any of us to stay in business. Throughout the process they have relentlessly attacked the integrity of our profession and attempted to paint pharmacists in a very negative light.
Despite all of our efforts, and there were many, to have the government return to the negotiating table or have the regulations softened, the Minister of Health pressed on with her agenda. There are those who feel that we should have done more to stop the regulations from happening. Still others cling to the false hope that we can stop them from being implemented. I have seen and heard some of the most ridiculous suggestions to date coming from the fringe of the profession that believe riots, hunger strikes and all manner of idiotic behaviour are the answer to our problems. Of course, I respect these guys for their passion and commitment to their profession, but I have to believe their suggestions would do more harm than good in our current situation.
The government and many people in the province know that we are unhappy with the regulations in their current form. We have protested , collected petitions from over 500,000 Ontario voters, spent money educating the public through media and advertising, and have attempted to have an intelligent conversation with the powers that be in the Ministry of Health. It seems as though there has been little impact from any of our activities.
I think anyone who believed that the government was going to fully retreat from their position and that it would be business as usual was looking through rose-tinted glasses. It would have been nice to finish the war before the regulations dropped, but this phase was as much about setting the stage for the next 1-2 years as it was about achieving immediate change.
There has been much written about the plight of pharmacists and the potential impact that the cuts proposed by the government would have on our profession and our business model. We have warned that some pharmacies would go out of business, that dispensing fees would rise considerably, and that services that had previously been offered free of charge would no longer happen or would be subject to fees. We have set the stage to begin charging a fair fee directly to the patients for the services that we said would be affected by these changes. There is no one living in the province or working for the government who should be surprised when this happens.
Yes, we have entered a new phase in our battle for respect and fair funding from the government. This is the time to prove that we were not bluffing, we were not presenting distorted facts or misinformation, and the new reality in pharmacy practice in Ontario, as legislated by the Ontario government, is that patients pay a lot more than they have been used to. The intelligent operators will be able to survive and be able to clearly demonstrate that the government promises of lower drug costs for Ontarians were as sincere as every other promise this premier and government have made during their tenure.
The people of Ontario will have their chance to pass judgement on this government in 2011. Barring a major shift in public opinion, the majority of these Liberals will be out of a job and we can begin to negotiate a fair deal with the new regime at Queens Park.
Our mission now is to take the high road and work with the hand that we have been dealt. We need to find a way to make our business work to support our professional practice within the constraints of government policy. Every time we ask a patient to open their wallet before providing service, we need to make sure they know exactly who is responsible.
It is regrettable that the Loblaws of the world do not seem to share in our common goals for the profession, but we cannot let them dictate the terms of our practice. While we will probably lose a few scripts to them, my experience has been that most patients are looking for more from their pharmacy than simply the lowest price. We need to continue to serve the majority of our patients who appreciate and expect the level of care that they have been accustomed to receiving from us.
In the end, our victory will be achieved through the legions of pharmacy patients who appreciate the care they receive from us and support our efforts to be recognized by the government. We will not gain their support by acting like radical fringe groups or through taking destructive and unprofessional actions. We may gain their support by continuing to provide them with the care they expect and informing them of the reasons that it now costs them a lot more to receive it.
I urge every pharmacist to remain focused on our long term goal of gaining respect from the government and other payers through an adequate professional fee and professional services funding model. I also urge all pharmacists to fight, and fight hard, but to do it with class and professionalism.
Despite all of our efforts, and there were many, to have the government return to the negotiating table or have the regulations softened, the Minister of Health pressed on with her agenda. There are those who feel that we should have done more to stop the regulations from happening. Still others cling to the false hope that we can stop them from being implemented. I have seen and heard some of the most ridiculous suggestions to date coming from the fringe of the profession that believe riots, hunger strikes and all manner of idiotic behaviour are the answer to our problems. Of course, I respect these guys for their passion and commitment to their profession, but I have to believe their suggestions would do more harm than good in our current situation.
The government and many people in the province know that we are unhappy with the regulations in their current form. We have protested , collected petitions from over 500,000 Ontario voters, spent money educating the public through media and advertising, and have attempted to have an intelligent conversation with the powers that be in the Ministry of Health. It seems as though there has been little impact from any of our activities.
I think anyone who believed that the government was going to fully retreat from their position and that it would be business as usual was looking through rose-tinted glasses. It would have been nice to finish the war before the regulations dropped, but this phase was as much about setting the stage for the next 1-2 years as it was about achieving immediate change.
There has been much written about the plight of pharmacists and the potential impact that the cuts proposed by the government would have on our profession and our business model. We have warned that some pharmacies would go out of business, that dispensing fees would rise considerably, and that services that had previously been offered free of charge would no longer happen or would be subject to fees. We have set the stage to begin charging a fair fee directly to the patients for the services that we said would be affected by these changes. There is no one living in the province or working for the government who should be surprised when this happens.
Yes, we have entered a new phase in our battle for respect and fair funding from the government. This is the time to prove that we were not bluffing, we were not presenting distorted facts or misinformation, and the new reality in pharmacy practice in Ontario, as legislated by the Ontario government, is that patients pay a lot more than they have been used to. The intelligent operators will be able to survive and be able to clearly demonstrate that the government promises of lower drug costs for Ontarians were as sincere as every other promise this premier and government have made during their tenure.
The people of Ontario will have their chance to pass judgement on this government in 2011. Barring a major shift in public opinion, the majority of these Liberals will be out of a job and we can begin to negotiate a fair deal with the new regime at Queens Park.
Our mission now is to take the high road and work with the hand that we have been dealt. We need to find a way to make our business work to support our professional practice within the constraints of government policy. Every time we ask a patient to open their wallet before providing service, we need to make sure they know exactly who is responsible.
It is regrettable that the Loblaws of the world do not seem to share in our common goals for the profession, but we cannot let them dictate the terms of our practice. While we will probably lose a few scripts to them, my experience has been that most patients are looking for more from their pharmacy than simply the lowest price. We need to continue to serve the majority of our patients who appreciate and expect the level of care that they have been accustomed to receiving from us.
In the end, our victory will be achieved through the legions of pharmacy patients who appreciate the care they receive from us and support our efforts to be recognized by the government. We will not gain their support by acting like radical fringe groups or through taking destructive and unprofessional actions. We may gain their support by continuing to provide them with the care they expect and informing them of the reasons that it now costs them a lot more to receive it.
I urge every pharmacist to remain focused on our long term goal of gaining respect from the government and other payers through an adequate professional fee and professional services funding model. I also urge all pharmacists to fight, and fight hard, but to do it with class and professionalism.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Billable Hours
The last bill I received from my lawyer included charges for every phone call made on my behalf, every stamp used to mail a letter, every photocopy made and every hour he spent thinking about my matters. The last time I was at a garage, I paid for shop time, shop supplies used, delivery charges for parts ordered on my behalf, and labour at a much higher hourly rate than I ever made as a pharmacist. The last time I visited a physician, I paid a ten dollar fee to obtain his signature on a form and pick it up the next day. We pay service charges, convenience fees and surcharges daily without batting an eye. Why then, should we believe that pharmacists and pharmacy services should be different?
For years, pharmacists have been happy to receive compensation for one task- dispensing prescriptions. Professional allowances have covered the gap between the charged fee and the actual cost of filling prescriptions as well as all of the other services that pharmacies typically offer. At the end of the day pharmacies survived with a respectable profit margin and the system, though far from perfect, worked as well as any other aspect of the health care system. The problem with the system, though, is that only pharmacists and those closely tied to the industry understand how it all works. The average consumer and government official does not understand the intricacies of the system, and it is hard to explain in 15-second sound bites that dominate our media.
The regulations proposed by the Ontario government represent devastating cuts to the profession. The government and many of the groups supporting them have grossly underestimated the value that they receive from pharmacies on a daily basis. The Health Minister has stated that the business model for pharmacy will need to change. There really is no question in that regard. It is certainly a tall order to replace about $300,000 in lost revenue virtually overnight, but we all need to take a hard look at how we operate and rationalize our business. Rita Winn said it best- “it’s time to start charging what we are worth!” Additional paid professional services are an exciting prospect for the future, but we need to be able to survive until these are a reality.
The first area to look at is all of the services that we currently provide without receiving any compensation. These were never funded, but since pharmacies received sufficient PA funds to operate, they were provided gratis in most cases. These include services like requesting refills for patients, compliance packaging, home delivery, providing rush orders of vacation supplies, answering telephone requests for information, advancing emergency supplies of medications, providing duplicate receipts for prescriptions, contacting third party insurance plans on behalf of patients, contacting physicians for changes in cases where it is not a therapeutic intervention, providing patient profiles to patients or lawyers, and the controversial co-pay waiving practices. In my world, these will become either fee for service (ie-charge of $5 for prescription authorization requests, $5 for duplicate official receipts) or services billed by the minute (ie-$5 per minute for calls to third parties on behalf of patients.) These are all interventions using a pharmacist’s unique knowledge and expertise, or supplies and equipment. We need to be directly compensated for every second we are using our expertise on behalf of our patients.
The professional fee for dispensing a prescription also needs to be raised to an appropriate level to compensate for the actual costs involved in dispensing a prescription. The most recent research indicates that the actual costs of dispensing are around $14 per script. The fee needs to be set to achieve an average of about $15 per prescription, recognizing that the maximum collected from ODB is going to be $8 or $9. In most cases, the appropriate professional fee will be between $17 and $21. The cash paying and privately insured will end up subsidizing ODB recipients which is unfair, but that is the system that the government is endorsing through this legislation.
Once the fee schedule is established for all of the routine, non-professional, and low-level professional activities that comprise the average day in the pharmacy and the usual and customary fee is set at a level to appropriately recognize the realities of dispensing we can look at the additional professional services that we will provide in the future.
This will require a huge paradigm shift for a profession that has for too long provided most of their services and expertise for free. The first time we ask our patients to pay us directly for the services that they are receiving will be an uncomfortable experience. I have to believe it will also be very liberating. We will no longer be under the thumb of the Executive Officer or Minister of Health.
Any consumer should realize that nothing in this world is free. Pharmacists have been able to provide numerous services for free BECAUSE of the indirect funding they were receiving from other sources. The funds are gone and not coming back, but the expenses associated with them are all still there. We have no other choice, and I would expect the majority of patients to understand this. We also must be sure the majority of pharmacy operators understand this. We are a profession and we need to compete on professional value and service, not on charges and fees.
If we are successful in implementing new service fee schedules across all pharmacies, the independents may not suffer the dire fate that they have been predicting. In fact, we may find that the new revenue streams allow us to offer even better services and care than we have in the past.
When patients realize the true costs of the services they receive from pharmacy, they can take up the battle with the government in demanding that they become insured services under the Ontario Drug Benefits plan.
I do not support the government or their handling of this whole situation, and I will strongly campaign against them in the next election. In the meantime, however, we all need to take a hard look at our practice and accept the fact that the way we operate must change. Change is never easy, but the only way the government will be able to see the effects of their legislation is by pharmacists taking the necessary steps to protect their profession and their livelihood operating under the legislated system. It will not be an easy summer, but at least we now know where we stand and can made decisions based on actual knowledge and not hypothetical situations.
For years, pharmacists have been happy to receive compensation for one task- dispensing prescriptions. Professional allowances have covered the gap between the charged fee and the actual cost of filling prescriptions as well as all of the other services that pharmacies typically offer. At the end of the day pharmacies survived with a respectable profit margin and the system, though far from perfect, worked as well as any other aspect of the health care system. The problem with the system, though, is that only pharmacists and those closely tied to the industry understand how it all works. The average consumer and government official does not understand the intricacies of the system, and it is hard to explain in 15-second sound bites that dominate our media.
The regulations proposed by the Ontario government represent devastating cuts to the profession. The government and many of the groups supporting them have grossly underestimated the value that they receive from pharmacies on a daily basis. The Health Minister has stated that the business model for pharmacy will need to change. There really is no question in that regard. It is certainly a tall order to replace about $300,000 in lost revenue virtually overnight, but we all need to take a hard look at how we operate and rationalize our business. Rita Winn said it best- “it’s time to start charging what we are worth!” Additional paid professional services are an exciting prospect for the future, but we need to be able to survive until these are a reality.
The first area to look at is all of the services that we currently provide without receiving any compensation. These were never funded, but since pharmacies received sufficient PA funds to operate, they were provided gratis in most cases. These include services like requesting refills for patients, compliance packaging, home delivery, providing rush orders of vacation supplies, answering telephone requests for information, advancing emergency supplies of medications, providing duplicate receipts for prescriptions, contacting third party insurance plans on behalf of patients, contacting physicians for changes in cases where it is not a therapeutic intervention, providing patient profiles to patients or lawyers, and the controversial co-pay waiving practices. In my world, these will become either fee for service (ie-charge of $5 for prescription authorization requests, $5 for duplicate official receipts) or services billed by the minute (ie-$5 per minute for calls to third parties on behalf of patients.) These are all interventions using a pharmacist’s unique knowledge and expertise, or supplies and equipment. We need to be directly compensated for every second we are using our expertise on behalf of our patients.
The professional fee for dispensing a prescription also needs to be raised to an appropriate level to compensate for the actual costs involved in dispensing a prescription. The most recent research indicates that the actual costs of dispensing are around $14 per script. The fee needs to be set to achieve an average of about $15 per prescription, recognizing that the maximum collected from ODB is going to be $8 or $9. In most cases, the appropriate professional fee will be between $17 and $21. The cash paying and privately insured will end up subsidizing ODB recipients which is unfair, but that is the system that the government is endorsing through this legislation.
Once the fee schedule is established for all of the routine, non-professional, and low-level professional activities that comprise the average day in the pharmacy and the usual and customary fee is set at a level to appropriately recognize the realities of dispensing we can look at the additional professional services that we will provide in the future.
This will require a huge paradigm shift for a profession that has for too long provided most of their services and expertise for free. The first time we ask our patients to pay us directly for the services that they are receiving will be an uncomfortable experience. I have to believe it will also be very liberating. We will no longer be under the thumb of the Executive Officer or Minister of Health.
Any consumer should realize that nothing in this world is free. Pharmacists have been able to provide numerous services for free BECAUSE of the indirect funding they were receiving from other sources. The funds are gone and not coming back, but the expenses associated with them are all still there. We have no other choice, and I would expect the majority of patients to understand this. We also must be sure the majority of pharmacy operators understand this. We are a profession and we need to compete on professional value and service, not on charges and fees.
If we are successful in implementing new service fee schedules across all pharmacies, the independents may not suffer the dire fate that they have been predicting. In fact, we may find that the new revenue streams allow us to offer even better services and care than we have in the past.
When patients realize the true costs of the services they receive from pharmacy, they can take up the battle with the government in demanding that they become insured services under the Ontario Drug Benefits plan.
I do not support the government or their handling of this whole situation, and I will strongly campaign against them in the next election. In the meantime, however, we all need to take a hard look at our practice and accept the fact that the way we operate must change. Change is never easy, but the only way the government will be able to see the effects of their legislation is by pharmacists taking the necessary steps to protect their profession and their livelihood operating under the legislated system. It will not be an easy summer, but at least we now know where we stand and can made decisions based on actual knowledge and not hypothetical situations.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Never give in
"I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat."
We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-Winston Churchill
While I would never compare our struggle with the Ontario government to the threats facing the world when Churchill delivered his first speech as Prime Minister, I can draw great inspiration from his words, some 70 years after they were so eloquently spoken.
The pharmacy community is understandably feeling frustrated as weeks have passed since the announcement of massive front-line health care cuts by the government with little change from their original position. Pharmacists, pharmacy staff, students and patients have rallied at Queen’s Park and at MPP offices, have presented hundreds of thousands of signatures on petitions and have been the subject of hundreds of newspaper articles and media pieces over the past two months. Yet today, the Health Minister announced that the regulations will pass essentially unchanged.
The days and weeks ahead will be very difficult for many pharmacists. Pharmacists will question whether the entire campaign was worth the effort since very little movement was made on the part of the government. We will struggle with the difficult decisions that will need to be made in order to keep our practice afloat. If we want to survive, we can no longer be the easygoing, friendly health care professional providing countless services to patients for free. The days of walking up to a pharmacy counter and obtaining free advice or services from the pharmacist are over.
Our profession will be forced to evolve if we are to remain viable. The way we deliver services and the way we charge for the services that we provide will need to change dramatically. We will need to actively seek new practice opportunities and take full advantage of our expanded scope of practice, even if it means direct patient billing for the services provided. Our dispensing activities, once the main source of pharmacy revenue and main focus of our day will need to become streamlined and more efficient. The fees charged for dispensing will need to increase considerably to cover the previous subsidized funding gap, as well as the gap left on the public drug plan side.
We were all warned in the beginning that this was going to be a marathon and not a sprint. This is truly a war, and one that we must be determined to fight to the end. We have spent a lot of energy educating the public and warning of the potential effects of the funding cuts. The hour is upon us, and the public will soon feel the effects of the reckless Liberal health care cuts.
As pharmacists, we can choose to fight, or we can choose to die. We will do what we need to do to survive, and Ontarians can decide what type of pharmacy care they prefer. My bet is that they like what they are receiving now a whole lot better than what they will be getting by November 2011. We need to make sure they are reminded every day of the people who caused the change.
June 7th will forever live in history as a dark day for the profession of pharmacy in Ontario. The only advice I can give my fellow pharmacists today is this- again from Sir Winston Churchill...
Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never--in nothing, great or small, large or petty--never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-Winston Churchill
While I would never compare our struggle with the Ontario government to the threats facing the world when Churchill delivered his first speech as Prime Minister, I can draw great inspiration from his words, some 70 years after they were so eloquently spoken.
The pharmacy community is understandably feeling frustrated as weeks have passed since the announcement of massive front-line health care cuts by the government with little change from their original position. Pharmacists, pharmacy staff, students and patients have rallied at Queen’s Park and at MPP offices, have presented hundreds of thousands of signatures on petitions and have been the subject of hundreds of newspaper articles and media pieces over the past two months. Yet today, the Health Minister announced that the regulations will pass essentially unchanged.
The days and weeks ahead will be very difficult for many pharmacists. Pharmacists will question whether the entire campaign was worth the effort since very little movement was made on the part of the government. We will struggle with the difficult decisions that will need to be made in order to keep our practice afloat. If we want to survive, we can no longer be the easygoing, friendly health care professional providing countless services to patients for free. The days of walking up to a pharmacy counter and obtaining free advice or services from the pharmacist are over.
Our profession will be forced to evolve if we are to remain viable. The way we deliver services and the way we charge for the services that we provide will need to change dramatically. We will need to actively seek new practice opportunities and take full advantage of our expanded scope of practice, even if it means direct patient billing for the services provided. Our dispensing activities, once the main source of pharmacy revenue and main focus of our day will need to become streamlined and more efficient. The fees charged for dispensing will need to increase considerably to cover the previous subsidized funding gap, as well as the gap left on the public drug plan side.
We were all warned in the beginning that this was going to be a marathon and not a sprint. This is truly a war, and one that we must be determined to fight to the end. We have spent a lot of energy educating the public and warning of the potential effects of the funding cuts. The hour is upon us, and the public will soon feel the effects of the reckless Liberal health care cuts.
As pharmacists, we can choose to fight, or we can choose to die. We will do what we need to do to survive, and Ontarians can decide what type of pharmacy care they prefer. My bet is that they like what they are receiving now a whole lot better than what they will be getting by November 2011. We need to make sure they are reminded every day of the people who caused the change.
June 7th will forever live in history as a dark day for the profession of pharmacy in Ontario. The only advice I can give my fellow pharmacists today is this- again from Sir Winston Churchill...
Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never--in nothing, great or small, large or petty--never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
It didn't need to happen this way
According to Deb Matthews, Minister of Health, her goals with drug system reform are to reduce generic drug prices, eliminate professional allowances, and recognize pharmacists appropriately for the care and service they provide.
According to pharmacists, we would like to reduce generic drug prices, eliminate professional allowances, and be recognized appropriately for the care and service that we provide.
Sounds like we all want the same thing...
Let me take you back to last summer, when Health Minister Number Two continued the search for the holy grail of reduced drug spending started by George Smitherman. What if he had called a meeting of all stakeholders in pharmacy and established a working group to really tackle the problems and find real solutions? He could even have had a roundtable discussion about ways to improve the drug benefit system in Ontario- Kind of like the recent Liberal retreat, except with more emphasis on substance and meaningful discussion. What if pharmacists were asked at that time to be partners in the process, rather than just given the token opportunity to present a proposal that was never to be considered? What if the current Minister of Health had engaged the pharmacy community in real discussions around solving drug spending problems earlier this year, instead of simply getting us to agree to a gag order that allowed the government time to hone their sales pitch? What if the Minister of Health, upon seeing the first outcry from the pharmacists and patients announced that she was going to have real discussions with the pharmacy community and work to find common ground? Do you suppose the fight would have intensified to its current level?
There have been multiple opportunities for government to facilitate meaningful discussion with our profession and our patients. They could have easily said that they were interested in our feedback and scheduled meetings with all who were interested in meeting with them without causing any political damage. Instead, all of their offers to meet have been laced with resentful and inflammatory statements. Even today, when informing media that it will take a month or so to implement regulations, Deb Matthews was quick to point out that she was not influenced by pharmacists and there was no room for negotiation on several key aspects of her plan. Why won’t Deb Matthews and the Liberals show us the respect that they say they have for us and invite us back to the table to find real solutions to drug spending concerns in the province?
We have done many things to ensure that our side of the story is heard. Over 500,000 petition signatures and countless emails, phone calls and letters from pharmacists and our patients have seemingly not had an impact on the Liberal government. By all accounts, they are determined as ever to push ahead with the reforms that they have announced despite the consequences.
Unfortunately, it may be time to start demonstrating some of the consequences of this short-sighted policy. It is up to us to find a way to survive under the new rules governing our profession, and survival will require a very radical review of our entire operation. In the end, it is the patients that will lose. The sad thing is that it never needed to end up this way.
According to pharmacists, we would like to reduce generic drug prices, eliminate professional allowances, and be recognized appropriately for the care and service that we provide.
Sounds like we all want the same thing...
Let me take you back to last summer, when Health Minister Number Two continued the search for the holy grail of reduced drug spending started by George Smitherman. What if he had called a meeting of all stakeholders in pharmacy and established a working group to really tackle the problems and find real solutions? He could even have had a roundtable discussion about ways to improve the drug benefit system in Ontario- Kind of like the recent Liberal retreat, except with more emphasis on substance and meaningful discussion. What if pharmacists were asked at that time to be partners in the process, rather than just given the token opportunity to present a proposal that was never to be considered? What if the current Minister of Health had engaged the pharmacy community in real discussions around solving drug spending problems earlier this year, instead of simply getting us to agree to a gag order that allowed the government time to hone their sales pitch? What if the Minister of Health, upon seeing the first outcry from the pharmacists and patients announced that she was going to have real discussions with the pharmacy community and work to find common ground? Do you suppose the fight would have intensified to its current level?
There have been multiple opportunities for government to facilitate meaningful discussion with our profession and our patients. They could have easily said that they were interested in our feedback and scheduled meetings with all who were interested in meeting with them without causing any political damage. Instead, all of their offers to meet have been laced with resentful and inflammatory statements. Even today, when informing media that it will take a month or so to implement regulations, Deb Matthews was quick to point out that she was not influenced by pharmacists and there was no room for negotiation on several key aspects of her plan. Why won’t Deb Matthews and the Liberals show us the respect that they say they have for us and invite us back to the table to find real solutions to drug spending concerns in the province?
We have done many things to ensure that our side of the story is heard. Over 500,000 petition signatures and countless emails, phone calls and letters from pharmacists and our patients have seemingly not had an impact on the Liberal government. By all accounts, they are determined as ever to push ahead with the reforms that they have announced despite the consequences.
Unfortunately, it may be time to start demonstrating some of the consequences of this short-sighted policy. It is up to us to find a way to survive under the new rules governing our profession, and survival will require a very radical review of our entire operation. In the end, it is the patients that will lose. The sad thing is that it never needed to end up this way.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
American Style
When all else fails, attack our friends and neighbours to the south. It’s such a Liberal thing to do. In the past two days several MPP’s have accused Ontario’s pharmacists of “American-style” campaign attacks. In question period today, Deb Matthews called the campaign a “multi-million-dollar American-style campaign of fear-mongering and misinformation.” She must have this confused with something else. I have been exposed to several American political campaigns, and this does not characterize the Ontario Community Pharmacies’ campaign.
In fact, this all started with an “American-style” campaign against pharmacists by the government. The blatant personal character assassination of pharmacists, like that displayed by Deb Matthews as the regulations were announced could be characterized as “American-style.” The distortion of the facts to demonize the profession of pharmacy and pharmacists is reminiscent of some great American negative campaigning. In America, though, the candidates attack each other, and use their own campaign funds to do it. In this case, the government is using resources provided through public tax dollars to spread misinformation, attack and demonize our profession. The only appropriate use of “American-style” in describing this situation is the future of Ontario pharmacy practice if these regulations come to pass.
The campaign by Ontario’s Pharmacists has been entirely factual. We have expressed the reality of the situation that most reasonable people could understand. When you take away almost a Billion dollars every year from pharmacy we will not be able to provide the same level of care and service. We do not like the source of the funding, but the system has evolved because of government neglect and under-funding over the past two decades. While not ideal, professional allowance funding has allowed us to practice our profession and serve the patients of Ontario. Most Liberal MPP’s have stated their support for the government plan, and we have let their constituents know about it. Polling has confirmed that the re-election chances for many Liberals are slim to none. These are all facts, not misinformation.
When this much funding is taken away with no real compensation, pharmacies will need to find ways to absorb the loss. This may mean reduction of services or implementation of additional fees. It may mean pharmacies need to close. Speaking the truth about the consequences of these actions is not fear-mongering. Is it “fear-mongering” to tell someone that they might blow themselves up if they smoke while pumping gas? Is it “fear-mongering” to tell someone that they might be attacked if they corner a wild animal? Is it “fear-mongering” to tell a Liberal in Ontario that they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of being re-elected come 2011?
Deb Matthews and the Liberals have woken the slumbering beast, and now they’re not quite sure how to handle it. Pharmacists will continue to speak out and have our voices heard. We will continue our campaign of facts and truths to counter the misinformation coming from the Liberal government. We will do it in a decidedly “Canadian-style” with professionalism and class. We can proudly stand behind our message with facts and evidence. We do not need to resort to “American-style” personal character attacks to get our message across. Let’s hope the Liberal government can do the same.
In fact, this all started with an “American-style” campaign against pharmacists by the government. The blatant personal character assassination of pharmacists, like that displayed by Deb Matthews as the regulations were announced could be characterized as “American-style.” The distortion of the facts to demonize the profession of pharmacy and pharmacists is reminiscent of some great American negative campaigning. In America, though, the candidates attack each other, and use their own campaign funds to do it. In this case, the government is using resources provided through public tax dollars to spread misinformation, attack and demonize our profession. The only appropriate use of “American-style” in describing this situation is the future of Ontario pharmacy practice if these regulations come to pass.
The campaign by Ontario’s Pharmacists has been entirely factual. We have expressed the reality of the situation that most reasonable people could understand. When you take away almost a Billion dollars every year from pharmacy we will not be able to provide the same level of care and service. We do not like the source of the funding, but the system has evolved because of government neglect and under-funding over the past two decades. While not ideal, professional allowance funding has allowed us to practice our profession and serve the patients of Ontario. Most Liberal MPP’s have stated their support for the government plan, and we have let their constituents know about it. Polling has confirmed that the re-election chances for many Liberals are slim to none. These are all facts, not misinformation.
When this much funding is taken away with no real compensation, pharmacies will need to find ways to absorb the loss. This may mean reduction of services or implementation of additional fees. It may mean pharmacies need to close. Speaking the truth about the consequences of these actions is not fear-mongering. Is it “fear-mongering” to tell someone that they might blow themselves up if they smoke while pumping gas? Is it “fear-mongering” to tell someone that they might be attacked if they corner a wild animal? Is it “fear-mongering” to tell a Liberal in Ontario that they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of being re-elected come 2011?
Deb Matthews and the Liberals have woken the slumbering beast, and now they’re not quite sure how to handle it. Pharmacists will continue to speak out and have our voices heard. We will continue our campaign of facts and truths to counter the misinformation coming from the Liberal government. We will do it in a decidedly “Canadian-style” with professionalism and class. We can proudly stand behind our message with facts and evidence. We do not need to resort to “American-style” personal character attacks to get our message across. Let’s hope the Liberal government can do the same.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)