The Alberta government is still unconvinced about the federal government’s pharmacare program covering diabetes medication and birth control, even though the bill has now become law.
“Alberta is willing to work with and discuss ways that the federal government can invest in Alberta’s existing comprehensive pharmacare programs and help us expand coverage to those who need it most,” Alberta Health Minister Adriana LaGrange wrote in a statement Friday.
“Unfortunately, the federal government has yet to share its vision for the future of national pharmacare, beyond coverage for contraceptives and diabetes medications, and how pharmacare will be financially supported in the long term while respecting Alberta’s current offerings.”
Bill C-64, legislation that was introduced under the former supply and confidence deal between the NDP and Liberals, received royal assent on Thursday.
In its first phase, it will cover some contraception and diabetes medications with provinces that sign deals with the federal government (British Columbia was the first province to do so). The federal government has said the plan is to expand coverage for other medications in the future.
On Friday, federal Health Minister Mark Holland said that, while it won’t be easy, he believed it “absolutely is possible” for the federal government to strike pharmacare agreements with all the provinces by the spring.
In her statement, LaGrange referred to the province’s drug programs as being “some of the most comprehensive” in the country, covering more than 5,000 drugs.
“We intend to maintain our current benefit offerings,” LaGrange wrote.
“The federal government can assist us in enhancing our current offerings by not adding duplicate programs or creating unnecessary and costly administrative burdens.
“Without meaningful consultation and true collaboration, Alberta will continue to call on the federal government to provide predictable, sustainable and unconditional health funding that aligns with provincial and territorial priorities, and respects our exclusive jurisdiction over the planning, organization and management of our health-care systems.”
It’s a similar tack to Alberta’s approach to the Canadian Dental Care Plan, which provides coverage for those without dental benefits and a household income of less than $90,000. The plan has started to open in phases.
The provincial government has suggested that dental care falls under provincial jurisdiction, and that Alberta can support its own residents’ needs with supplemental federal funding.
Holland, meanwhile, has said his working relationships with provincial counterparts makes the spring timeline for pharmacare deals realistic.
Drug plans in Alberta
Implementing the pharmacare plan will be challenging in Alberta in a way it might not be for other provinces, said Fiona Clement, a professor at the University of Calgary in the department of community health sciences.
British Columbia, for instance, has a plan where all residents are included and receive different levels of public coverage depending on their income.
“You can imagine implementing a plan — where there are specific additional dollars for things like contraceptives and diabetes — is relatively easy with that backbone of a structure,” Clement said.
Alberta’s plans are more assorted, with different ones for those who are over 65 and those who are low-income, for instance.
“There’s going to need to be some really thoughtful policy work done on how best to implement this in Alberta,” Clement said.
The pharmacare bill that was central to a political pact between the Liberals and NDP received royal assent on Thursday night and has now become law. It allows the federal government to sign deals with provinces and territories to cover diabetes and birth-control medications as part of the public health system.
Dr. Shelley Duggan, president of the Alberta Medical Association, said she believes the federal program represented “a great start.”
“There’s so many patients that simply cannot afford medications, and it certainly impacts their health,” Duggan said.
“People who don’t have any coverage are two and a half times [more likely] to skip medications because they can’t afford it, and they need to pay for rent and food and whatnot. So I think this is a good start.
“Certainly, the AMA questions why Alberta would not join into this.”
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has indicated he would reject the proposed single-payer system if elected, suggesting it would shut down private drug plans.