

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
However, at least two provinces—Alberta and Quebec—have said they would opt out, which critics called "outrageous."
Advocates of boosting Canadians' access to prescription drugs in recent days have cautiously celebrated forthcoming legislation for a universal national pharmacare program, which will begin with coverage of contraceptives and diabetes medication.
The supply and confidence agreement between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberals and the New Democratic Party (NDP)—announced in 2022 and set to continue through the middle of next year—called for "passing a Canada Pharmacare Act by the end of 2023 and then tasking the National Drug Agency to develop a national formulary of essential medicines and bulk purchasing plan by the end of the agreement."
However, the parties last year agreed to push it until March 1. With that deadline rapidly approaching, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh on Friday confirmed to CTV News that the parties had struck a deal on "historic" draft legislation.
"I can proudly say that not only do we have legislation that specifically refers to single-payer, that refers to the Canada Health Act, and the principles and values, we also have secured commitments to delivering diabetes medication and contraceptives using a single-payer public model," Singh said in a Sunday appearance on CTV.
The draft hasn't yet been introduced, but Nikolas Barry-Shaw, the trade and privatization campaigner at the Council of Canadians, highlighted in a Monday analysis that "several leaks (if correct) have suggested the Canada Pharmacare Act will include plans to develop a list of essential medicines that would be covered by pharmacare and a bulk purchasing plan, as well as an 'implementation council' to advise on financing."
"This represents one of the biggest advances in Canadian healthcare in decades but it's nevertheless a fragile victory," Barry-Shaw declared. "The program would be life-changing for people who rely on birth control and diabetes medications, and after the legislation is passed we hope the formulary will be expanded so more people can have that life-changing access to medicines."
Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labor Congress, also welcomed the win, saying Friday that "this is a BIG deal" and "represents the most significant enhancement to our healthcare system since the creation of public healthcare in Canada."
"I have personally heard from workers unable to afford their diabetes medications, and parents faced with the heart-wrenching choice between feeding their children or providing them with essential lifesaving medicines," Bruske continued, taking aim at Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre, who said he wants to see the plan's details when asked about it on Friday.
"These are the struggles many Canadians face daily—not the fake outrage that Mr. Poilievre is talking about these days. The introduction of a universal single-payer pharmacare program is not just a policy change; it's a lifeline that will bring tangible improvements to the lives of countless individuals," Bruske stressed. "This achievement is a testament to the power of collective effort and advocacy."
While the plan, as Barry-Shaw detailed, would involve the federal government buying prescription drugs in bulk, so that everyone in Canada with a health card can get them without any out-of-pocket costs, "pharmacare will be delivered through provincial drug plans," which, as he the campaigner put it, is "a double-edged sword."
Global News reported that in a Sunday email, the office of Alberta Health Minister Adriana LaGrange, who belongs to the United Conservative Party (UCP), "said that if the federal government pursues a national pharmacare program, Alberta intends to opt out, and instead intends to obtain a full per capita share of the funding."
Blasting Alberta's UCP premier, Friends of Medicare executive director Chris Gallaway said Monday that "by preempting their decision on pharmacare even before the federal announcement is made, Danielle Smith's government has made it clear they would rather play politics than get things done to help Albertans. By doing so, they are siding with the profits of big pharmaceutical and insurance corporations over the health and well-being of Albertans."
"Canada currently pays some of the highest drug costs in the world, and millions are struggling to afford the medications that they need," Gallaway noted. "It is well documented that moving to a national, single-payer pharmacare plan would save governments, employers, Albertans, and our provincial healthcare systems billions of dollars per year. And most importantly it would save countless lives!"
"The fact is, Canada remains the only country with a universal Medicare program that does not include prescription medications," he added. "At a moment when so many Albertans are struggling with the cost of living, and access to the healthcare they need, it is outrageous to see our provincial government working to undermine this long-overdue expansion of our public healthcare coverage."
Alberta is not alone among Canada's 10 provinces and three territories. According to CTV, "Quebec has also said it intends to opt out, and British Columbia and New Brunswick said they're waiting for details before deciding whether to sign on."
An overwhelming majority of Ontarians want their government to prioritize community drinking water needs over those of commercial water-bottling companies, according to a new poll which also supports the call for Nestle Waters Canada to sell a well it purchased this summer to the local municipality as its residents have demanded.
The poll (pdf), conducted by Oraclepoll Research on behalf of the Council of Canadians, surveyed 1,200 respondents between December 8-13, 2016. Its findings overall clearly demonstrate that "[p]eople do not want companies like Nestle to profit from water," as Maude Barlow, the group's national chairperson, declared.
Specifically, the poll found:
"Based on these numbers, the Ontario government needs to considerably strengthen its regulations on bottled water and work towards phasing out all bottled water permits, not just new or expanded permits," said Emma Lui, national water campaigner for the Council of Canadians.
"We're urging the Ontario government to act on these poll results by organizing public consultations and facilitating community debate on how water use should be prioritized in the province," she said. "For too long, the Permit to Take Water system has haphazardly been issuing water permits. This must stop, and the Ontario government must begin truly protecting water for communities."

The Elora, Ontario, well is quickly becoming a flash point in the fight over water rights in Canada, Mark Calzavara, the Ontario-Quebec regional organizer for the Council of Canadians, told CBC News. "It is the most important, or clearest contest, between a municipality and a bottled water company," he said.
Nestle purchased the well earlier this year, as Common Dreams reported, outbidding the Township of Centre Wellington and helping to spark a growing Boycott Nestle effort. Just last week, news outlets reported that Nestle was in fact seeking to develop a "partnership" between the company and the Township of Centre Wellington--causing local water protectors to bristle.
"Mayor [Kelly] Linton needs to make an immediate public statement that he does not support any 'partnership' agreement with Nestle," said Arlene Slocombe, executive director of Wellington Water Watchers, which claims such a deal would merely be an attempt by Nestle to get around an existing moratorium. "If he is engaged in discussions with Nestle he needs to end those discussions immediately, and respect the wishes of the community and say 'No to Nestle.' Water is for life, not for profit."
Slocombe's group and Saveourwater.ca are organizing an emergency public community meeting for Wednesday, January 4 in Elora to tell Linton and the Township Council to once again say "No to Nestle."
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)--the corporate-friendly trade deal between the U.S. and 11 Pacific Rim nations that sparked progressive outcry over its threats to everything from democracy to digital rights to climate goals --now appears to be "in full-blown cardiac arrest."
Not only is there the fact that President-elect Donald Trump campaigned against the deal that President Barack Obama vigorously pushed, multiple news sources reported Friday that the White House has now given up on its efforts to get approval during the "lame-duck" session of Congress.
The Wall Street Journal, for example, reported that the deal "effectively died Friday, as Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress told the White House they won't advance it in the election's aftermath, and Obama administration officials acknowledged it has no way forward now." Reuters reported that the administration said "Friday that the fate of the free trade pact was up to Trump and Republican lawmakers."
The Hill also reported:
"We have worked closely with Congress to resolve outstanding issues and are ready to move forward, but this is a legislative process and it's up to congressional leaders as to whether and when this moves forward," said Matt McAlvanah, a spokesman for the Office of the U.S. trade representative, in an email to The Hill.
A White House official acknowledged on Friday the difficultly of pressing Congress to pass the TPP because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said this week that "it's something that he's going to work with the president-elect to figure out where they go in terms of trade agreements in the future," according to reports.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had already signaled in August that the U.S. Senate would not vote on TPP this year.
The political newspaper added a statement issued Friday by TPP foe Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who said that "a strong coalition of members of Congress and labor, environmental, faith, and human rights organizations and activists worked diligently to stop this agreement."
That's exactly what some advocacy groups are saying--that the deal's apparent death should not be chalked up to Trump's victory this week but to the grassroots' effort.
"Let's make one thing clear," said Evan Greer, campaign director for digital rights group Fight for the Future. "Donald Trump didn't kill the TPP. We did."
The deal, she continued, would have "globalized Internet censorship, undermined civil liberties, and devastated our economy and our planet."
Instead, "[a]n unprecedented grassroots movement of people and organizations from across the political spectrum came together to spark an uprising that stopped what would have been nothing less than an outright corporate takeover of our democratic process. Together we sounded the alarm, and made the TPP so politically toxic that no presidential candidate who wanted to be elected could support it."
"As we enter a new stage in history, let the movement that stopped the TPP serve as a reminder to the powerful: we are many, and you are few," she continued.
Offering a similar observation on Saturday, Maude Barlow, national chairperson of the Council of Canadians, said in statement: "The TPP is in full-blown cardiac arrest, thanks to years of international campaigning against this toxic deal, including turning Senate and House elections into contests over rejecting the TPP."
But, according to Barlow, as well as Arthur Stamoulis, executive director at Citizens Trade Campaign, continued vigilance is necessary.
Barlow said that her experience "from watching trade agreements is that free trade proponents always try to resuscitate these deals under different names--CETA, TiSA, and others. We need to put a 'do not resuscitate' order on these corporate deals once and for all."
Stamoulis also acknowledged the "the cross-border, cross-sector, progressive 'movement of movements'" that brought the deal to what could be its very end.
And with the Trump administration--with its "cabinet of horrors"--approaching, Stamoulis writes that "people need to be reminded of their power."
"This victory," he writes, "will be one of the biggest wins against concentrated corporate power in our lifetimes, and it holds lessons we should internalize as we steel ourselves for the many challenges we face heading into the Trump years."
"Trump's vision of internationalism is not one of human rights, worker rights, sustainability, and improving standards of living. The President-elect is a man who, among other things, thinks that workers are overpaid, is hostile to unions, denies climate science, and embraces authoritarian regimes."
"We've all got a lot of work to do," he concludes.