The DNPP Proposes a Drug Deal with Fidel Castro

A logical answer to some of Canada’s health care problems (real or imagined) lies a few hundred miles south of Newfoundland. Doing a drug deal with Cuba could save billions for Canadians.

If we became an active participant in Cuba’s pharmaceutical manufacturing and research sector it would benefit both of us.  For Cuba, a partner with a multi-billion market and financial resources.  For Canada, a partner whose moderate spending on advertising, detailing, and dividends would lessen drug costs.

To get some idea of the savings we must take a more than casual  glance at what we spend on drugs. Looking at figures from the Canadian Institute for Health Information shows an increase in the cost of drugs from 1990 to 1999 of  6.865 billion to 13.075 billion.  That is a big jump. Almost double. But it might have been worse. Or at least it might have looked worse.

Almost ten years ago something happened to the apparent cost of drugs. Bear with us, and we will work it out together.  Here are two sets of figures from a table of health costs in 1993.  Both are from Health Canada.
  

The larger number (a) appears in tables of drug costs compiled before 1995. The SMALLER number (b) is in the present tables.  Voila....drug costs changed by 2 billion dollars in 1993. Where did all that money go? Well, there is another column.  With the interesting name "OTHER". It seems 80% of of the 2 billion wound up there.  Some one else can look for the other 20%.

Well, they didn’t make all the money disappear, but the drug bill does look better. Always remember, the 2 billion that moved also doubled.

We at the DNPP did not point out the altered figures to embarrass the Feds, Heavens to Murgatroyd, No!!! We just wanted to show that the cost of drugs would seem even higher without the accounting improvement. The same amount would have been spent, but the number in the "Drug" column would be about 4 billion higher.  The increase would still have been three times the amount needed to cover combined population gains and inflation. But it would look better. A gentler mugging.  

So, it is possible we are paying 5 to 7 billion more than we should for medicines? It is time to explore alternatives. Cuba???

Why Cuba?  Why not?  Cuba has pharmaceutical research and production capability.  Both countries would gain in such a partnership.  Cuba would get a good customer and access to capital. We would save money and expand our trade. We would buy drugs and sell wheat or whatever.

Not many people know it, but Cuba trains students from poorer countries as doctors, on scholarships, and sends them home. Seems like decent thing for one poor country to do for other poor countries.  Maybe we could send some students in pharmacy (even if we aren't poor).  Our young people would see a different culture and provide those folks with some foreign exchange.  Both parties would win.

Back to the justification for doing this.  Money.  A saving of maybe 5 billion.

That is a lot of money. Even more, if the savings are reinvested in Medicare.

The "DOWNSIDE"?  Well, our present suppliers would be upset.  No one enjoys falling out of a money tree. Of course, what with all the mergers and acquisitions, and the courtships from oil companies, they might not notice for some time.

NAFTA would be cranky, but who runs our country anyhow?

That small but vocal group both here and abroad that enjoy beating up small countries would be annoyed. But it is time everybody learned pounding on people is a poor way to make friends.

So, to sum up.  We will start small. A not for profit foundation, (CanaCuba? ...Cubada?) with modest initial funding, can explore the potential. It will make some purchases, then guide products through the approval process and expand as quickly as possible.

Funding?  We at the DNPP think there is no use doing things by halves.  If we are going to do something nice, lets have fun doing it. Let us start with the idea of involving Canadians.  The Feds could have a special bond issue, no fixed expiry date. Denominations 10-100, limit to an individual, 1000. Dividends limited to 6%, not to be considered as income.

This would be a good investment for a senior, and seniors, as the largest customers and owners would benefit twice.  Once from the dividend and once from savings on their pills.  And since there are a whole bunch of seniors it might just fly. At a thousand bucks a pop 3.5 million old folks could come up with 3.5 billion. Start up funding would come from both levels of government 50/50.

That money would be repaid as the foundation raised money.

ANOTHER GREAT IDEA FROM THE DNPP