Surprise! I actually partially agree with Layton on Health Care

As someone who has been a strong advocate of a parallel private health system, you would think I would be the last person to agree with Jack Layton on health care http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051203/layton_private_clinics_051204/20051204?s_name=election2006&no_ads=. Interestingly enough when pressed on the health care issue, Jack Layton said he would cut off all funding to private clinics, but would not try to shut them down. He further went on to say that private clinics have been around since the time of Tommy Douglas. On the whole I don't think that is too unreasonable a position as I am generally against subsidizing businesses so arguing that private clinics must rely solely on private funding is not totally unreasonable. The only disagreement I have with Layton is I believe governments should be allowed to contract with private clinics if they can provide quicker, cheaper, and better service. I also believe doctors working in the public system should be allowed to work in the private system once they have reached their quota in the public system. I guess this means that after all, none of the three parties are totally opposed to the European system, it is just that all of them are afraid of using the term parallel private system or two tiered health care. After all what Layton is advocating is not to much different than what exists in Sweden and Netherlands who both have a parallel private system, but prohibit cross-subsidization and require doctors to work in one or the other, not both.