The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

2 - Orono Weekly Times Subscriptions $33.02 + $1.98 GST = $35.00 per year. No Refunds. Publishing 48 issues annually at the office of publication. "We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) toward our mailing costs." Wednesday, April 15, 2009 ORONO WEEKLY TIMES - 5310 Main St., P.O. Box 209, Orono, ON L0B 1M0 E-mail: oronotimes@rogers.com or Phone/Fax: 905-983-5301 Publisher/Editor Margaret Zwart Production and Display Advertising - Donna Anderson Wood Classified Advertising - Sue Weigand The Orono Weekly Times welcomes letters to the editor on subjects of interest to our readers. Opinions expressed to the editor and articles are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Orono Weekly times. Letters must be signed and contain the address and phone number of the writer. Any letter considered unsuitable will not be acknowledged or returned. We reserve the right to edit for length, libel and slander. If your retail or classified ad appears for the first time, please check carefully. Notice of an error must be given before the next issue goes to print. The Orono Weekly Times will not be responsible for the loss or damage of such items. Reality Check: Diagnosing the future of health care in Canada By Robert Roach Director of Research, Canada West Foundation As we stumble through this recession, there are two things Canadians and their governments should understand about health care. First, no matter what we do to reform the system, short of reducing the amount or quality of care available, the cost will continue to rise. Health care will get more expensive and we will, one way or another, have to come up with the cash to pay for it. Second, until we as individuals, and as a society through our governments, fully embrace prevention and wellness as the first principle of health care, our individual levels of health will be lower than they could be. There are many reasons why health care costs have gone up in recent years. One often-overlooked element is the fact that we have developed better ways of healing people and keeping them alive. With luck, these advances will continue and diseases like diabetes will no longer take our loved ones from us and the survival rate after serious accidents will go up and up. These new treatments cost money. We didn't get MRIs 30 years ago, and didn't have to pay for them, because magnetic resonance imaging didn't exist. The last thing we should be contemplating is cuts that will undermine providing the best possible care we can. You only get one life, and if you have the ability to keep yourself healthy until a ripe old age, you should not shy away from the investments to make this possible for everyone. What is all our prosperity for if not to achieve things like this? There is more to life than being healthy -- far more -- but being healthy sure helps! Canadians and their governments need to accept this basic truth: good health care with high tech gadgets, better drugs and thorough rehab services costs a lot of money, in the same way that a faster car costs more than a jalopy. This means more taxes and/or more out-of-pocket costs. Get used to it and don't fall prey to the idea that we can have excellent health care at little cost. This does not mean that throwing more and more money at the current system is the answer to our many health care system woes. It is naïve to think that reforms of any kind will magically make health care inexpensive. More importantly, we should not be too quick to cut, or using doublespeak, "delist" things like chiropractic services, physiotherapy, drug coverage, psychological counseling, advanced diagnostic tests and other services in the name of saving money unless we are prepared to see overall health outcomes deteriorate. That's the choice we are facing and it should be crystal clear what we are deciding to do. This is especially true for the most vulnerable members of our society who cannot just dip into their disposable income and cover the extra costs. Cutting coverage and ignoring things like eight-hour waits at walk-in clinics because of a lack of doctors makes people suffer -- it is as simple as that. What are some of the first things to get cut when governments look to trim the costs of public health care? Wellness and prevention programs. Should the goal be saving money or increasing the overall level of health? Study after study shows that if we significantly increase our efforts to promote wellness, we would be much healthier. This seems like a smart thing to do and, frankly, more important than cutting costs. This, by the way, is not about Big Brother putting people in jail for eating Doritos. There is a lot we can do that does not force people against their will to be healthy. It is less clear if greater attention to wellness will slay the health care expenditure dragon. On the one hand, every person who avoids a heart attack by improving their diet, getting more exercise and taking medication to control their blood pressure, is one less person who needs a series of costly treatments. On the other hand, wellness services are not free and, especially in the short-term, are likely to increase costs. As government look for ways to cut back in this recession, let's hope we have the collective foresight not to abandon the advances we have made in health care by cutting back on its availability to everyone regardless of their income, or by cutting back on prevention services in a kneejerk reaction to the slowdown. Let's keep our eyes on the prize of being the healthiest people in the world. Letters to the Editor Council deals with opposing agendas Dear Editor: As one of the few Clarington residents who actually visited Total Hockey, having followed the "saga", I was disappointed a couple of weeks ago when Clarington Council turned down the funding for the necessary renovations to make the space useful for Community Care. I saw it as making the best of a very bad situation. When the issue came back on the April 6 agenda, I attended the meeting. The Mayor put forth a very sound dollar-and-cents business approach -- the space as it sits is totally useless, built for one purpose only. Do we make leasehold improvements for a possible for-profit business, or, a long-term community organization that would repay the costs over time? Councillor Novak spoke against it, and talked about the tax implications, i.e. our roads need fixing, municipal employees (like every segment of the population in this economy) were asked to accept modest gains. However, the words of Gord Robinson, Willie Woo and Adrian Foster carried the night for me. Community care is servicing people who have worked and paid taxes for many years and now need assistance to stay independent. The space is at the Garnet B. Rickard Centre -- who did more over many years for our community than Garnet Rickard? And of course, we will all be there, needing Community Care perhaps sooner-rather-than-later. This project will provide much opportunity for Community Care and will free up space at the Beech Center for the Clarington Older Adults -- both vital components of this community. Another interesting issue on the agenda that night was the compensation paid to council members who sit on the Veridian Board. Mayor Abernethy from the outset considered this part of his job. His compensation has been donated to the Touching Lives Campaign, Bowmanville Hospital. Councillor Foster has been the other representative for the past two years, Councillor Novak will be for the next two years. What was the idea there, is this split term being done in other municipalities? Our representatives to the Veridian Board are there to see to the interests of Clarington, whatever their backgrounds. In December 2008, this Board voted themselves a 100% increase -- in this economy? Councillors are well paid, do they need to make another $12,000.00 for attending four meetings? Their councillors job is basically a part-time commitment. Would they be sitting on this Board if they weren't on Council? Gas, meals perhaps, but $12,000.00? Mayor Abernethy moved that Clarington members of the Veridian Board return their remuneration to the municipality. Councillor Novak will be serving this next two year term and moved that the issue be tabled until 2010 -- and it carried. Councillor Novak, on the Community Care issue, referred to the modest increases for our Municipal works... and the rationale is?? I appreciate the Veridian Board may be more difficult AGENDAS see page 3