Can we learn from resignation of Finland’s government?

News from Finland should remove any doubt about politics being nothing more than medicine on a larger scale. The Finnish coalition government resigned ahead of an April election, citing its inability to deliver a health-care reform package it had campaigned on. This would be like if the Liberals stepped down because they did not keep their promise of a comprehensive universal pharmacare program.

Finnish Prime Minister Juha Sipila said his administration works on a “result or out” principle, claiming that political parties have an obligation to assume responsibility for failed policies. This unprecedented move, however, should be taken with a grain of salt as his party was plummeting in the polls with an expectation of defeat.

Still, it is refreshing — and still somewhat shocking — to discover that elected officials in other parts of the world will admit to failure and step down when it is in the public interest. Notwithstanding the seemingly magnanimous actions of Finnish political leadership, the fact that this Nordic country is grappling with health care delivery should force Canada to reflect on its own reform process.

Finland spends a smaller percentage of its GDP per capita on health care — one of the lowest in Europe — compared to us. Admittedly, it enjoys this statistic while having a national population that is exceeded by the number of people in the GTA.

Its universal health-care system, which includes capped user-fees and private health care, is organized to entrust its 450 individual municipalities to provide local pri- mary care, while simultaneously requiring them to fund specialist care through the 20 regional hospital districts. Its central government distributes tax revenue to municipalities to fund health care based on a number of demographic factors.

And yet, Finland struggles. The government’s proposal for reform included the consolidation of services into 18 entities, with the goal of streamlining care and finding efficiencies. Interestingly, this vision echoes the desire by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care to create a super agency from the province's 14 LHINs.

The Finnish story should be instructive to Canadians because it reiterates that health care is a complex and dynamic challenge facing every country. The collective inaction by governments around the world on reform poses a huge threat to the quality of health care in the near future. This inertia is a symptom of convoluted political structures that increasingly challenge the ability to find consensus that is needed in the legislative process.

These political determinants of health are now firmly rooted in our hyper partisan environment. The more our society retreats to the comforts of echo chambers, the less likely we are to find common ground moving forward.

Which is why we need our elected officials to lead with a focus on policy instead of ideology. Indeed, in an important election year, this is ultimately the campaign promise that all Canadians deserve to be kept. Adam Kassam