The Physician Services Committee

Prior to the 1995 election, the relationship between the OMA and the government was negotiated through “Framework Agreements”.8 In 1995, the newly -elected government was concerned by evidence of a dramatic increase in the rate of medical service utilization. [...] A court should be cautious about characterizing structural changes to OHIP which do not shut out vulnerable persons as discriminatory, given the institutional impediments to design of a healthcare system by the judiciary.” In this case, the changes to the Schedule of Benefits were found not to discriminate within the meaning of s. 15(1) of the Charter and the application was dismissed on that grou [...] For example, the terms of reference of the RBRVSC make no explicit provision for input into its decisions by actors besides the OMA or MOHLTC.29 The sum total seems to be that, despite the current PSC-centred bargaining framework’s integration of evidence with rationing choices, amendments to the schedule are ultimately treated by this framework as a largely private matter best left to the interpl [...] An interesting recent episode of rationing in the de-listing process was brought about by the requirement in the 1997 Agreement that the PSC find $50 million in savings in the overall cost of the Schedule of Benefits. [...] Given the importance of changes to the OHIP schedule to the broader public interest, these are the main weaknesses of the current MOHLTC-OMA bargaining model.