Skip to main content

Politics Insider delivers premium analysis and access to Canada's policymakers and politicians. Visit the Politics Insider homepage for insight available only to subscribers.

Last week, both British Columbia and Saskatchewan announced new cash incentives in the hope of drawing more physicians to rural areas.

B.C. will pay doctors a $100,000 bonus if they commit to practise at least three years in one of 17 designated communities – places like Bella Coola, Galiano Island, and Tumbler Ridge.

Story continues below advertisement

Saskatchewan, for its part, offered physicians $120,000 over five years if they establish a practice in a community with a population of 10,000 or less.

These provincial moves are on top of a federal initiative, announced last summer: Partial Canada Student Loan forgiveness of up to $40,000 over five years for health professionals (nurses as well as doctors) who commit to practise in rural or remote areas of Canada.

But don't expect a stampede to small towns.

These programs – and every province announces variations on them fairly routinely – are well intentioned but not very effective. They are more public relations than sound public policy.

Canadian physicians earn a gross income that is, on average, $307,482. Average overhead is about 26 per cent, meaning net income is about $250,000, but that varies a lot by province and by specialty.

Offering an additional $24,000 to $33,000 a year, at least in the short term, may seem attractive, especially to newly-minted MDs saddled with a lot of debt. (About one-third of students graduate from medical student with debts in excess of $100,000 according to the Canadian Medical Association.)

But it's not money, especially not short-term bonuses, that will attract and keep doctors in rural and remote areas. Quebec has actually been the most successful at keeping doctors in rural areas because it pays significant differential fees – about 15 per cent more.

Story continues below advertisement

What the research shows though is that the most effective way of drawing physicians to rural and remote areas is to give them a taste of the lifestyle. In other words, ensure that part of medical school training is in rural/remote areas and open medical schools outside big urban centres (such as the medical school in Thunder Bay, Ont.)

Much of rural Canada is exceptionally beautiful – who wouldn't want to be paid handsomely to live on Galiano Island? – but the demands on rural physicians can be crushing.

Will there be work for the doctor's partner? (And many physicians are married to other health professionals.) More importantly, when there are few (or no) other doctors around, there is no rest.

About 30 per cent of Canadians live in rural or remote areas, everything from native reserves, farming communities, fishing villages and other resource-based towns.

These populations are markedly sicker than their urban counterparts. There are far more dangers in daily living in the country, hence more traumatic injury. The rural population is also older, meaning there is more chronic illness like cardiovascular disease. Hospitals can be a long way away too.

The country doctor working around the clock is a nice romantic image, but it's not an attractive lifestyle. That's why more rural practices are closing than opening and why governments are scrambling to reverse the trend.

Story continues below advertisement

Right now, a lot of healthcare in rural and remote areas is not delivered by resident doctors but by visitors on locums. (A locum is a temporary doctor in a practice or hospital.)

This is exceptionally expensive and inefficient – a locum doc can earn $2,000 per shift plus airfare and lodging. These costs are rising because provinces and territories poach doctors from each other.

One of Ottawa's principal roles in healthcare should be to ensure timely access to healthcare across the country, including closing the urban-rural disparity.

Improving healthcare in rural and remote areas should be near the top of Ottawa's agenda. But, sadly, Ottawa;s principal agenda is to wash its hands of its healthcare responsibilities, to leave everything to the provinces and territories.

As a result, the Ministerial Committee on Rural Health, established back in 2001, has essentially died a death by neglect.

In a massive, sparsely-populated country like Canada this meeting the needs of the rural and remote residents is not a new challenge, nor is it easily resolved.

But, at the very least, it requires a deliberate, co-ordinated strategy, not one-off initiatives.

André Picard is The Globe and Mail's health columnist.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading…

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.