Three lessons Canada can learn from Australia’s health-care system
Posted on October 22, 2025 in Health Delivery System
Source: TheStar.com — Authors: Jason M. Sutherland
TheStar.com – Opinion/Contributors
Oct. 22, 2025. By Jason M. Sutherland, Contributor
Health-care systems across Canada are struggling to provide timely and equitable access to health care services — at a time when provincial governments are reining in spending in the midst of economic uncertainty.
Canada needs to find solutions that improve affordability, access and health care costs. A promising path is to look to other countries for innovative health care policies and practices, beginning with Australia.
Why look to Australia?
Australia shares many similarities with Canada. Both have universal and publicly funded health-care systems, with responsibility for delivering health care resting primarily with Canadian provinces and Australian states.
Both countries are grappling with similar health-care challenges — affordability, timely access and delivering services in vast rural areas and providing culturally appropriate health care for Indigenous populations.
Australia is seeing better results for its spending on health care. A recent international comparison of health-care systems ranked Australia as the top performer. Canada was ranked seventh by the researchers.
Australia’s experiences offer insights for Canada. Here are three lessons that we can learn from them:
First, expanding access and improving health outcomes can happen without massive increases in public spending.
Canada is already one of the top health-care spenders among Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Public data show that health spending accounted for 11.2 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP) compared with an average of 9.2 per cent for other OECD countries.
Despite spending a lot compared with other countries, provincial health-care systems — faced with an aging population, more medical complexity and immigration-fueled population growth — are seeing long waits for services, overcrowded emergency rooms and an ongoing shortage of health-care professionals.
In contrast, Australia spends about 9.6 per cent of GDP on health care. Yet it is the top-ranked of 10 countries studied for equitable access and health outcomes. Meanwhile Canada places seventh in equity and fourth in outcomes.
Second, more private-sector involvement in health care is not a cure-all.
Provincial governments are increasingly turning to private and for-profit providers to deliver publicly funded health care services to address deficiencies in the public system. Some provinces are contracting out thousands of surgeries to for-profit clinics.
The cautionary tale of Australia’s experiences has shown that having dual private and for-profit health care does not guarantee more timely access to services.
In addition to Australia’s publicly funded health-care system, the government allows Australians to purchase private health-care insurance and access private or for-profit health-care services, including hospital care.
Those with private coverage can choose to receive treatment as a public patient in a state’s public hospitals or be treated as a private patient in either a public hospital or at a private facility.
While proponents of this hybrid hospital system say it improves access to publicly funded health care by redirecting patients with the financial means to the private system — and freeing up space in public hospitals for those who cannot afford private insurance — there is no evidence that the private system has improved access to public hospital care or reduced wait times for elective surgery.
In fact, Australia’s private hospitals are facing considerable financial challenges due in part to rising costs and disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The dire financial situation in Australia’s private health systems has resulted in rising insurance premiums and higher copayments for Australians and the demise of some private hospitals.
Third, minimizing administrative burdens will foster a more efficient and effective health-care system. The Commonwealth report’s comparison of health-care systems ranked Australia second in administrative efficiency while Canada placed fifth.
The report credits Australia’s good results to electronic claims processing and efforts to minimize burdens on physicians.
Governments in Canada can build on these lessons by fostering collaboration and communication with their counterparts in Australia.
Canada’s federal government should take the lead in co-ordinating and funding comparative analyses of the two countries’ health-care systems — examining policies and practices that affect affordability, accessibility and equity — with provinces and territories providing data and expertise.
It should also fund joint health policy research with Australia and support personnel exchanges — enabling both countries to learn from each other.
The knowledge gleaned will only strengthen Canada’s health-care systems.
It is time for governments to invest in collaboration and innovation to ensure that health care is affordable, accessible and equitable for all Canadians.
Jason M. Sutherland is the UBC Professor of Health Services and Policy and Director of the Centre for Health Services and Policy Research in the School of Population and Public Health at the University of British Columbia.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/three-lessons-canada-can-learn-from-australia-s-health-care-system/article_266db2fe-5f7c-40f4-9e0b-51335e45d6aa.html?source=newsletter&utm_content=a04&utm_source=ts_nl&utm_medium=email&utm_email=0C810E7AE4E7C3CEB3816076F6F9881B&utm_campaign=top_23713
Tags: budget, Health, ideology, participation, privatization
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 22nd, 2025 at 11:51 am and is filed under Health Delivery System. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Recent Comments