As his first act as Alberta's new Minister of Health and Wellness, Dave Hancock, declared that user-pay, private health care choices were no longer an option in Alberta.

Apparently one of Minister Hancock's main reasons for his government's prohibition on allowing Albertans to purchase private health care is that "the private system is about choice, not about sustainability - And what we need to focus on - is to make sure we have a sustainable system."

But should sustainability really be our goal

Why would we want to merely sustain a system that fails on so many levels

In 2000, the United Nations' World Health Organization (WHO) ranked every national health care system. Canada's no-choice, government-monopoly, health care system came in 30th.

Why wouldn't Canadians and Albertans want to move up that list rather than just "sustain" 30th place

29 countries have health care systems better than Canada, including: France (1), Italy (2), San Marino (3), Andorra (4), Malta (5), Iceland (15), United Kingdom (18), Colombia (22), and Saudi Arabia (26).

Of the 29 countries, 20 of them spend less on health care per capita than Canada, yet achieve better results. Clearly, throwing an endless stream of tax dollars at the status quo is not the answer, contrary to what the majority of Canadian politicians tend to believe.

So if sustaining is not the solution, why not choice, Mr. Minister

Albertans already have the choice to spend their own after-tax dollars on gambling, alcohol and tobacco - yet bizarrely, the minister is compelled to prevent them from spending their own after-tax dollars on health care of all things.

Many European countries, including top ranked France, have long-figured this out. Prohibiting free citizens to spend their own after-tax dollars on their own health doesn't work and it doesn't lead to healthier citizens or a healthier system.

Regardless of whether Minister Hancock gives Albertans the right to make their own health care choices with their own after-tax dollars - private health care, and private health insurance is coming to Alberta.

In 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada declared in the Chaoulli v. Quebec decision that, "democracies that do not impose a monopoly on the delivery of health care have successfully delivered- services that are superior to and more affordable than the services that are presently available in Canada. This demonstrates that a monopoly is not necessary or even related to the provision of quality public health care."

While the Chaoulli decision was only enforceable in Quebec, a nearly identical case has been launched here in Alberta. In September, the Canadian Constitutional Foundation, on behalf of Calgary resident Bill Murray, filed a constitutional challenge against Alberta's health care laws and their prohibition on allowing Albertans the right to purchase private health insurance.

When his case wins (and it almost certainly will), the Alberta government will be scrambling to give Albertans the right to access private health care.

Perhaps Minister Hancock should be spending this time figuring out how he's going to do that, rather than figuring out how he's going to merely sustain the 30th best health care system in the world.