Drug coverage in Canada is a patchwork; an inequitable inefficient and unsustainable patchwork with no coherence or purpose. Some people think that we can solve the problem by adding more patches, but the core of the problem is that it is a patchwork. For the working population, access to medicines is still organized as privileges offered by employers to their employees. Universal pharmacare would not only provide better access to needed prescription drugs, but also eliminate waste, ensure value-for-money and help improve drug safety and appropriate prescribing. Opponents fear that a universal pharmacare plan would ration drugs, and impede drug access for some patients. However, these claims misunderstand the reality of drug coverage, pricing and access. Opponents propose, instead, to “ fill the gap” of current drug coverage by implementing catastrophic coverage, which would serve commercial interests without maximizing health outcomes for the Canadian population. In spite of overwhelming evidence and consensus in the academic community in favour of universal pharmacare, the battle is far from over.

One of the countries that has achieved top rank in human development for several consecutive years in the past decade is Canada. The elimination of discrimination against women is one of the criteria. for development, and Canada has endeavored to abolish discrimination against women in this country. Nevertheless, wage discrimination is a problem that Still exists in this country. In the present research, first it was attempted to consider whether this discrimination exists or not? And if it exists, to what extent? Then to clarify the issue, two theoretical patterns, the human capital theory and the gender relations theory were utilized. The first theory explicates the phenomenon concerning individual differences, and the second theory has a structural approach in explaining the case, and identifies discrimination in the human relations structure. The results of the research showed that wage discrimination between men and women exists and that the rate of the same is 9.112 dollars annually. Taking in to consideration such factors as marriage age, minority status, academic years, annual working weeks (as an independent varianble), wage rate (as a dependant variable), and gender (as an intervening variable), the results proved that age had a direct relationship. Marriage brought about wage-increase for men and wage decrease for women. The minority status equally decreased the wage for men and women. Academic years increased the wage, but there was more increase for men rather than ;for women. Concerning the office, supervising positions often has been appointed to men; therefore, their wage average was higher than women. In respect to working weeks per year, men had approximately 2 more working weeks than women. According to the human capital theory presuming that women enjoy less human capital than men (education and working weeks annually) it seems that the 2% difference in education-average and the two more annual working weeks for men cant explain the 9.112 dollars wage-difference. But in the gender relation theory which has a structural approach, it seems that the job structure for employing men and women is the way that men are taken in to service for higher positions and consequently shall earn higher wages, while employers appoint women for lower positions. Thus the wage-discrimination in Canada cant be explained with the individual-differences approach but, rather through the gender-relations approach.