"And that insurer is the provincial government, which is accountable to the legislature and the voters if the quality of coverage is allowed to slide."

Considering that is a post about healthcare, one of the most individual and most personal issues we each face, am I the only one that finds this essential component of the government administered or government as single-payer system to be so obviously and utterly ridiculous?

This single aspect alone, in my opinion, is reason enough to never consider it as a solution to health care. While once every 2 years, or once every 4 years electoral processes might be good for managing the directions communities go with respect to what type of energy sources they should consider, or whether to build an infrastructure project or not, it does not, in my opinion, qualify as a suitable method for managing personal and often immediate life and death issues that people face with respect to their health care options. Once you settle on only one option, you by default eliminate all other options. That seems foolish to me.