Ma'am, what you are describing is not two-tier health care.

Here's the very misleading concept of two tier health care. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/06/28/tasha-kheiriddin-think-two-tier-health-care-would-be-a-disaster-ask-a-swede/
Two tier health care does not just mean private sector involvement. If so, Canada already has one. Most physicians run their clinics privately, dental care is not so much publicly funded, and many employers provide their employees with supplementary health insurance through private insurance companies. Canada already has those options, so we can say Canada is already in the world of two tier health care. Two tier health care system, however, is a system where private insurances and service providers play main provisional role of medical service along with public system. In that sense, its perfect form only exists within the U.S. among OECD nations. In most developed countries, insurance for primary care is provided only through public system while service itself can be delivered by private service providers. I'm always bugged by Danielle Smith-like people mentioning German health care system as an example of two-tier system's superiority. The truth is if a person wants to opt out public insurance that person must have income above about 50,000 euros. Well, then the income for typical family of 4 should be 200,000 euros. Only quite wealthy people can opt out. However, I have never seen Danielle Smith or the Fraser Institute mentions that fact.