Medical experts could block emergency stay requests after Bill 2 deal with Quebec

Quebec’s union of medical specialists and the provincial government have reached an agreement on how to interpret a controversial provision in Bill 2, potentially allowing the doctors’ union to drop its request for an emergency stay on the legislation.

But while the emergency stay request may have been granted, the challenge in court is not over, according to lawyer Jean-Philippe Groleau. Federation des Médecins Specialists du Québec (FMSQ).

Bill adopted L in lawate last month, and is drawing the ire of doctors’ federations as it imposes a new pay structure on physicians.

Among the immediate concerns, Groleau explained, is the meaning behind Bill 2’s prohibition against two or more doctors joining in a concerted effort, such as pressure tactics to disrupt or slow medical care to protest government policy.

FMSQ was concerned that this provision could be interpreted so strictly that two doctors who were married and moved to Ontario to practice, or colleagues who discussed retiring at the same time, could be found guilty of prohibition and face serious fines.

Look Explanation of the agreement between FMSQ and the Government of Quebec:

Quebec medical experts, government lawyers reach agreement on controversial part of Bill 2

In a surprise twist, lawyers from the government and the federation representing medical specialists reached an agreement on one of the more controversial parts of Quebec’s new doctor remuneration law. If confirmed by a Superior Court judge, it would allow doctors to decide their own futures, without fear of retribution.

On Thursday afternoon, FMSQ announced it had received the government’s interpretation of Bill 2. The government confirmed that it would not interpret the provision strictly, making it clear that it would not penalize actions such as transfer of two married doctors or two doctors retiring together.

The federation agrees with this less restrictive interpretation, noting that the Government has confirmed that a much higher burden of proof would be required at the criminal level to enforce the prohibition. The Attorney General of Quebec would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the doctors were actually going in protest.

“I think the doctors will be safe,” Groleau said, adding that the rush to order the halt was to protect doctors’ fundamental rights.

Following their meeting, both parties submitted a joint motion outlining this interpretation to a Quebec Superior Court judge, asking him to approve it. The judge said it would take a few days for him to issue a decision.

If the judge approves the joint interpretation, FMSQ said this specific request for an emergency stay would no longer be necessary. However, the federation said it still intended to challenge the rest Law In court, there are provisions that violate the right of association and negotiation.

Simon Jolin-Barrett, the province’s justice minister and The Attorney General has said that the federations’ initial interpretation of the law was wrong and their fears were unfounded.

Paul Brunet, president of the Quebec Council for Patients’ Rights, was in court Thursday. He said he wants patients to be represented.

“On the one hand, we have a government that is certainly well-intentioned, that wants to improve the efficiency of doctors’ services, not to mention improving the efficiency of the network,” he said.

“And at the same time, we have doctors who say: ‘If this law is actually implemented, we will lose hundreds of doctors.’ The patients are not ahead. We want justice to settle the debate.

Brunet repeated that cThe council requested amendments to Bill 2 to state that all patients will have access Health care.