Quebec’s federation of medical specialists and the provincial government have come to an agreement regarding the interpretation of a contentious provision in Bill 2. This development could potentially lead to the doctors’ association withdrawing its request for an emergency stay of the legislation. Despite the potential withdrawal of the emergency stay request, legal proceedings are expected to continue, as stated by Jean-Philippe Groleau, a lawyer representing the Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec (FMSQ).
The bill, which was officially enacted last month, has faced strong opposition from doctors’ federations due to its imposition of a new salary framework for physicians. One of the main concerns raised by Groleau is the ambiguity surrounding Bill 2’s prohibition of two or more doctors collaborating in actions, such as pressure tactics, to disrupt or delay medical services in protest of government policies.
The FMSQ had expressed worries that this provision could be interpreted in a stringent manner, potentially leading to scenarios where two married doctors relocating or colleagues discussing simultaneous retirement could be deemed in violation of the prohibition, resulting in significant penalties.
In a recent development, the FMSQ disclosed that they have received the government’s interpretation of Bill 2. The government has assured that it will adopt a less stringent approach in interpreting the provision, explicitly stating that actions like two married doctors relocating or two doctors retiring simultaneously would not be penalized. The federation has expressed agreement with this more lenient interpretation, highlighting that the government has set a higher standard of proof — equivalent to the criminal level — for the prohibition to be applicable. The Quebec attorney general would need to conclusively prove that the doctors were departing as a form of protest.
Groleau emphasized his belief that doctors will be safeguarded under this new interpretation, underscoring that the urgency in seeking a stay was to protect the fundamental rights of doctors. Following discussions, both parties jointly submitted a proposal detailing this interpretation to a Quebec Superior Court judge for approval, with a decision expected in the coming days.
If the judge sanctions the joint interpretation, the FMSQ stated that the emergency stay request would no longer be required for that specific issue. However, they intend to continue challenging other aspects of the law in court, particularly those that impinge on the right of association and negotiation.
Simon Jolin-Barrette, Quebec’s justice minister and attorney general, has consistently maintained that the initial interpretation of the legislation by the federations was inaccurate and their concerns were unwarranted. Paul Brunet, president of the Quebec Council for Patients Rights, attended the court proceedings and emphasized the importance of patient representation in the ongoing debate.
Brunet reiterated the council’s call for an amendment to Bill 2 to ensure that all patients have access to healthcare services, underscoring the need for justice to resolve the current dispute.
