logo
Letters: Where do Quebec politicians go for health care?

Letters: Where do Quebec politicians go for health care?

It is frightening to be a patient requiring health care in Quebec.
The public sector is so strained that fatigued, overworked physicians can't help but eye the private sector. So we pay financially to go private, or we pay mentally, emotionally and physically when we go public. Either way, we pay.
I wonder: Where do politicians receive their health care? Do they feel entitled to skip the wait-line if they use the public system? Do they use the public system at all?
Is it unfair to conclude that politicians have no idea how it feels to wait and worry about getting care — as the rest of us do?
Health care management should be in the hands of medical people, not politicians.
Mary Armstrong, Montreal
Longtime reader saw it coming
Re: ' A bitter pill to swallow as family doctor shortage deepens ' (Allison Hanes, Aug. 6)
Allison Hanes's column is accompanied by a photo of François Legault when he was health minister with the Parti Québécois government two decades ago.
During those two decades, my wife has been warning in letters to The Gazette about the deteriorating situation in our health care system.
Today I need to say for her: 'She told you so!'
Arnold Yesovitch, Côte-St-Luc
Bill 21: Judges are the best arbitrators
Re: ' Supreme Court may be lifeline Legault needs ' (Opinion, Aug. 5)
Raphaël Melançon refers to former minister Benoit Pelletier's view that the use of the notwithstanding clause to shield Bill 21 against Charter of Rights challenges is justified because it ensures 'collective interests are fairly taken into account.'
It seems to me rather that the use of this clause enables the provincial government to be a judge in its own case as to whether its legislation is fair to the minorities whose rights it violates.
By contrast, the CAQ government could have instead attempted to persuade the courts that Bill 21 was 'reasonable and demonstrably justified,' as allowed by the Charter — a better guarantee of the bill's fairness — but chose not to take this path.
The fact that the judges are unelected, as referred to disparagingly by Melançon, is precisely the guarantee that they can judge Bill 21 according to its merits rather than public pressure.
Robert Hajaly, Montreal
The timely gift of Louise Penny
What a wonderful coincidence when I opened The Gazette!
On an annual visit to Montreal from their residence in Florida, our eldest son and his wife have added Knowlton to their 'getaway weekend.'
As a fervent reader of Louise Penny's writing over the years, I included her novel The Grey Wolf in their treats-to-go package.
With the creation of her café, so appreciated by the Knowlton community, I'm certain that the author's followers of her hero Insp. Armand Gamache will agree that 'goodness exists' via the gift of books.
Vivianne M. Silver, Côte-St-Luc
Submitting a letter to the editor
Letters should be sent by email to letters@montrealgazette.com
We prioritize letters that respond to, or are inspired by, articles published by The Gazette.
If you are responding to a specific article, let us know which one.
Letters should be sent uniquely to us. The shorter they are — ideally, fewer than 200 words — the greater the chance of publication.
Timing, clarity, factual accuracy and tone are all important, as is whether the writer has something new to add to the conversation.
We reserve the right to edit and condense all letters. Care is taken to preserve the core of the writer's argument.
Our policy is not to publish anonymous letters, those with pseudonyms or 'open letters' addressed to third parties.
Letters are published with the author's full name and city or neighbourhood/borough of residence. Include a phone number and address to help verify identity; these will not be published.
We will not indicate to you whether your letter will be published. If it has not been published within 10 days or so, it is not likely to be.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

B.C. First Nation wins rights, title along Fraser River's south arm in Richmond
B.C. First Nation wins rights, title along Fraser River's south arm in Richmond

Vancouver Sun

timea day ago

  • Vancouver Sun

B.C. First Nation wins rights, title along Fraser River's south arm in Richmond

VICTORIA — A Vancouver Island First Nation has won back fishing rights and title for part of the land its ancestors used as a summer home in the Lower Mainland, despite opposition by two other Indigenous communities. A B.C. Supreme Court judge says in a written decision posted Friday that the Cowichan Tribes have established fishing rights on the Fraser River and title to a portion of almost 7 1/2 square kilometres of land they claimed on Lulu Island in Richmond. The Musqueam and Tsawwassen First Nations, along with the federal and provincial governments, the City of Richmond and the Vancouver-Fraser Port Authority all opposed the claim during the 513-day trial. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Justice Barbara Young ruled that land titles grants issued by the Canadian and B.C. governments to others 'are defective and invalid' as they 'unjustifiably infringe the Cowichan Nation Aboriginal title to these lands.' The decision says both governments owe a duty to negotiate with the nation 'in good faith' on how to reconcile its land title with what's now in the territory, including the Vancouver airport Fuel Delivery Project property. B.C. Premier David Eby says in a response that the province is reviewing the decision for a possible appeal and will also seek to resolve the issue by negotiating with all nations involved. 'But let me be clear: owning private property with clear title is key to borrowing for a mortgage, economic certainty, and the real estate market,' Eby says. 'We remain committed to protecting and upholding this foundation of business and personal predictability, and our provincial economy, for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people alike.' The area where the Cowichan have established title was used by the nation's ancestors during the summer as a 'permanent post and beam village' but was never established as a reserve, resulting in B.C. giving away the land starting in 1871. The Musqueam Indian Band — which declared in 1976 that it holds the Aboriginal title covering both the north and south arms of the Fraser River — says in a statement that it is deeply disappointed and 'fundamentally' disagrees with the court decision. It says that it has established 'national legal precedent on Aboriginal title and fishing rights' through two major cases in the Supreme Court of Canada, and it plans to 'continue to vigorously defend these rights.' 'Musqueam is shocked the court didn't give effect to oral history and traditional governance protocols, which guide intercommunity relationships since time immemorial,' the statement says. The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority says in a statement that it is reviewing the implications and details of the decision alongside other affected federal government departments, and further updates will be provided at an appropriate time. The Cowichan Tribes says in a news release that it is 'celebrating a historic victory,' while honouring 'generations of leaders' in the community who fought to win the Aboriginal title on the Fraser River land. 'It is in their honour and for the well-being of our future generations that the elders, knowledge holders, and chiefs who have gone before us brought this case forward to recognize our Aboriginal title and fishing rights, as a basis for truth and reconciliation, through the courts,' it says. Young says in the decision that while evidence shows a number of Coast Salish groups being historically located in the lower Fraser River region, some places, such as the area of the Cowichan claim, 'belonged to specific groups.' The judge says the Cowichan 'had the capacity and intention to exclusively control their village land and some surrounding areas on the south arm of the Fraser River' before 1846, when the British Crown asserted sovereignty in the area. 'This was the Cowichan village,' the ruling says. 'It belonged to the Cowichan, and other groups respected that it was on Cowichan land. 'The Cowichan exercised effective control over their land. There is no evidence of other Indigenous groups occupying this village.' The court recognizes that the case 'raised complex … and novel issues,' its decision says. 'The fact is, all the parties have continued interests, rights and obligations around the south arm of the Fraser River and limited resources need to be shared and preserved,' Young says in the decision. 'Now that this multi‑year journey has concluded, it is my sincere hope that the parties have the answers they need to return to negotiations and reconcile the outstanding issues.'

B.C. First Nation wins rights, title along Fraser River's south arm in Lower Mainland
B.C. First Nation wins rights, title along Fraser River's south arm in Lower Mainland

Winnipeg Free Press

timea day ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

B.C. First Nation wins rights, title along Fraser River's south arm in Lower Mainland

VICTORIA – A Vancouver Island First Nation has won back fishing rights and title for part of the land its ancestors used as a summer home in the Lower Mainland, despite opposition by two other Indigenous communities. A B.C. Supreme Court judge says in a written decision posted Friday that the Cowichan Tribes have established fishing rights on the Fraser River and title to a portion of almost 7 1/2 square kilometres of land they claimed on Lulu Island in Richmond, B.C. The Musqueam and Tsawwassen First Nations, along with the federal and provincial governments, the City of Richmond and the Vancouver-Fraser Port Authority all opposed the claim during the 513-day trial. Justice Barbara Young ruled that land titles grants issued by the Canadian and B.C. governments to others 'are defective and invalid' as they 'unjustifiably infringe the Cowichan Nation Aboriginal title to these lands.' The decision says both governments owe a duty to negotiate with the nation 'in good faith' on how to reconcile its land title with what's now in the territory, including the Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project property. B.C. Premier David Eby says in a response that the province is reviewing the decision for a possible appeal and will also seek to resolve the issue by negotiating with all nations involved. 'But let me be clear: owning private property with clear title is key to borrowing for a mortgage, economic certainty, and the real estate market,' Eby says. 'We remain committed to protecting and upholding this foundation of business and personal predictability, and our provincial economy, for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people alike.' The area where the Cowichan have established title was used by the nation's ancestors during the summer as a 'permanent post and beam village' but was never established as a reserve, resulting in B.C. giving away the land starting in 1871. The Musqueam Indian Band — which declared in 1976 that it holds the Aboriginal title covering both the north and south arms of the Fraser River — says in a statement that it is deeply disappointed and 'fundamentally' disagrees with the court decision. It says that it has established 'national legal precedent on Aboriginal title and fishing rights' through two major cases in the Supreme Court of Canada, and it plans to 'continue to vigorously defend these rights.' 'Musqueam is shocked the court didn't give effect to oral history and traditional governance protocols, which guide intercommunity relationships since time immemorial,' the statement says. The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority says in a statement that it is reviewing the implications and details of the decision alongside other affected federal government departments, and further updates will be provided at an appropriate time. The Cowichan Tribes says in a news release that it is 'celebrating a historic victory,' while honouring 'generations of leaders' in the community who fought to win the Aboriginal title on the Fraser River land. 'It is in their honour and for the well-being of our future generations that the elders, knowledge holders, and chiefs who have gone before us brought this case forward to recognize our Aboriginal title and fishing rights, as a basis for truth and reconciliation, through the courts,' it says. Young says in the decision that while evidence shows a number of Coast Salish groups being historically located in the lower Fraser River region, some places, such as the area of the Cowichan claim, 'belonged to specific groups.' The judge says the Cowichan 'had the capacity and intention to exclusively control their village land and some surrounding areas on the south arm of the Fraser River' before 1846, when the British Crown asserted sovereignty in the area. 'This was the Cowichan village,' the ruling says. 'It belonged to the Cowichan, and other groups respected that it was on Cowichan land. 'The Cowichan exercised effective control over their land. There is no evidence of other Indigenous groups occupying this village.' The court recognizes that the case 'raised complex … and novel issues,' its decision says. 'The fact is, all the parties have continued interests, rights and obligations around the south arm of the Fraser River and limited resources need to be shared and preserved,' Young says in the decision. 'Now that this multi‑year journey has concluded, it is my sincere hope that the parties have the answers they need to return to negotiations and reconcile the outstanding issues.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 8, 2025.

Alberta government appeals injunction of transgender health-care law
Alberta government appeals injunction of transgender health-care law

Global News

timea day ago

  • Global News

Alberta government appeals injunction of transgender health-care law

See more sharing options Send this page to someone via email Share this item on Twitter Share this item via WhatsApp Share this item on Facebook Alberta is appealing a temporary injunction of a law banning doctors from providing gender-affirming care to youth. A judge ruled in June that the provincial law raises serious Charter issues that need to be hashed out in an ongoing court challenge of the legislation. Court of King's Bench Justice Allison Kuntz ruled the law is likely to cause irreparable harm to gender diverse youth and contrary evidence submitted from the province wasn't overwhelming enough. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy The government argues the injunction was premature, since the law wasn't fully in effect, and that the judge made a mistake in deciding it would cause irreparable harm. It has said the law was passed to protect children from making potentially irreversible decisions about their bodies. Egale Canada, one of the groups challenging the law, says it respects the province's right to appeal but believes the judge made the right decision. Story continues below advertisement — More to come…

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store