Liberal MPs say Quebec French-language health directive sows confusion

MONTREAL — Two Montreal-area Liberal MPs are raising concerns about a controversial Quebec directive that outlines when health-care providers can offer services in a language other than French.

The directive, published last month, has angered members of Quebec’s anglophone community who worry it could restrict their access to health care in English. The Quebec government, meanwhile, claims patients will still be able to receive treatment in the language of their choice.

Anna Gainey, federal MP for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, says her constituents are concerned the directive could disrupt the way they communicate with health-care providers. In a statement posted to the X platform Wednesday evening, Gainey said she’s spoken with federal Health Minister Mark Holland.

“It is clear that the confusion and uncertainty created by the directive is likely to have adverse consequences that cannot be ignored,” she wrote. “Clarity is urgently needed. The choice of language should continue to belong to the patient.”

Gainey said Ottawa should be ready to insist that Quebec respect the fundamental principles of the Canada Health Act, which include accessibility of care.

In a post on X Thursday morning, Mount Royal MP Anthony Housefather said he shares Gainey’s views. “When it comes to health care the language preferred by the patient is paramount,” he wrote. Both Gainey and Housefather represent majority-anglophone ridings on the Island of Montreal.

The 23-page directive comes in response to Bill 96, the contentious 2022 law designed to protect the French language in Quebec. The bill requires that government agencies, including health services, communicate with the public in French, except in certain situations.

At the time, Premier François Legault insisted access to health care would not be affected by the new law. But in an interview Thursday, Housefather said the new directive tells a different story. “If everybody was just entitled to receive services in English, there’s no need for this directive,” he said. “So clearly some category of people only is allowed to receive service in English under exceptional situations.”

According to the document, a language other than French can only be used in health-care settings when “health, public safety or the principles of natural justice require it,” including in emergencies.

It includes a number of examples of situations in which English or another language may be used. In one, a 14-year-old girl is seeking an abortion and is accompanied by someone who doesn’t speak French. In that case, instructions for followup care can be given to the support person in their language.

In another example, a 10-year-old boy requires emergency medical care. In that case, health-care professionals are allowed to ask for his anglophone father’s consent in English.

The directive also stipulates that members of Quebec’s historic anglophone community must provide a certificate proving their eligibility to attend English school in the province if they want to receive all medical services exclusively in English. Housefather said he’s skeptical that provision would ever be put into practice.

Furthermore, immigrants to the province are only eligible to receive health care in a language other than French for the first six months after their arrival.

Jean-François Roberge, Quebec’s minister of the French language, insists his government is not imposing barriers for people who want to receive health care in English. In a post on X last week, he said the directive only requires that administrative communications be in French, not all forms of care. “It allows all people who wish to receive health care in a language other than French,” he said.

But Montreal lawyer Eric Maldoff said the directive includes no obligation to provide health services in English for patients who request it. “This would be very simply resolved if they get back to the idea that it’s the patient or the user of the services that should control the language of communication,” he said.

Housefather said there’s a legal argument to be made that the directive violates the principle of accessibility under the Canada Health Act. “I believe that the notion that English services are readily available in a location but you’re legally forbidden from giving them to somebody who prefers to have their service in English is a problem,” he said.

“And I would want to see, if Quebec insisted on taking that fairly absurd position, the federal government saying that, ‘We don’t agree.'”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 8, 2024.

Maura Forrest, The Canadian Press