Refugee health-care advocates criticize government inaction

The federal governmenthasn't complied with a court ruling that reinstated health care for refugee claimants, advocates are set to argue in court next week, returning to a fight they thought they'd won last July.

Lorne Waldman, a lawyer forCanadianDoctors forRefugeeCare, will be back in Federal Court on Tuesday to try to force the government to comply with a July 2014 decisionthat reversed changes to refugee health care introduced two years earlier.

• The federal government's court-case losing streak
• Refugee health care temporarily restored in most categories
• Federal government to appeal ruling reversing 'cruel' cuts to refugee health

In 2012, the federal governmentdecreasedthe level of health care to which refugee claimants were entitled, arguing the government shouldn't pay for health care for "bogus" refugee claimants.

Canadian doctors took issue with the government's distinction between "bogus" and "genuine" refugees, arguing that the changes brought in 2012 also applied to those claimants whose applications are being processed and who are in the queue waiting for a hearing.

The Federal Courtfound the move was "cruel and unusual" because it jeopardizes refugees' health and shocks the conscience of Canadians.

Judge AnneMactavishruled the federal cabinet has the power to make such changes and that the procedure was fair, but thatthe 2012 modifications put lives at risk, including thelives of children.

Mactavish gave the government until Nov. 4 to reinstate the health care. The government waited until the last possible day to returnsome health care to refugeespending its appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal.

Mactavish's ruling also rolled back a change the Conservatives made to a 1957Cabinet order that provided forrefugee health care. The government had repealed thatmeasure when it made the changes in 2012.

Government appealing 'flawed' ruling

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and the Canadian Doctors for Refugee Care, however, say the government re-repealed that measure on Nov. 6, 2014, only two days after it was supposed to restore the health coverage.

The advocates first pointed out the return to the repealedmeasure in December, but the Canadian Medical Association Journal drew attention to it in an article published Wednesday.

Waldman said the Federal Court was clear the government was supposed to restore the pre-2012 coverage. He's filed a motion to the court asking for a finding that the government has breached the court order.

• Read the Federal Court decision (.pdf)

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Chris Alexander declined an interview request and responded by email. He calledthe court ruling "flawed."

"Our government is defending the interests of Canadian taxpayers as well as the integrity of our refugee determination system," Kevin Menardwrote.

"We have implemented temporary health-care measures as per the Federal Courts ruling on Nov. 5. Regrettably, the Federal Courts ruling is costing taxpayers an extra $4 million a year."

Government showing 'contempt'

Dr. Philip Berger, one of the founders of Canadian Doctors for Refugee Health, says the government showed contempt for refugee claimants and doctorsand is now extending that contempt to the Federal Court.

"There's nothing the federal government says about refugee health that can be believed," he said.

"The costs have simply been downloaded to the provinces and tohospitals who must see people in emergency departments and doctors who are prepared to provide coverage for free."

The lack of early intervention also costs more as problems get worse, saidBerger, the medical director of inner-city health at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto.

The original Federal Court case covered a number of specific examples of refugee claimants being denied health care, including a woman in labour who was denied an epidural.

"What the government underestimatesis that we, the doctors, are more stubborn than they are, but our cause is just and theirs is not," Berger said.