Skip to main content

The Ontario government’s move to axe its out-of-country health insurance program violates the Canada Health Act, a court ruled this week as it ordered the province to reinstate the coverage.

The province overstepped its bounds in eliminating the Out of Country Travellers’ Program at the beginning of 2020, which reimbursed Ontario residents who experienced medical emergencies when outside of Canada, a three-judge panel with the Superior Court of Justice found.

“By totally eliminating the out-of-country reimbursement feature (unless pre-approval has been obtained) the impugned regulation clearly violates the portability criterion,” reads the decision written by Justice Harriet E. Sachs.

Story continues below advertisement

If a province doesn’t meet the portability pillar – one of five pillars in the Canada Health Act – after consulting with the federal Health Minister, Ottawa can “by order direct that the cash contribution to that province for a fiscal year be either reduced or withheld,” the court said.

“In order to satisfy the portability pillar, a provincial plan must provide payment for insured services that are delivered while an Ontario resident is temporarily outside of Canada at a rate that is similar to what would have been paid if the service had been provided in the province,” Justice Sachs wrote.

The province, she noted, ignored three letters from the federal government expressing concern over the cancellation of the Out of Country Travellers’ Program after Health Minister Christine Elliott announced the news in the spring of 2019. The move followed a six-day public consultation.

She said at the time that the program was both costly and provided little value to taxpayers.

Ms. Elliott said the province spent $2.8-million to administer approximately $9-million in claim payments through the program every year.

The program covered out-of-country in-patient services up to $400 per day for a higher level of care, and up to $50 per day for emergency outpatient and doctor services.

The Canadian Snowbirds Association, which represents those who spend the winter in warmer parts of the world, challenged the move, calling it an “egregious violation” of the Canada Health Act.

Story continues below advertisement

The group is applauding the court’s decision.

“The ruling affirms the right of Ontario residents to out-of-country emergency insurance coverage, as required by the Canada Health Act,” said Karen Huestis, president of the Canadian Snowbird Association.

A spokeswoman for Ms. Elliott did not immediately respond to a request for comment, while a representative for the Ministry of the Attorney-General did not immediately say whether the province would consider appealing the ruling.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Coronavirus information
Coronavirus information
The Zero Canada Project provides resources to help you manage your health, your finances and your family life as Canada reopens.
Visit the hub

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies