‘Doctors are different,’ court hears in billings case

Lawyers argue names of high-billing MDs shouldn’t be made public

The names of high-billing doctors should not be made public, lawyers for the Ontario Medical Association and two other doctor groups have told the Ontario Court of Appeal.

“Doctors are different ... Why are they different? Because they do not have a contract with government,” lawyer Linda Galessiere, acting for a group of physicians described as “affect- ed third-party doctors,” argued Tuesday.

Others paid from the public purse — including lawyers, consultants and contractors — have actual contracts with government, she said, but with doctors, it is simply legislation that mandates their OHIP payments come from the public treasury, not contracts, Galessiere argued. The contract between the government and the Ontario Medical Association (OMA) is only about the value of specific fees doctors can charge OHIP, she said.

Galessiere said physicianidentified billings are public in British Columbia, Manitoba and New Brunswick because governments in those provinces passed legislation forcing disclosure. She said that if the Ontario government wants disclosure, then it can also introduce legislation. The second group of doctors is described as “several physicians affected directly by the order.” This group and the “affected third-party doctors” comprise 34 physicians, all of them men, more than half of whom practise in the GTA. Approximately onethird are radiologists and another third are ophthalmologists. They are among the top OHIP billers.

The doctors and the OMA are appealing a ruling made a year ago by the Ontario Divisional Court that upheld an order by the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPC) to release physicianidentified billings of the 100 highest-paid doctors.

The IPC order was the result of an appeal by the Toronto Star after the Ontario health ministry only partially disclosed information sought under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The Star, in April 2014, made an application for information on the 100 highest-paid doctors for the most recent five years — 2008 to 2012, inclusive.

The ministry disclosed most of the doctors’ medical specialties and amounts paid, but withheld names, claiming such disclosure would be an unjustified invasion of their personal privacy. Justice Paul Rouleau, one of three judges hearing the appeal case, asked Galessiere what makes doctors different from service providers when it comes to disclosure.

“They (doctors) are not providing any services to the government. None. They provide them to the citizens,” she said.