Law Times

Page 6 January 25, 2016 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com Stalling not an option The recent decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in Carter v. Canada was an irrefutable edict to the legal profession and Canadi- ans at large — get ready for change. The decision will mean momentous legislative change for jurisdic- tions across Canada, including Ontario, on how physician-assisted death will play out for individuals and families who will grapple with moral and procedural questions. Lawyers, too, will play a key role in helping with the difficult ques- tions the possibility of physician-assisted death renders unto clients, and how they will incorporate this decision into end-of-life planning. The Supreme Court has given an extension of four months to the federal government to hammer out how physician-assisted death will occur. But the court was clear the extension was granted because of the election period last year, and it will be "only four months." Media coverage of the decision portrayed Ontario as scrambling in the wake of the ruling, especially compared with jurisdictions such as Quebec, where an assisted-dying law has been in effect since late last year. The government needs to move quickly on this in order that steps for physicians and legal advisers are clearly articulated and explained so members of the profession can know the limits and be able to care- fully and meaningfully advise their clients. In times of turbulence or dramatic change, lawyers are turned to as captains of expertise and wisdom. This decision will test their prowess in navigating some of the most delicate areas of the law. Leadership from above is required, and educa- tion of all Canadians, including lawyers, will be paramount. Stalling is not an option, and both the federal and provincial governments must show their readi- ness to provide workable, tangible direction to those in the field, who will be entrusted with providing smooth expertise, on the ground and in the fray. LT COMMENT ©2016 Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted or stored in a retrieval system without written per- mission. The opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the publisher. Information presented is compiled from sources believed to be accurate, however, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. Law Times disclaims any warranty as to the accuracy, com - pleteness or currency of the contents of this pub- lication and disclaims all liability in respect of the results of any action taken or not taken in reliance upon information in this publication. Publications Mail Agreement Number 40762529 • ISSN 0847-5083 Law Times is published 40 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. LT.Editor@thomsonreuters.com CIRCULATIONS & SUBSCRIPTIONS $199.00 + HST per year in Canada for print and online (HST Reg. #R121351134), $199 + HST per year for online only. Single copies are $5.00. Circulation inquiries, postal returns and address changes should include a copy of the mailing label(s) and should be sent to Law Times One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Rd. Toronto ON, M1T 3V4. Return postage guaranteed. Contact Keith Fulford at ........... 416-649-9585 or fax: 416-649-7870 keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com ADVERTISING Advertising inquiries and materials should be directed to Sales, Law Times, 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto, ON, M1T 3V4 or call: Kimberlee Pascoe ...............................416-649-8875 kimberlee.pascoe@thomsonreuters.com Grace So .............................................416-609-5838 grace.so@thomsonreuters.com Joseph Galea .......................................416-649-9919 joseph.galea@thomsonreuters.com Steffanie Munroe ................................416-298-5077 steffanie.munroe@thomsonreuters.com Director/Group Publisher . . . . . . . . . Karen Lorimer Editor in Chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gail J. Cohen Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gabrielle Giroday Staff Writer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neil Etienne Staff Writer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yamri Taddese Copy Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patricia Cancilla CaseLaw Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adela Rodriguez & Jennifer Wright Acting Art Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steve Maver Production Co-ordinator . . . . . . .Sharlane Burgess Electronic Production Specialist . . . Derek Welford Law Times Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto, ON • M1T 3V4 • Tel: 416-298-5141 • Fax: 416-649-7870 www.lawtimesnews.com LT.Editor@thomsonreuters.com • @lawtimes u EDITORIAL OBITER By Gabrielle Giroday Stretching the limits of credibility Y ou don't have be a personal injury lawyer to know Premier Kathleen Wynne's recent comments around the fabled promise of a 15-per-cent drop in auto insurance premiums doesn't pass the smell test. What's more shocking is the smug, cav- alier manner in which she blurted out that Ontario drivers would not only be getting less coverage from their auto insurance but that they really shouldn't have expected to see a 15-per-cent cut in premiums. "It was a stretch goal," she shrugged un- apologetically, as if not delivering was a mi- nor setback, akin to telling your spouse you didn't have time to pick up milk on the way home from work. We were supposed to see that reduc- tion by last August as part of a 2013 budget pledge. Don't get me started with motorcycle insurance rates, which have soared over the past three years for a bike I ride in fair weather with no tickets or accidents on ei- ther of my licences. Indeed, the Financial Services Com- mission of Ontario reports approved rates dropped a mere average of 0.15 per cent in 2015. The average since 2013 is a limp seven per cent. "We always knew it was going to be a challenge, and the good news is that insur- ance rates continue to come down," Wynne continued, ignoring the fact that the strat- egy was part of a political deal for NDP support to buy another year for what was then a minority Lib- eral government. Nice sunny spin, isn't it? The real cost, however, in that failed "stretch goal" isn't just in Canada's highest insur- ance premiums, it's written in the agony of accident victims. Car drivers in Ontario get less protection, more process, more hurdles, and less value for their premium dollars. The tragedy, however, is that despite an average annual premium of $1,500 a year, most drivers have no idea how vulnerable they are because few of us consider the limits of our coverage beyond whether we have collision and what the de- ductible is. Personal injury lawyer Brian Goldfin- ger, like many who practice in the personal injury world, is furious because he knows the risks all too well. He sees clients and ac- cident victims every day whose worlds have collapsed through no fault of their own but can't get the appropriate level of compensa- tion to piece together some kind of life with which to move forward. For these victims, it's not about getting rich by scamming insurance companies, it's about dealing with the harsh realities of crippling injuries. "For Premier Kathleen Wynne to come out now and say attaining that 15-per-cent insurance rate cut was just a 'stretch goal', in her own words, it's just so infuriating," said Goldfinger. "They made deals with the insurance industry to cut benefits to accident victims and then this." As Goldfinger, points out, the social contract has been broken. The deal was that insurance companies would see risks re- duced and pass those savings on to consumers. It started years ago with the introduction of the no- fault concept, which has been a disaster. More recently, attendant care benefits were slashed to $36,000 from $72,000, and caregiver benefits have been eliminated along with housekeeping benefits under standard auto policies, while a regulatory change to O. Reg 461/96 was simply im- posed, increasing statutory deductibles in cases of auto accidents to $36,540 from $30,000, he said. "It has resulted in making it harder for innocent accident victims to recover com- pensation," Goldfinger said. "The justifica- tion for this increase was to reflect the cost on inflation. Yet accident benefits under standard automobile policies such as the $400 weekly income replacement benefit or the $1,500 a month for attendant care has not increased to reflect inflation at all. It's a one-way street and the industry is control- ling all the traffic lights." More cuts are pending this year as of June 1, when rehabilitation and care limits for catastrophically impaired persons (the most severe injuries) will be cut in half, to $1 million from $2 million, while raising the bar on what defines coverage, especially for those suffering from brain injuries." Just two years ago, York University School of Business professors Fred La- zar and Eli Prisman at the York Univer- sity Schulich School of Business concluded that, from 2001 to 2013, Ontario consum- ers overpaid $1.5 billion in auto insurance. And this is what we get, says Goldfinger: "It's abundantly clear the Ontario govern- ment has been transferring money from in- nocent car accident victims to large, deep- pocketed insurance companies." With budget consultations underway, we're likely to see the term "stretch goal" en- ter the political lexicon in common usage along with "revenue tools." Balance the budget? Stretch goal. Pay down debt? Stretch goal. Zero-based nego- tiations with public service unions? Stretch goal. Transparent, accountable govern- ment? You guessed it. Stretch goal. LT uIan Harvey has been a journalist for more than 35 years writing about a diverse range of issues including legal and political affairs. His e-mail address is ianharvey@rogers.com. Queen's Park Ian Harvey

• Cover