Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
News

Doctor who supported tax reforms removed from board of Doctors Nova Scotia

Roger Collier
CMAJ December 11, 2017 189 (49) E1539-E1540; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-5535
Roger Collier
CMAJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Dr. Monika Dutt, a Nova Scotia family physician who supported the controversial tax reforms proposed by the federal government, has been removed from the board of directors of Doctors Nova Scotia. Dutt was one of the signatories of an open letter to Finance Minister Bill Morneau that supported removing certain tax benefits of incorporation as a step toward a fairer tax system. Most physicians, however, have been adamant in their opposition to the proposed changes.

“I am not able to speak to the reason why I was removed from the Board of Doctors Nova Scotia,” said Dutt. “I can, however, speak to why I and many others supported the federal tax proposal, which was in contrast to the stance taken by national and provincial associations.”

Poor health outcomes are related to income inequality, and one way to address those health disparities is through taxation, said Dutt. Physicians are among the top 1%–5% of income earners in Canada, and the tax benefits available to some doctors are not available to the vast majority of Canadians, or even to all physicians. Doctors who called for a more equitable tax system, however, were often met with “overt hostility” from peers on social media and in medical leadership, said Dutt.

“Many did not speak publicly of their support for the tax changes as they were worried about negative repercussion from colleagues,” said Dutt. “Unfortunately, taxation discourse amongst physicians has often been marked by a dismissal or stifling of differing opinions and unprofessional behaviour by some.”

Doctors Nova Scotia did not say that Dutt’s public support of the proposed tax changes led to her removal from the board. In a statement, Dr. André Bernard, the board’s chair, said the board has a governance framework, which includes a policy that “clearly outlines the expectations with regard to conflict of interest and confidentiality.” Board members are also “educated on their role and responsibilities.”

Figure

Dr. Monika Dutt has experienced hostility from some other doctors for her public support of controversial tax reforms.

Image courtesy of CMA

“That framework prevents us from commenting further on the specifics; however, the board is confident that the proper process was followed in addressing this matter,” the statement concluded.

Dutt is a well-known physician and public health advocate. She is a past chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare and a former medical officer of health in Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Ontario. She is the executive director of Upstream, a nonprofit with a goal to “create a healthy society through evidence-based, people-centred ideas.” She is also on the board of directors of the Broadbent Institute, an independent organization that champions new approaches to government and leadership.

There was no shortage of opinion on Twitter when news broke about Dutt’s dismissal. Dr. Jillian Ratti, a family physician in Alberta, suggested that Doctors Nova Scotia “unfortunately doesn’t believe it can or should represent diverse opinions simultaneously.” Dr. Ron George, an anesthesiology professor at Dalhousie University, said the board had lost an important voice and that he hoped Doctors Nova Scotia was going to offer its members more explanation about the decision. According to Dr. Jill Konkin, an associate professor of family medicine at the University of Alberta, the vote to remove Dutt was a “sad commentary“ on Doctors Nova Scotia because medical associations need “a broad range of views to come to creative, innovative solutions.”

Not everyone agreed, however, that the dismissal was unjustified. According to Chris Struthers from British Columbia, who describes himself as a “hardworking business owner,” the decision to remove Dutt was not surprising or problematic. “If councillors on my engineering association openly pushed for raising my taxes, I’d be voting them off ASAP,” he wrote. “You can’t well represent members if you hold very unpopular opinions.”

Footnotes

  • Posted on cmajnews.com on Nov. 23, 2017.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 189 (49)
CMAJ
Vol. 189, Issue 49
11 Dec 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Doctor who supported tax reforms removed from board of Doctors Nova Scotia
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Doctor who supported tax reforms removed from board of Doctors Nova Scotia
Roger Collier
CMAJ Dec 2017, 189 (49) E1539-E1540; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-5535

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Doctor who supported tax reforms removed from board of Doctors Nova Scotia
Roger Collier
CMAJ Dec 2017, 189 (49) E1539-E1540; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-5535
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Resignations at Canada’s drug pricing panel raise independence questions
  • Provinces accept federal health funding deal
  • Feds propose $196B health funding deal with few strings attached
Show more News

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Canadian government
    • Public health

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire