Why would I want to pay $1,500 to have a meeting with the federal minister of health? It鈥檚 because of the old saying: 鈥淲hat鈥檚 good for the goose is good for the gander.鈥�
High-profile people gain access to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau by paying $1,500. I鈥檓 sure this fee isn鈥檛 just to talk about the weather.
So why can鈥檛 I make a similar offer to the minister of health? And also pay a similar amount to the minister of justice?
Due to my Scottish heritage, spending money this way isn鈥檛 an easy decision. But I hate to see a waste of taxpayer money, and political hypocrisy. And I鈥檝e already asked to interview Minister of Health Jane Philpott. I was advised that she鈥檚 too busy. So why is it so important to me to meet her? 聽
Today, health officials spend millions of dollars of taxpayer money to open more injection sites for addicts. I believe this to be a horrendous blunder. It鈥檚 also hypocrisy that addicts, who usually cause their own destruction, are getting more attention and priority than those who face agonizing death due to no fault of their own. 聽
While you鈥檙e reading this column, terminally ill patients in agony are being denied medical assistance in dying. Some hospitals, funded by taxpayers, refuse to provide this now legal humanitarian act.
Surely, since the minister of health is a physician, she must be aware of human suffering in the last hours of life.聽聽聽聽聽聽 聽
I鈥檇 gladly pay another $1,500 to meet the minister of justice. After all, the current opioid epidemic is a double-edged sword involving both ministries. It鈥檚 a major cancer in our society that, if left unchecked, will have huge financial and societal costs.
This epidemic has been years in the making in North America. And politicians and do-gooders are creating a multimillion-dollar bureaucracy to take on the continuing care of tens of thousands of addicts. It鈥檚 like throwing a rug over a roaring fire hoping it will burn out. It won鈥檛 happen.
So is there a solution? Of course there鈥檚 one, but you need intestinal fortitude to carry it out. Several years ago, I flew to Singapore. Prior to landing I was given a small card with a message that I鈥檝e never forgotten. It read: 鈥淒eath to drug traffickers under Singapore law.鈥�
Lee Kuan Yew, then prime minister of Singapore, had decided to rid the country of illegal drugs. He knew there was no point in showing your teeth if you were not prepared to bite. His big bite was to hang illicit drug traffickers. They quickly got his message.
I find it interesting that, in all the hue and cry from politicians and law-enforcement agencies about opioid addiction, no one has recommended a similar sentence for drug pushers 鈥� ones who often sell their deadly illegal drugs in full sight of authorities.
I鈥檝e also never forgotten the two words that Singapore officials used about North American society. They accused it of being 鈥渋rresponsibly permissive.鈥� They got it right.
So when I offer $1,500 to both the minister of health and minister of justice, you know exactly why I want a meeting. It won鈥檛 be about the weather or for personal gain.
Rather, it will be to remind the minister of health that the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled that dying patients have the legal right to seek medial assistance in dying. And that, as minister of health, Philpott should ensure that all those who wish it have access to it. And that hospitals that close their doors to medical assistance in dying patients should lose public funding. 聽
Will I lose my money? Hell will freeze over before either minister will let me in the door. Will drug traffickers in Canada have to worry about being hanged? Not a chance. In North America, there is no Lee Kuan Yew. And our society will suffer severe and long-lasting consequences because of it.
I wish I had a more optimistic outlook on this issue. But unless politicians take a firm stand on those who push illegal drugs, we will see a medical tsunami that bodes ill for our country. 聽
So what do readers think? I鈥檒l publish your remarks.
For comments, go to [email protected].
