Hospitals cannot be upgraded

I wish to respond to your cover story on the McGill University Health Centre ["One big hospital, one big mistake," Feb. 4], which gave the impression that inadequate consideration has been given to renovating the Centre's existing hospital facilities.

Great effort has been put into analyzing what we call the "existing sites," with an eye to upgrading them to modern hospital standards. The MUHC's vision for the future of health care in Montreal goes beyond "adequate" and foresees the creation of an environment that becomes itself a tool for treatment and healing, augmenting caregivers' effectiveness in helping patients and their families.

With this vision in mind, we have taken a hard look at the MUHC buildings that now serve Montrealers. Experts in medical planning and architecture have, for example, analyzed the Montreal General Hospital with an eye to its modernization.

The simple, hard fact is that this facility cannot be upgraded to modern, functional standards. Hospitals in 1999 do not function the way they did in 1959. For example, modern medical facilities require higher ceilings for specialized ventilation systems that reduce infection rates from air-borne pathogens. Wider corridors, more natural lighting and better communications links are elements our old buildings cannot provide, even by gutting them and retrofitting from the outer walls in.

The experts decided that many of the barriers to effective modern hospital practice found at the MGH are beyond correction at any cost. Our estimates suggest that improving facilities that house 15 key departments (representing only 30% of the space in our buildings) to minimum modern standards would cost substantially more than constructing the new Glen Yard campus.

Renovated sites would also continue to be very expensive facilities to maintain, robbing from financial resources that could be used for more innovative new services like home care.

And finally, accessibility to existing sites is problematic and difficult to rectify. The properties are already overdeveloped, with no possibility for adequate parking or easy access to the metro system. The hillside siting of the MGH and the Royal Vic cause undue hardship for our patients, especially seniors and during icy winters.

The MUHC believes firmly that a new facility on the Glen Yard site is the best solution for an up-to-date hospital facility. We have also recognized that it is essential to ensure that the existing sites find new, appropriate vocations as part of Montreal's architectural heritage. We will do that.

Developing a health care centre of the next century and finding new life for our five hospital buildings are not mutually exclusive challenges. Both must be done for the good of Montrealers. Both can be done with success.

--Duncan Shaddick

Chairman, existing sites work group, McGill University Health Centre

Welcome Hollywood

Why is Robin Spry discouraging major Hollywood producers from spending millions of American dollars in Montreal? ["Tinseltown takeover," Feb. 11]

If the problem is that the demand for experienced film crews is greater than what Montreal can supply, don't refuse the work--fix the problem!

Here's an idea: lobby for those coveted tax breaks to provide training opportunities for those who need it. Contract experienced out-of-town technicians to fill the high-skill positions and our people will gain experience apprenticing on the set. This is what industry does when offered a windfall.

Mr. Spry et al have yet to learn that this kind of "home groan" is one of the things that keeps Canadians filmgoers from going to Canadian-made films. If you don't have confidence in your own people, why should we?

--Russ Oakley

Male order

Hey! Where are all the silly poses featuring tall, dark 'n' handsome guys glaring broodingly from hooded eyebrows, lounging around with six-pack stomachs?

After the apparent exaltation of the ever-lovely female form on the cover of your Feb. 11 issue, I hope you balance it out a little.

--Sylvia Coleman

Lingo politico

You mentioned the political designation populist in conjunction with the Reform Party and its Führer, Preston Manning ["Reform calls in corporate guru," Jan. 28]. Please note: the term populist cannot apply to a party that worships national debt and fumigates over deficits, as does Reform.

The true meaning of populism is found in the absolute rejection of the majestic swindle called national debt and its intellectual dyspepsia of interest rates and income tax.

Discover true populism by solving this non-sense riddle: why would you pay income tax to pay interest to another person to watch you borrow money from yourself?

--Yukon Calusa