May 30, 2026

SOUTH MUSKOKA HOSPITAL ADVCOCATES REFUSE TO ‘STAY QUIET’ IN ONGOING FIGHT FOR ‘EQUAL CARE’ AT THEIR LOCAL HOSPITAL

MUSKOKA — In a dimly lit Norwood Theatre in the ‘Heart of Muskoka’ last Saturday morning, the main attraction wasn’t kiddy cartoons, but a bit of alleged funny business on screen.

Not exactly the blockbuster 100 people counted on.

But ….

Two years ago it was a little different outside next door where hundreds gathered in the Memorial Park — named in honour of soldiers who fought for freedom.

Not importantly freedom of information.

This was a bit of a re-run — or best Oscar-worthy presentation in the health and hospital mystery category.

Re-enforced by their FOI findings, the Save South Muskoka Hospital Committee remains steadfast and staying on message with its opposition to how Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare seeks to restructure district medical care.

“If local leadership and the provincial government see south Muskoka will not stay quiet, the current plan cannot stand,” committee vice chair Nick Caughey said.

“I think it’s fair to say it’s time to sound the alarm. There are significant gaps.”

Nick Caughey, vice chair of the Save South Muskoka Hospial Committee, talked about their FOI requests. “And guess what? We have them now. We ran a formal process. We looked at the details, and in fact what we suspected the last two years we were right. Those concerns are legitimate.” PHOTOS Mark Clairmont MuskokaTODAY.com

With no word yet on MAHC’s Stage 1.3 proposal to the province for two hospitals in Bracebridge and Huntsville, which SSMHC considers unequal, members believe they still have time to convince the Ministry of Health of “flaws” in planning they claim will seriously and lastingly — for 50 years —widely impact community health while also guiding and encouraging emerging economic prospects and creating a dangerous growing north-south gulf.

“Local funding must be tied to a fair equitable hospital plan. These are your dollars that are going to build a Huntsville hospital, whilst south Muskoka suffers,” said Caughey who also urged supporters to write hospital officials and politicians and donate to the cause for supportive signage.

The protracted fight continues along similar lines they’ve relied on for more than two and a half years in several public forum arguments advocating for at least the status quo to remain at South Muskoka Memorial Hospital.

Namely these half dozen continued concerns: location, location and location; 60 not 46 beds; critical new engineering site information; a return of obstetrics; a larger share of ALC beds; and redacted reports they’re appealing to the privacy commissioner, which could take more than a year to be assigned and adjudicated in their favour.

After a hard-fought battle to win back a total of at 46 beds for SMMH (far fewer then are there now), they say that’s still down14 beds from what doctors in south Muskoka say are needed to adequately and safely take care of their patients when not long befor both hospitals could be rebuilt in the early 2030s.

SSMHC wants a share of the 64 transitional Alternative Level of Care beds.

About 100 south Muskoka hospital supporters were told the proposed SMMH site doesn’t meet Ministry of Health site requirements for expansion and that costs better used for beds would require substantial water and sewer improvements if built as part of a gravel pit that takes up half the site according to a Stantech report.

The committee said it had to fight to get information “MAHC wouldn’t give us.”

Caughey said: “We told them we want to have a discussion about legitimate community concerns. We need to have an equal footing with you. So you don’t have all the information and we’re just left going, well yeah OK, I guess that sounds right.

“And guess what? We have them now. We ran a formal process. We looked at the details, and in fact what we suspected the last two years we were right. Those concerns are legitimate.

“That’s why MAHC wouldn’t give us that information, to sit down and have that conversation with them. Because they knew that we would be armed to have a real discussion with them about what needs to be changed.”

Part of the reason for the interst and concern, Caughey added, is the estimated cost of more than $1 billion to build the two MAHC hospital sites amd would see 30 per cent of that fall to local taxpayers who are mostly on board municipally — if not all fully supportive at the public grassroots level.

“And you know, definitively, there’s a lack of transparency — and I think credibility now resulting from where we are at in this process,” he said.

“So it is the time where MAHC and the province owes us accountability on these decisions. And the time is now to get this right. Because this is the next 50 years of health care in south Muskoka.” A large growing four-seasons community he reiterated.

Frankie Dewsbury, of the SSMHC, takes down posters at the Norwood Theatre. She says they are confident some redactions in the reports they received will be lifted. But it may take more than a year to get that hidden information on MAHC’s hospital proposal to the province, by which time she admits the submission could dramatically change.

Report redactions appeal

Committee member Frankie Dewsbury addressed the redactions and said MAHC “wouldn’t fully disclose what they submitted to the ministry.”

So the committee filed their Freedom of Information request through Ontario’s Privacy Commissioner’s public complaints office. However she said a lot of what they received from the ministry was redacted.

“We’ve appealed. And we feel confident those redactions will be lifted,” because the information refusal “does not apply as a compelling interest to public disclosure of the record and clearly outweighs the purpose of the exemption.”

“We were told that it will take two months to be assigned an adjudicator,” said Dewsbury. “So that’s the fall. And with a backlog it could take up to a year, to be honest. Do we have a year? Well, who knows?”

She said switching to the Royale Muskoka lands would make them happy.

**SSMHC said they had to fight to get information MAHC refused to provide them.**

What they unearthed

Meanwhile SSMHC is confident it has enough new information to challenge current planning.

“When we received the reports we did an analysis and we posted those reports on our website,” said Caughey.

Saturday he said: “We’re gonna talk about what’s missing. We know there’s going to be less beds. We know that there’s reduced services. We know resulting from that, sustainability and rural challenges for the hospital going forward. We know that there’s major unresolved site and infrastructure issues for 300 Pine Street.

“We did an analysis and we highlighted where the information doesn’t meet what MAHC has been telling us. We also compiled and sent a series of questions to the hospital, to the town, and to the Ministry of Health and Ontario Health.”

But so far “at first blush” SSMHC hasn’t heard back.

Committee member Steve Webb, a retired paramedic, talked about the site selection, noting Pine Street was ranked second behind MAHC’s originally preferred site Royale Muskoka Lands on Muskoka Beach Road just off Ecclestone Drive.

He said although Pine Street meets the ministry guidelines of 40 acres, “the Stantech report clearly states that only 22.5 acres are useable.

“That doesn’t allow for future expansion of a hospital campus” such as more doctors’ offices and maybe a long-term care facility.

He added that in a conversation he and fellow member Peter Cross had with Queen’s Park, “we were told we had no idea there was an abandoned pit of 22 acres on that property.”

Which poses topographical challenges, he said, that require 15 metres (50 feet) of fill “so that they can get the sewers to gravity feet. Then they have to upgrade to pumping stations on the bottom end so that they can handle this added flow.

“What’s shocked us significantly is there isn’t enough water pressure and volume for fire suppression at that site. So they’re going to have to build a water tower or cisterns, some type of storage facility in order to meet that capacity.

“All these upgrades come at a significant cost, and who’s gonna be paying for that? If it comes out of the capital budget, wouldn’t you rather see more beds.”

**Advocates won’t stop fighting and are calling on the province to address at minimum these three key concerns among others.**

Another major concern the committee cares deeply about is patient and visitor distance and transportation between the two towns they say is too far and is being inadequately discussed — certainly with the Town of Bracebridge as they have told the SSMHC.

Additionally, there is primary site access via Hwy. 11, Taylor Road and Depot Drive the committe also cites as being ripe for emergency paramedic delays.

Though experience south shows RVH hospital in Barrie, off Hwy. 400, is easy to get to. Pine Street, the other access road, they worry would also be clogged in a residential and industrial area.

The transportation plan, they say, is extremely important as it doesn’t affect south Muskoka, the group’s leadership said in their 90-minute presentation and Q&A.

It affects north Muskoka as well because of the separation of services, with patients from Huntsville’s catchments area having to travel south for day surgery and other diagnostic testing.

“So what we’re asking for in a nutshell,” concluded Caughey, is an improved model of care, a realistic transportation plan and a site selection review for the south Muskoka site.”

Said Dewsbury, “The bottom line is we were promised by Doug Ford and Graydon Smith two equitable care hospitals. You promised that. Deliver it.

“I think the different board would help with a different perspective, different message. Different ethics.”