Evidence of meeting #39 for Canada-China Relations in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was csis.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Okay. I understand.
Also, the Wuhan Institute of Virology was not part of this G7-plus-one network.
8:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Okay.
I have a second set of questions. You raised the first red flag in August 2018, which culminated in an investigation and the walking out of the two scientists from the lab 10 months later, on July 5, 2019. Subsequent to that, there were two CSIS security assessments that were conducted and reports that were produced. There was one in April 2020 and another in June 2020, which was about 12 months later.
First, why did it take so long for the lab to be secured, with the two scientists being walked out of the lab, on July 5, 2019?
Second, why did it take an additional 12 months for these two CSIS and security assessments to be concluded? It seems like it takes an awful lot of time to get things done.
8:40 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
I absolutely agree that the timing is key here. This is what's important to me in the messaging here today. The coordination between science and security is going to be effective in rapidly detecting and acting upon these particular threats when they appear.
In the context of what we're discussing here now, I certainly wouldn't characterize that the lab was insecure. We didn't have any suggestion or any direction that these individuals needed to be removed immediately. There wasn't any suggestion or direction to not have them retained in the lab and still doing some of the work until that moment in July.
As for myself, I only read the two CSIS letters that you're speaking of within the last week as it related to the release of documents.
8:40 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Do you agree, though, that it took too long for this process to unfold and that in the future this should happen in a much shorter time frame?
8:40 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
In the future, it absolutely should happen in a shorter time frame.
When you apply hindsight in this particular scenario and look at the circumstances going on, this is an area where parties are all gaining awareness. This is a public service department that, at the outset, is applying public service principles to the investigation.
8:40 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
I have another question for you.
You've now spent four years in the United Kingdom working in their scientific community at a lab. Prior to that, you spent years working for the Government of Canada in a scientific environment.
Can you compare and contrast how the British treat national security and scientific research with how we treat them here?
8:40 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
In the U.K., again, there are a variety of examples I could provide to the committee in terms of actual policies, guidelines and, in some cases, even laws in place to scrutineer.
8:40 p.m.
Conservative
8:40 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
I don't know if it's more effective, because, again, this is something that is still at the discussion point in the U.K. Certainly, the amount of guidance available is elevated. That's just a trend within the U.K. They don't leave anything unwritten. If anything is important, there will be corollary policy guidelines if not laws related to it. I think, in this scenario, you can put in multiple examples.
8:40 p.m.
Liberal
8:40 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Welcome, Dr. Gilmour. Thank you for presenting yourself at this committee.
Let me go to a very direct question.
Some members have been suggesting that there was a connection between the dismissal of the two scientists who are part of this inquiry at the national microbiology lab and you leaving for the U.K. when you joined the Quadram lab.
I'm going to ask you this directly: Did you resign from PHAC to take on your role at Quadram Institute in 2020?
8:40 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
Mr. Chair, that's a fair question. Yes, I did resign, but the reasons for my resignation were different. I had one of those rare moments in life where there is a perfect opportunity professionally and personally. The roles I have in the U.K. exactly meet my interests and skill sets. I've flourished there in that particular role. My young family who moved there with me flourished, as well.
At the end of the day, it was ultimately a personal decision and one we've had zero regrets about.
8:40 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you, Dr. Gilmour.
I'm very sorry that I'm asking personal questions, but I want to make sure there's transparency and clarity in this committee.
Just to clarify, the dismissal of the two scientists had nothing to do with your resignation.
8:40 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
No. Nor were they dismissed at the moment of my resignation. I think I found out about it, probably, when most people did—multiple years after.
8:40 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
You made a personal decision in terms of your career and family. An opportunity came up in the U.K. that you felt was the right one for you.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
Great. Thank you very much.
Let me go to a second set of questions. These are in regard to international collaboration in scientific research. This is something we've been discussing a lot. Of course, it's very much a part of it. I think you have some unique experience and expertise you can offer us.
Let me start by asking you this question: Is it common for international laboratories to collaborate on research?
8:45 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
[Technical difficulty—Editor] between institutes. It's not just the materials that would be transferred back and forth. It's the expertise. It's the lived experience. It's epidemiologic information and metadata. There are a variety of requirements you need for successful science. That would have been one of the other bases for the laboratory networks we had, both internationally and within Canada.
Certainly, for a group like the national microbiology lab, there's no way to act in isolation. That's why their principal mandate is working with the other 10 provincial public health laboratories across the country. Again, success is entirely dependent upon the free flow of information around a particular issue.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
What's the importance here in terms of science on an international scale? I'm thinking of the extensive collaboration that you're speaking to.
What's the opportunity for countries and for scientists from different places and different backgrounds to collaborate on scientific research?
8:45 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
Mr. Chair, there are a variety of options and a multitude of ways that people can collaborate.
I know from the U.K. that, especially under the lens of national security, they calculated that probably at least about half of all scientific collaboration in the country is founded in some degree on international collaboration.
Again, you cannot rely strictly upon your own expertise and your own materials. There has to be benefit-sharing between different institutes.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
In terms of Canada, how do you think Canada is doing on international collaboration in public health? Are we an important player?
8:45 p.m.
Research Scientist, As an Individual
Mr. Chair, that's another complex question.
I know Canada is well respected in terms of its microbiology expertise, its virology expertise and its role in the study of the transmission of antimicrobial resistance. In the fields that I work in, yes, it is absolutely respected.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yasir Naqvi Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
My last set of questions—obviously I am time-dependent—is around what you started talking about when Mr. Chong was asking you about the coordination between science and security. I'd love to hear you elaborate on your understanding of this enhanced nature of coordination between science and security.
I think you also alluded to...that we are, of course, learning over time. Hindsight is a great way of learning in terms of what we knew before and during the pandemic. Now even the U.K. is working through that process.
Can you elaborate, in your view as a scientist on an international scale, what that coordination looks like between science and security?
