Government Operations Committee on May 22nd, 2020

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I want to start with your comment about blaming the Harper Conservatives.

First of all, I want to say how disappointed I am that instead of dealing with this very important situation, you used that disgraceful fallback line. I have the public accounts with me, because I keep them with me everywhere I go. The first year the Liberal government was in power, it cut PHAC funding by 10% and then 13%, with an overall drop of 5%. In total, the health ministry has been slashed 12% since the Harper years, so I would ask that you focus on providing true answers to this committee about this pandemic, rather than falling back on disgraceful Liberal talking points about Harper cuts.

Now I want to get to my questions.

Many of the N95 masks on a recall list were tested by the CDC as early as mid-April, and they had filtration rates as low as 12%. Why did we okay the suppliers? They were, again, banned in the States because of faulty masks, and the CDC was notified about this a month ago. Why are their masks still being allowed into Canada?

[Dr. Stephen Lucas]

Mr. Chair, as I indicated, Health Canada became aware of the U.S. FDA-issued revised guidance on May 7 after—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Okay. Let me stop you right there. Why did it take you so long to be aware of that, when it was published April 13? I can find it on Google. My staff did. Why has it taken us so long?

[Dr. Stephen Lucas]

The information provided to us through the testing undertaken and the revised guidance on the utilization of the masks was completed on May 7. We looked at the work done by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and identified the specific medical device establishment—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I have those documents and they show it's as early as mid-April. I also have those documents from NIOSH. They show that they did the testing and published it in mid-April. Why does it take us so long? Are we waiting to hear from them?

[Dr. Stephen Lucas]

We worked with the United States Food and Drug Administration, which issued their revised guidance in regard to those masks on May 7. With that information, on May 9 we cancelled the authorization for a company pertaining to KN95 masks. On May 10, we issued letters to medical device establishment holders requesting that—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Are we waiting for them to contact us? Are we not proactively looking at their website or watching this?

Again, we've looked at all the companies that had the recalls and were banned in the States. On April 13, April 15 and April 20, the information was available. Are we just sitting back and waiting for the CDC to give us this information?

[Dr. Stephen Lucas]

We are actively looking at sources of information that pertains to the quality of products on the market and are working with other regulators, including the United States Food and Drug Administration, to act on that basis, which is what we did in this circumstance.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

We are also requiring independent testing data now for new KN95 approvals from Health Canada to ensure that we have our own independent testing data.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

On the Healthy Canadians website, the recalls are listed as advisory, but the title and description on the website say “recalls”. Why do you classify the recall as merely advisory?

[Dr. Stephen Lucas]

In this circumstance, the specific regulatory action for those 20 or so companies was to indicate that they needed to relabel the medical devices. They could still be used, but not in the circumstance that an N95 level of filtration was needed. That relabelling is formally considered a recall. The specific regulatory action requested was to label in accordance with Health Canada direction to ensure that devices are used in an appropriate way.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Of the 11 million N95 masks that have come in so far, about 9 million, give or take, have been found faulty or substandard or have poor filtration. We've heard they could be used otherwise, as perhaps surgical masks or for other issues.

Who is deciding what they can be used for? We've heard conflicting information from the minister—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I'm afraid we are completely out of time for that question, but I would appreciate if you could once again provide an answer to Mr. McCauley's question in writing to our clerk as quickly as possibly.

We'll now go to our last five-minute intervention, in this case from Mr. MacKinnon.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Chair, I will be taking Mr. MacKinnon's spot, as he asked me to. We didn't get a chance to communicate that.

Minister, I want to go back to the relationship between the provinces and the federal government. How are you getting that particular information, the numbers with regard to personal protective equipment and how that equipment is distributed to different areas of Canada when a certain province requests it? Can you explain to this committee how that is done and how many calls you have per week with your provincial counterparts?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

I think it's not just me. There are multiple levels of communication with the provinces and territories that allow us to have a very quick line of sight into what their needs might be and what concerns they have in terms of their own particular epidemiology.

Dr. Tam, as you know, meets with the public health officers at least once or twice a week, and maybe even more frequently. I'm looking at her, but I know it's a lot. It's three times a week. I have been having twice-weekly calls with my counterparts. I think this week we've had one call. I know that President Namiesniowski connects provincially and territorially as well. So does Deputy Minister Lucas. Through all of those conversations, each with a specific purpose, we are able to gain information very quickly from a variety of different perspectives about what needs might be arising.

In terms of equipment, though, there are also formal requests that come forward in addition to the allotted sharing that we've agreed upon. That request might indicate that a province or territory has extraordinary needs, and then we are able to fill those very quickly.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, minister.

I have to tell a story. Locally, it's amazing the number of Canadians who've stepped up to produce non-medical masks. I have a lot of constituents who are producing non-medical masks for patients at CHEO. They've been sewing those masks at home and been providing hundreds and hundreds of them daily.

You've mentioned the chief public health officer, who is with us today. As the provinces are starting to reopen their economies, what would be the best public health advice you can give to individuals?

[Dr. Theresa Tam]

I think the tried and true public health measures still remain. As much as you can, continue physical distancing, washing your hands, covering your coughs and staying home if you're sick. That's very important.

Together with all of the provincial and territorial chief medical officers, we've come to a consensus—really a recommendation—that a non-medical mask or face covering will provide an added layer of protection for you to protect others, or for others who are wearing it to protect you, from respiratory droplets if you can't maintain that two-metre distance or you can't anticipate whether you can maintain that distance. In particular, that would apply to public transport or going to a grocery store, or situations like that, but certainly it's the concept of “I protect you and you protect me”.

The individual provinces and territories, though, do issue their own specific advice to citizens based on the disease activity in their area.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, I will end my questioning there. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

We will now go to our two and a half minutes of interventions, starting with Monsieur Barsalou-Duval.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Earlier, one of my colleagues asked about the supposedly medical masks that were actually not so medical but were still sold as if they were. We must also add the Spartan projects that turned out to be ineffective, although they were already on the market. The actions taken by Health Canada seem very troubling to me. Is Health Canada properly doing its work to protect the public?

I also want to talk about a specific case that concerns me greatly and that has to do with the supply and eligibility of medical systems. It is about a software program. It dates from before COVID-19, but I am sure you will see that it is quite troubling. A company could have obtained public contracts without having a licence for the medical systems. The company is called SCC Soft Computer. It is illegal for it to be selling medical systems.

What is the government doing to ensure that people comply with the requirements? What is the government doing to ensure that there are consequences when a situation like this arises?

I am trying to understand how such a situation could have happened. Have there been any consequences?

[Dr. Stephen Lucas]

Mr. Chair, as I noted, Health Canada grants regulatory approval for medical devices as well as pharmaceutical products and other health products. In doing that, they're subject to certain conditions. If we find evidence about any of those approved products or products that are on the market without approval, we take immediate compliance and enforcement information, following up as appropriate to remove them from the market or ensure they're being used in accordance with the regulatory authorization. If there's non-compliance, we refer it to law enforcement officers for appropriate action.

In some of the specific examples given, we authorized, for example, the Spartan point-of-care diagnostic test kit, which was subject to further clinical evaluation, and in that context an issue was identified with—

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you for your answer. I apologize for interrupting you, but I do not have a lot of time left and I would like to be able to ask some other questions.

It is important to protect the public and to ensure that there are no—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Monsieur Barsalou-Duval, you have no time. I'm sorry to say that.

Again, for the umpteenth time, if witnesses have not been able to complete their full answers because of time constraints, please do so as quickly as possible in writing to our clerk.

Our final intervention of two and a half minutes will be with Mr. Green.

Mr. Green, the floor is yours.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through you to Dr. Tam, in 2006 you co-authored a report on pandemic preparedness in Canada called “The Canadian Pandemic Influenza Plan for the Health Sector”. The document called for the Canadian government to make plans to ensure “a consistent 16-week supply”—which would be “two pandemic waves” of eight weeks—of personal protective equipment, such as the N95 respirator masks, gowns, gloves and face shields, because there would be “shortages” of materials and supplies during the pandemic period.

However, according to PHAC whistleblowers, on February 12, 2020, the NESS included only 94,000 surgical masks, 100,000 N95 respirator masks, 400,000 face shields, half a million gowns and two million gloves. This would be the equivalent of one week of use in Ontario in April.

As the public health officer of Canada, can you tell us why the Public Health Agency of Canada failed to ensure that Canada had a consistent 16-week supply of personal protective equipment prior to the outbreak of COVID-19?

[Dr. Theresa Tam]

The plan you refer to is the Canadian pandemic influenza plan, which is a guidance document. It is a broad national plan. The guidance was to ask all levels of government to plan for 16 weeks as an appropriate time frame in considering a pandemic, because you could have more than one wave as well.

That is applicable not just to the federal government but also to the health system more broadly as a recommendation for the benchmark. I think that speaks to the health system as a whole in terms of the PPE and the different roles and responsibilities of federal and provincial and territorial governments. That was the recommendation at the time.

As I say, this is an unprecedented global crisis, and we could all, not just the federal stockpile but the provincial ones—