Government Operations Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2020

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Certainly, and thank you for that.

My concern on this is.... If for some reason we are delayed, I want to make certain that we have it in place so that we can invite some of the departments, or at least one, just so we adhere to what the motion is and what was asked. If you are comfortable with that, the committee, with the clerks and the analysts, will make certain that something like that is set up.

Thank you.

[The Clerk]

I beg your pardon, Mr. Chair.

Madame Vignola wanted to intervene on that point.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

On the Nuctech study, are we talking about inviting the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry or the Minister of Public Services and Procurement? I ask because we are already hearing from the Minister of Public Services and Procurement on the estimates. I see no issues with inviting her twice, but the two appearances would be quite close together.

As Mr. Paul-Hus said, if we can't hear from her twice in the tight window before November 23, we will turn to our witness lists for the Nuctech study.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you for that.

What we're looking at is just in case we aren't able to get the ministers there, because of dealing with the estimates. We would have it set up so that the departments could at least start the study before we.... That's what I'm bringing to your attention right now.

Mr. Drouin.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a quick point. In the previous session, when we dealt with COVID-19 witnesses we had a list. I'm just wondering if the clerk is going to send us the list of who's asked to appear, because we are in a hybrid format. Normally, we'd get together and talk about them, but now that we have a hybrid format.... The clerk can correct me if I'm wrong, but last time you sent us a master list—here's whom the Conservatives invited, whom the Bloc invited, whom we invited—just to cross-reference to see if we have some of the same witnesses.

[The Clerk]

Perhaps I can clarify, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Drouin, are you referring to the witness list that was submitted during the last session of Parliament?

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

I am referring to how we are going to proceed now with respect to the fifth recommendation. Basically, I would like to see the list of witnesses being proposed for the Nuctech study.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Certainly.

Mr. Paul-Hus.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would simply like to remind my fellow member Mr. Drouin that, at our last meeting, we had decided that the parties would choose their witnesses, the clerk would compile a list and we wouldn't necessarily discuss it. If I'm not mistaken, that is what we had agreed upon.

Perhaps the clerk can confirm that for us.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, perhaps I can intervene on this point.

What is written in the subcommittee report with regard to Nuctech is that once the witnesses are submitted, the chair, in conjunction with the clerk and analysts, would prepare a work plan for the consideration of the committee.

I apologize, Monsieur Drouin, if I misunderstood your question. I think you were asking exactly that.

Essentially, what we do is take the list. The analysts in these situations usually try to group them thematically. Then we submit it back to the committee for consideration. The committee will know which parties submitted which names, and can then discuss which names it wants to adopt from the work plan. If I remember correctly, this is how we proceeded with the COVID study in the summer.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Does that clarify things for you, Mr. Drouin?

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

Yes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

From my distance, I think I can see your thumbs-up there. The camera is way down at the far end of the room.

With that, the floor is now open.

I believe I see Mr. Green with his hand up.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

We'll open the floor with you, Mr. Green.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin my remarks by saying that I'm very glad and happy that we've been able to pass that and can start to get to work on the reports and the studies. You'll note that I had sent out two notices of motion that broke out the omnibus nature of the previous work that I'd presented. I'm going to set that aside, because I'm hoping that in testing the will of this committee today, we can go ahead and get back on track with the demand for documents that was put out some time ago, with a slight adjustment to dates and taking into consideration feedback I received at our scheduling subcommittee meeting, to try to meet people halfway on stuff.

With your indulgence, I'd like to put the first motion. I can reference it. If people would like me to read it out, I'm happy to do that. I can practice my French, perhaps—or perhaps not.

The first motion I have is the COVID-related motion, that the committee send for all briefing notes, memos and emails related to the national emergency strategic stockpile. The motion is before you. It was sent out on Friday.

I'll note, for those who are keenly interested, that I changed the date so that we're clear that this is not the exact same motion. This is taking feedback from other members of the committee to extend it to August 31, but then to kick to December 1 to allow that month for staff to get whatever happened between my original ask and this one.

Through you, Mr. Chair, I just want to make sure the committee is clear on exactly which motion I'm talking about. I don't want putting this motion to cause any more confusion than perhaps it has in the past.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, Mr. MacKinnon has asked that Mr. Green read the motion into the record, please.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I would be happy to.

This will be a great clip for my social media, so I appreciate the indulgence, Mr. MacKinnon.

The motion is as follows:

That, in the context of its study of the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee send for all briefing notes, memos and emails from senior officials, prepared for the Minister of Health, the President of the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Chief Medical Health Officer of Canada, and the Minister of Public Service and Procurement between 2010 and Monday, August 31, 2020, regarding the stockpiling, management, disposal and replenishment of medical equipment and supplies in the National Emergency Strategic Stockpile; that the committee receive the information no later than Tuesday, December 1, 2020; that matters of Cabinet confidence and national security be excluded from the request; that any redactions to protect the privacy of Canadian citizens and permanent residents whose names and personal information may be included in the documents, as well as public servants who have been providing assistance on this matter, be made by the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel of the House of Commons and that these documents be posted on the committee’s web page.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

Mr. Green, do you want to add anything more before I open this up for discussion?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes. I appreciate that the way in which I tried to reintroduce all of this caused concern. We're now almost two full months past prorogation and the scheduling that we received. I'll remind folks that the original spirit of this motion was supported by this committee in the past, which hopefully provided the opportunity for staff to get a good head start on this.

Kicking it into the beginning of December gives us an opportunity to receive the information, consider it, and perhaps find a way to respond, if necessary, in the weeks leading up to Christmas. What I don't want is a December 31 date that kicks it into some time in 2021, so I'm calling on the reasonableness of the government to support what I think should be a clear and transparent process, open by default, for the government as it relates to the national emergency strategic stockpile.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Green

I have Mr. MacKinnon and Ms. Vignola.

Mr. MacKinnon, go ahead.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank my fellow member Mr. Green for his motion. I don't believe I expressed support for this motion. On the contrary, I think it is a ridiculous motion that puts an additional burden on people we are depending on right now to purchase medical supplies and personal protective equipment. It is those people who will have to respond to the various motions for the production of papers—motions adopted by the House of Commons and supported by the members of the opposition. Other committees had very similar motions.

It is my duty as parliamentary secretary and our collective duty as government members to roundly condemn the witch hunt that seems to be taking shape through these motions for the production of papers. The opposition is looking for problems where none exist.

Allow me to explain.

The purpose of the national emergency strategic stockpile is to help provinces and territories in the event of a pandemic or medical emergency. I don't think that is a controversial idea. Supplies are added periodically, maintained and deployed when necessary.

The Public Health Agency of Canada maintains the stockpile, ordering supplies as needed. Any study of the national emergency strategic stockpile would need to be done by the Standing Committee on Health, which examines how Health Canada conducts its operations and manages its resources. The motion adopted by the House contains a similar request for the production of papers.

The job of Public Services and Procurement Canada, or PSPC, one of the departments we scrutinize, here, is to procure goods and services when a client department asks it to. If a department wants goods, services or equipment of any sort but lacks the necessary authority to make the purchase itself, the central purchasing agent—PSPC—procures the goods or service on the department's behalf. In accordance with best practices in procurement, PSPC procures goods and services at the request of a client department.

What happens to the service or equipment afterwards is entirely the responsibility of the department or agency in question, not of PSPC. We find ourselves having to explain that on a fairly regular basis, which I find baffling. If Transport Canada wants to purchase a particular piece of equipment and has neither the ability nor authority to do so, PSPC purchases the equipment on Transport Canada's behalf.

Transport Canada accepts the equipment, adds it to the department's inventory, sets it up, deploys it and manages its life cycle, as necessary. Eventually, the department will remove the equipment from its inventory and start the process all over again. That's what departments do when they purchase equipment, and the same goes for the Public Health Agency of Canada.

I can't wrap my head around why Mr. Green is so intent on burdening the same public servants—we aren't talking about 5,000 of them—with this colossal task. His motion calls for the production of papers going back years. The committee would force these public servants to review and produce all of this documentation, while ensuring trade secrets, intellectual property and cabinet confidence are all protected.

I do not understand this motion, since the Standing Committee on Health and Health Canada will be answering the same questions. PSPC will be forced to do the same in response to the various motions adopted by the House and other committees.

It will come as no surprise that I do not support the motion. We are in a pandemic, and frankly, this isn't helping anyone. No one should take pleasure in imposing all of this extra work on senior officials and employees who are doing a stellar job. They look for personal protective equipment around the world and oversee the purchase of vaccines, looking after the logistics and working with organizations such as Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada to build a national stockpile.

Now I ask the honourable members here today, from all the parties: is that not exactly what you would have them do? Their days already start incredibly early and end just as late, not to mention the overtime they do on the weekend, and yet, we would have them shoulder another burden, digging through records for documents that would in no way help us draw lessons to better manage the pandemic today.

This is my appeal to you, so to speak, on behalf of those public servants. Let's not make them do this or let's at least revisit the matter later. It is no secret that every aspect of Canada's handling of the pandemic will eventually be scrutinized—and the response of every province and every country will surely be as well. Everyone will have questions, and everyone will want to review the response and learn from it. That will be the case universally. Wanting to draw lessons and learn from the response to the pandemic is a goal shared by everyone, not just a single party. There will certainly be lessons to take away.

That said, this is my appeal to you, Mr. Chair and Mr. Green. Let's not force public servants to prioritize tasks like these over the safety and welfare of Canadians.

That is where I stand on this motion. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon.

I have Ms. Vignola next, then Mr. Drouin, Mr. Green, Mr. McCauley and Mr. Kusmierczyk.

Ms. Vignola.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

The honourable member is right about one thing. The motion would have us examine 10 years' worth of work, 10 years of procurement and stockpiling efforts, but the reason for doing so is simple.

Millions of masks were thrown out because of shortcomings in the replenishment process. Of course, Health Canada makes its own decisions in that regard, but as far as procurement goes, does it not behoove us to check whether the processes in place to protect Canadians and Quebeckers are valid? It is out of the question to wait until the pandemic is over to realize that we should have done this or that.

We are in the midst of the pandemic, and now that we have a tiny bit of hindsight, we can check whether the process is adequate and whether we can make any improvements to immediately protect people's health. We have to make sure the equipment and supplies in the stockpile aren't expired. The masks I referred to had been expired, not for three weeks or six months, but for five years. As I see it, everyone should review the process, and that is the committee's job.

To be clear, had the government supported the opposition's motion to create a special committee, there would not be three or four committees examining the same issue from various angles. There would be a single committee examining the issue from every angle, and we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now. I don't mind, because this is important work, but why not focus our efforts? That option was rejected, so we will try something else.

There are lessons to be learned, and the time to learn them is now—not when the pandemic is over. That would be the worst thing we could do. Let's immediately take advantage of the hindsight we have.

The motion was put forward this summer and the work got under way. The last thing I want to do is overburden public servants and those who have to search through the records. That is not my intention, and it certainly isn't Mr. Green's, to speak on his behalf. The objective is to get to the truth and to improve the process for everyone's sake.

That's what I have to say on the matter.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Ms. Vignola.

Mr. Drouin, go ahead.