Evidence of meeting #48 for Health in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was conveyance.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Robert Clarke  Deputy Chief Public Health Officer, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness, Public Health Agency of Canada
Dennis Brodie  Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada
Howard Njoo  Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada
John Cuningham  Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Susan Kadis Liberal Thornhill, ON

How many quarantine officers have you added or do you have?

4:55 p.m.

Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Howard Njoo

A rough number is about 30 to 40.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Susan Kadis Liberal Thornhill, ON

Does that represent what you're including in this amendment, or would you be going beyond that?

4:55 p.m.

Director General, Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Howard Njoo

We've actually made applications and are looking at additional quarantine officers also at major marine ports.

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dennis Brodie

There are currently about 30 to 40 quarantine officers. There are six quarantine stations: Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and Halifax. These 30 quarantine officers staff those quarantine stations on a 24-hour basis.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Susan Kadis Liberal Thornhill, ON

It's not new officers that we're talking about.

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dennis Brodie

No, and there are no new resources required as a result of this amendment.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Susan Kadis Liberal Thornhill, ON

Would there be more officers required if you included the land conveyance reporting requirements?

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dennis Brodie

There was no plan to establish quarantine stations at any land border crossing. I guess we would have to look at that in terms of numbers and risk. Again, I think it would be—

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

Susan Kadis Liberal Thornhill, ON

Was it never fully intended to be implemented? I'm a little confused.

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dennis Brodie

The quarantine stations that currently exist cover airports, marine ports, and land border crossings. If a customs officer notices a sick traveller who is crossing by land, they are required to notify the quarantine officer responsible for that crossing, who then will give instructions to the quarantine officer.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you.

Mr. Batters, you have five minutes.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I have just a really quick question. I don't have a five-minute question. I'd like to ask the gentlemen present, whoever can answer, this question. This is going to perhaps be difficult for you to answer. When the Quarantine Act was envisioned, and when it was passed into law and came into effect on December 12, 2006, what was the intention of the government of the day? What was the intention of the legislation in clause 34? Was the intention to include land conveyances, such as buses or trains, or was it not to include them? That's my question, quite simply. Was the intention of the legislation to include land conveyances or not?

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dennis Brodie

Well, clearly, the legislation, as it was written and assented to by both houses, included all types of conveyances.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

Subject to advanced screening—

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dennis Brodie

It was subject to advanced reporting.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

Sorry, advanced reporting.

4:55 p.m.

Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Policy Group, Public Health Agency of Canada

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

So in essence, this isn't a technical bill, then, Bill C-42. We're making some changes here to something that was passed through the House of Commons and then through the Senate.

Mr. Brodie has answered the question. Do any of you three gentlemen want to comment, or is that your understanding as well?

4:55 p.m.

Deputy Chief Public Health Officer, Infectious Disease and Emergency Preparedness, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Robert Clarke

Yes, I think what was happening at the same time as this was going through was that there were revisions being made to the International Health Regulations. So that was going on at the same time, and that's what caused a rethinking of some of the wording of this.

I don't know if anyone wants to add anything.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

What you're telling me, then, is that the Canadian Parliament chose to go further at that time than the International Health Regulations of the day. It chose to go one step further in terms of public safety and include land conveyances, something that no other jurisdiction in the world does, if I heard Mr. Malo's question. Yet the Canadian Parliament chose to go further.

Did everyone just miss this? The House of Commons missed it. The Senate missed it. There was just a screw-up in the language. That's the intent of my question. Was that the clear intention of the bill or not? Gentlemen?

5 p.m.

Senior Counsel, Public Health Agency of Canada

John Cuningham

Obviously, with respect, you're Parliament, and the law was passed as it was passed. As Mr. Brodie said, it covered marine and ground, and that was passed in 2005 and was only brought into force in 2006. In the intervening period, there has been a rethinking.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

This isn't your job to do. But can you enlighten me? I don't have this handy. What was the support in Parliament for the Quarantine Act? Was this something unanimously passed? Was this something opposed by the opposition of the day, which was our party? Do you have any insight into that? Perhaps the researchers have some information as to what the vote was on the Quarantine Act. Can we find that out?

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I'd be going by memory, but I think there was fairly significant support.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK

Thank you. I would appreciate, though, if we could find that out for the committee.