Evidence of meeting #43 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was products.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
No, but I have to get the consensus of the committee. I'm going to be asking committee, with your agreement, if it would be okay to leave everything as it is this week and then change it next week.
Ms. McLeod.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
I would really like to check to see if this will create undue hardships for Dr. Butler-Jones before we make a change. Will it impact the week after?
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Could we leave this pending, then, so that the clerk can check out his schedule? Dr. Bennett, can we then talk about this motion on Wednesday so we can clarify when they can come?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
My concern has been that in an hour without any external witnesses and only hearing from officials every week, we may not be hearing... There are many people like chief medical officers of health from some of the territories and provinces who would like to be able to tell us how it's going on the ground. Local medical officers of health want to be able to explain how it's going. I don't think we can be giving proper advice or oversight to the government without hearing in a formal way from the people who are actually doing the work on the ground.
I do believe there may be times when we want to hear from the officials and from external witnesses, which is easier to do if the briefing is in the first hour, and then to hear witnesses--or the other way around; I don't really care. I want us to be able to hear from external witnesses when it's appropriate, and that's why the motion says that with a week's notice we can hear from people who are calling our offices, wanting to be heard, like Dr. Sobel from Nunavut.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Basically, I'm hearing something different now. We had agreed that we'd have a briefing on H1N1 at committee from officials, publicly, once a week. We have put our schedule in until December break. What I'm hearing is that you want to bring more witnesses in on H1N1 and have the briefing.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
The understanding from the very beginning was that, at a minimum, we would get a briefing from the officials. But in order for us to do our due diligence, we would, when appropriate, call in witnesses to let us know how this outbreak is being responded to by the people on the ground or by the scientists or the various groups.
There were obviously a couple of areas we carved out, such as vaccines and a couple of other areas that were very specific. But from the very beginning, we knew this was not just a briefing; it was two-way accountability in terms of the role of this committee in overseeing the response to the pandemic.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
With all due respect to Dr. Bennett, I believe this committee agreed that we would hear from witnesses for the month of October. After that, we would have an update from the officials once a week. I firmly believe that this is what this committee agreed to. If we need to, perhaps we can go back through the records to see what we actually talked about.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
We will all have time for as much discussion as you want. I just want to make you aware that even though I'm hearing this, some of the public are asking about the HHR study, and they're quite concerned that the committee has not done anything about that. But it's the will of the committee. I have no influence on that whatsoever.
We're putting ourselves in a bit of focus from some of the public who are interested in H1N1 but don't want to lose the HHR study. It's the will of the committee. I'm just telling you what I hear in my office.
Go ahead, Dr. Bennett.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
There is absolutely no point in looking backwards. The point is to look forward to how we as a committee operate in this emergency crisis of H1N1 and whether we are doing our job. That's how we will be judged. Were there witnesses we should have called? Are there people who have insights that can help guide the committee, such as international witnesses?
I am concerned that we need the flexibility to do our job, which the Parliament of Canada gave us, in terms of oversight of the H1N1 outbreak. We had asked for a special committee. That was denied. It was determined that the health committee would be the place where the oversight would take place. We have an obligation to do our job looking forward. That's what we're saying. We cannot do that if it is just a weekly briefing, and I don't believe we agreed to just a weekly briefing. I believe that in all the language, we left the door open to call other witnesses when necessary. Even if the language was tighter than that, I do not believe the people of Canada would think we were doing our job by having just a briefing--
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
We'll try to wrap this up and take it to a vote.
Ms. McLeod, you're first.
We can vote on it very shortly.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB
Could we have the vote and still have time to get to the other motion?
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
To conclude, we have a very specific motion here. Perhaps we need to have further discussion in terms of the varying perceptions of what this will consist of, but this is a very specific motion. I suggest that we move forward with it and then perhaps delay this other conversation.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
If we want to have witnesses on H1N1, can I throw out this fact? Why don't we just do both in one day? We won't lose the other piece then. What do you think? That would be easy to accommodate. Dr. Bennett is saying that there are witnesses who need to be here. We're saying that we want a briefing.
Can I present that? Time is running out, and I need to have some resolution here. If we could leave everything as it is this week so we can get this rearranged for the following week, would that be acceptable? How are things going?
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Bloc
5:25 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Based on my understanding of this motion, a minimum of one hour would be set aside to discuss the pandemic. However, questions were raised earlier as to whether the experts we would like to hear from will be available. We talked about setting the motion aside until we have some assurance that all of the witnesses we want to hear from are available. If we change the meeting time by one hour and if, for example, the chief officer is unavailable, the motion loses some of its relevance.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Can we agree to adjourn and leave it until the next meeting? There doesn't seem to be a consensus. Is that agreed?