Health Committee on July 13th, 2020

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm almost dying here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I hear you.

All right, I'm going to have to take a vote on the unanimous consent, because I'm not sure that we have unanimous consent.

Would the clerk take a vote on whether we have, in fact, unanimous consent to proceed as we have described?

Please, go ahead.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, it would appear that we have 11 yeas.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Hallelujah.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Dr. Jaczek's motion is deemed to have been moved, as we've now decided to basically split off the two sets of documents, with documents related to the national stockpile to arrive at Dr. Jaczek's later date.

Is there any further discussion on the effective motion by Dr. Jaczek?

Dr. Jaczek, please go ahead.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am lowering my hand as we speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

Is there any further debate on this amendment?

Mr. Van Bynen, do you have a question?

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

You just referenced an amendment. I thought we were back to the motion as amended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

No. Dr. Jaczek moved to change the dates in the motion for the delivery of the documents. Ms. Kwan proposed a friendly subamendment to change only the dates for the documents pertaining to the national stockpile and that they be delivered in one fell swoop at a later date. The decision to deal with Dr. Jaczek's amendment in that fashion was passed by unanimous consent, but we still have Dr. Jaczek's amendment on the floor, as we have unanimously agreed that it should be deemed to have been moved.

We're still on Dr. Jaczek's amendment. I suspect we're probably all in agreement with it, but we should, if there is no debate, take a vote on it. If there is debate, we will continue to debate that item.

The debate is on Dr. Jaczek's amendment, as subsequently modified by unanimous consent.

Is there any discussion on Dr. Jaczek's amendment? I'm seeing none, so we will call a vote.

Madam Clerk, could you please call the vote on Dr. Jaczek's amendment, as amended by unanimous consent?

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, may I please reread the original motion as I understand it, just to be clear that I'm capturing everything completely?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

That's a desperately good idea. Thank you.

[The Clerk]

Thank you.

I do have the dates in two different places in the motion. Here it is:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee send for the following documents to be provided by the government by Monday, August 31, 2020 and that the documents be published publicly on the committee’s website by Monday, September 7 2020:

All documents, briefing notes and memorandums, regarding the emerging evidence that altered the government’s advice on the wearing of masks referenced by Dr. Theresa Tam, Chief Public Health Officer, at her appearance before the Standing Committee on Health on Tuesday, May 19, 2020, and that all documents, briefing notes and memorandums to/from/between Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Minister of Health’s Office and the Privy Council regarding the management of the National Emergency Strategic Stockpile from 2005 to 2020 be provided by the government by Wednesday, September 30, 2020 and that the documents be published publicly on the committee’s website by Wednesday, October 7, 2020, including supply inventory broken down by number and all updates sent to the government and the Government of Canada’s contracts for personal protective equipment since January 2020, provided that the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel vet the documents for matters of cabinet confidence and national security as well as privacy related to names and personal information.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you. I think that is the motion. Does anybody have any problem with that clarification? That is the motion before us.

On that basis we will conduct a vote on Dr. Jaczek's amendment.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we're back to the main motion, as amended many times.

Is there any further debate or discussion on the motion by Mr. Jeneroux as amended?

Ms. Jansen, please go ahead.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

A quick question. I thought the other guys were going to put in a new amendment that had the PMO as a separate amendment. Was that not actually the case? They wanted it completely separate for some reason.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

There was no such amendment. I think the intent had been to deal with whether or not to include those particular offices in Mr. Jeneroux's amendment as separate items. They didn't. There was no such amendment.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Ah, so they said they were going to do it, and then they didn't. I just want to be clear.

[An hon. member]

No, that's not true.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Well, there was a subsequent amendment to deal with removing the health department from the main motion, and that was not passed.

Is there any further discussion on Mr. Jeneroux's main motion as amended?

Seeing none, Madam Clerk, would you please call the vote on Mr. Jeneroux's motion as so vigorously amended. Thank you.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Madam Clerk. The motion has passed.

We are 10 minutes, I believe, to an effective hard cap on the translators' time. I propose that we resume the discussion on the remaining three motions of Mr. Jeneroux, say, next Monday. I'll ask the clerk if we can get the time slot. I think the current week is pretty full, at least for me. I'm hoping we can agree on an early time next week to finish this off.

I will also postpone the drafting instructions, which had been planned to follow this public portion, until the end of that meeting.

I'm sorry, someone wants to interject?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Yes, Mr. Chair. Before we adjourn this meeting, I just want to make sure that the information being sought will go unredacted to the law clerk's office. I ask because the last time, that didn't actually happen with regard to the motion that was passed on February 26. It was the redacted information that went to the law clerk's office. I want to make sure that we follow the rules in the motion as passed by committee. If we can ensure that happens, that would be great. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Well, thank you.

From this committee, we can do no more, really, than to pass the motion as we did. We will have to rely on the departments to act accordingly.

Are there any more comments?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Just to follow up on that, then, I'd be curious to know what option the committee has in the event that the departments do not follow through on the committee's motion as passed. I wonder if that's something the clerk's office can endeavour to find out and report back to the committee on at our next meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you. I will ask the clerk to do so.

Is there agreement that we shall resume this meeting as soon as possible, say, next week? Seeing no dissent, I shall take that as a—

Mr. Jeneroux, I see your hand is up. Sorry.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Mr. Chair, yes, my hand's up. It's all right. It's been a long meeting.

Obviously, we want to get through these next three important motions, I think, on the scope of our study. Yes, next week would be ideal. If not Monday, at least some day next week would be great.

I do just want to take the last few minutes here and wish Karin a happy birthday. I imagine this was probably an opportunity for her, as we were going to go in camera, to really take over the meeting. However, it didn't happen today. Again, happy birthday to you, Karin.

[Karin Phillips, Committee Researcher]

Thank you.