Health Committee on Feb. 24th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Let's call to order meeting number five of the Standing Committee on Health.

I'd like to start by welcoming Mr. Jeneroux back and congratulating him on his new offspring.

Congratulations.

We just had a talk about whether there's any sleep in his future or not. We'll see.

At the time we adjourned the last meeting, Mr. Thériault was speaking to his motion. What I'd like to propose here to the committee is that we finish Mr. Thériault's motion and then go to a Liberal motion so that all four parties have had a chance to submit a substantive motion. Then I suggest that we move all other motions, on studies in particular, to the subcommittee.

I would propose—and hopefully someone will move a motion to do this—that we refer them to the subcommittee to meet tomorrow morning and that the subcommittee can then report back to this committee on Wednesday to give us the priorities and the order in which they think we should proceed.

Mr. Davies also had some motions regarding studies to be submitted to the House. I've just learned today that the deal with studies like that is that they go to the House as reports from this very committee so that the membership of the committee reflected in the reports will change to what this committee's membership is. I understand that a number of people are reluctant to do that until they've read the report. There are about six reports out there to be read. I would request that we not process those particular motions until we've had a better chance to read the reports. I would suggest that, rather than everybody reading a different report, we all kind of decide, like a book club, which report to focus on. We could consider that particular report at our next meeting or at our meeting after the break. Is that satisfactory to everyone?

Mr. Webber.

[Len Webber, Conservative, Calgary Confederation, AB]

I'm just looking for some clarification, Mr. Chair. With regard to the past studies that we have done and getting a government response to those reports, you're suggesting that we choose one of those reports?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I'm suggesting that we choose one at a time. Mr. Davies identified six reports and one letter to redo. We can't just ask for a government response. We have to submit them as new reports, which makes us all the authors of those reports.

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

That sounds like a fine plan to me if you want, but just before we decide that as a committee, I'd like to follow up on Mr. Webber's comment and for new committee members.

These were all reports that followed studies from the last Parliament where the motion was passed to do the study. We wrote the report, came to conclusions and made recommendations. We then submitted it to the government for its response. It was a key part of each one of the motions that was made.

With regard to the studies, one is a diabetes strategy, which I believe was a Liberal motion moved by Ms. Sidhu. The second one is on sports-related concussions. I think that was another Liberal one, moved by Mr. Robert-Falcon Ouellette. The third is on the impacts of methamphetamine abuse in Canada, and I believe it was a joint Conservative-Liberal motion. The fourth, a study to get Canada's youth moving, was undertaken as a result of a Liberal backbencher's success in getting his motion passed in Parliament and referred to committee. The fifth one is a study on the LGBTQIA2 community, which I think, Mr. Chair, was your motion. The other one is about violence facing health care workers in Canada, which was my motion. The last one is a letter that followed a study because it came at the very end of our committee business in June. It was on the forced sterilization of women.

The reason I raise this is that I think there was widespread support by all of us around the table for all of those studies. I'm just wondering whether it's really necessary for everybody in this room to reread the reports simply in order to send the reports and then ask the government to give its response to what I think were really excellent recommendations by all parties, recommendations that represent a lot of hard work by everybody. I just don't know why we would hold that process up and whether it's really that important for everybody to reread all those reports. However, I'm happy to go with what the majority wants.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Dr. Powlowski would like to comment.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

In response to that, because I was one of the people who said I'd like to read the report, I don't intend to question the conclusions of the report. It's somebody else's study. It's like me as a doctor. I may not agree with one of my colleague's decisions, but I respect them for making the decision and I let them make the decision. My thinking is not to reopen the issue, but it's just part of the democratic process that if our name is going on it, we at least understand what's in the report.

My own thinking had been that if had we one week for each of the reports, then we could read them and understand them, just because our names will be going on them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

What I would suggest is that maybe, Don, you could recommend a report for us all to focus on first.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

In celebration of your chairmanship, Mr. Chair, I would move that we first proceed with the LGBTQIA2 report and consider it, and if it meets with the committee's approval, we submit that report to the government and ask that it respond to the recommendations in the report.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

That's an excellent choice. Is the committee in agreement with that?

Let's all go forth and read this great report, so that the next time we.... I don't think we'll be able to do it on Wednesday, but the next time we come back will be March 9. We should be ready to consider that.

Yes.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I know we want to really be efficient in this meeting, so I'm anxious to get to the committee business so that we can move forward. However, I'm curious, Mr. Chair, if there was any answer from the Minister about her potentially coming on Wednesday for the supplementary estimates. Could you update us on that, please?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

We reached out to the Minister. She can't come on Wednesday. She can confirm that she can be with us on March 11. That will be the second meeting after we come back from the constituency break, okay?

All that having been squared away, hopefully, let us continue—sorry.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We did state at the end of our study on coronavirus that we would visit it. I'm wondering if we could consider revisiting that in this time frame as you look at other studies that you want to do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I suspect that we will have time on Wednesday, assuming that the subcommittee works very hard and gives us a very narrow focus on what we can deal with on Wednesday. So could we perhaps invite someone to do another coronavirus briefing on Wednesday?

Have you finished?

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Dr. Powlowski.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I want to voice my agreement with that. I think things have materially changed since the last time we met to discuss the subject. I think the hope was that this was going to be confined to China and it wouldn't become a pandemic, but numbers of cases have popped up in South Korea, Iran and Italy.

I think we have to start thinking about the possibility of this being worse than we thought. Hopefully it won't get there, but I think with our previous discussions we thought or hoped that it wasn't going to become worse. I think we have to start thinking about the possibility and asking the relevant people, like Dr. Tam, about those kinds of things. We agree with you that if you want to bring.... I think I'd like Dr. Tam to come back on Wednesday to answer further questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Are we in agreement to ask for another briefing on Wednesday?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I'm hearing that we want to invite Dr. Tam and witnesses from the Public Health Agency.

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I'm not opposed to that, but I'm wondering if we can be slightly more efficient, with the Minister coming on March 11. Very often what happens is that a minister stays for one hour. I presume she's coming for an hour—I'd love her to come for two hours, and she's certainly welcome to, but typically they come for one hour and her senior officials come for the second hour.

I wonder if it would make sense to have Dr. Tam come to that meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

My understanding is that Dr. Tam will be there for that meeting, as well as other officials. I believe the Minister will be there for an hour, and then we will have the officials and, I presume, Dr. Tam for the balance of the time.

Dr. Kitchen.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I'm okay with that, except for the fact that this disease is progressing so rapidly that, after we discuss it on Wednesday, things could have changed by two Wednesdays from there when the Minister is here. At that point in time, we'd still be able to ask her questions, I think.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Mr. Powlowski.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Yes, and I totally agree.

As we look at it, we're looking at the tip of the iceberg. We're two weeks behind where the epidemic is, because of the two weeks between those first contracting this disease and maybe showing symptoms. It's a little worse right now than what it appears, or what we're seeing in terms of the statistics. I agree, and at times governments act as governments—that is, very slowly. This is something that's happening quickly. If we wait and don't do it this week, then we have a week off and there's another week, and we're two weeks further behind. We have to start asking the questions now and not wait.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

We've already signalled a general agreement to do this on Wednesday. We want to invite Dr. Tam. Is that correct? Anybody else? Any other department? Global Affairs Canada, perhaps?