Yes.
Evidence of meeting #18 for Health in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vaccines.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #18 for Health in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vaccines.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Is the committee square on what the amendment is?
Therefore, the discussion is on the amendment. Is there any discussion on the amendment?
Mr. Kelloway, Dr. Powlowski and Mr. Thériault, you have your hands up. Is this on the amendment or is this otherwise?
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Could I clarify what exactly the amendment is? I'm sorry. Maybe I wasn't paying enough attention.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes. In Mr. Barlow's motion, in the last paragraph, we'll make sure that the documents are tabled in both official languages. We'll have, in the second line of the last paragraph, “that the documents, in both official languages, be vetted in accordance”.
It's to make sure that those documents will be in both official languages.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
It could very well connect to the motion and the amendment. I'm just looking—for my purposes, in thinking this through—for clarification on whether these things.... Are we suggesting that these go in camera? Is that what I'm hearing? I just want clarification on what it looks like when we consider these documents in camera.
I'm just looking for some clarification through you or through the clerk or from whomever.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
I was going to speak to the motion itself, but I can speak to the amended motion and we can talk all day—no, no, I'm going to address the amendment that—
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Just let me clarify, please.
We're not talking about the amended motion, because the motion is not yet amended. We're talking about the amendment now.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Still, I'm going to speak to the same thing. Again, we have all day.
There is genuine concern about revealing the details of the contract. Many of you are aware that I believe in the importance of transparency of government. I believe, as much as possible, in revealing unredacted documents.
However, with respect to the vaccine contracts, this is obviously a very difficult area. Certainly, the pharmaceutical companies and the producers of vaccines don't want these documents revealed. Where they have been revealed, and we've heard that there have been instances where other countries.... The EU has revealed details of its contracts, but in fact those were heavily redacted. There is also the concern that if a vaccine producer finds out the details of the contract provisions of another vaccine producer, they're going to want their contract changed and they're going to want better provisions as well.
This is a very sensitive issue, because we're at their mercy. We don't produce vaccines ourselves. We have put down a lot of money and down the road we probably will put more.... I know the Conservatives have supported some initiatives to produce vaccines in Canada, and it was certainly the desire of Canada. We have put over $200 million into various producers—I count at least four or five different vaccine producers in Canada—to try to develop our own vaccine. However, we're not there yet. It was a global race. In fact, a whole bunch of companies won the gold medal, but unfortunately none of them were in Canada.
We are dependent on the vaccine producers. It doesn't seem to me very prudent right now to be doing something that could undermine our position with respect to the vaccine producers. We've heard it repeatedly today, and I certainly agree that this is by far the most important issue facing not only Canada but also the world. We want to get this right. I'm not sure this is a really good idea right now—when we're dependent on other people for a very necessary good that all Canadians want—to be doing something that's going to potentially jeopardize our relationship with them.
We're not going to support this underlying motion.
I said, I would eventually get to the amendment. As to it being in French, sure. Of course. Everything should be in both official languages; that's important. We can debate this, and then we can go on to the other motion and debate that for a long time as well.
For genuine reasons, because this is of concern, I don't really think this is an issue that we ought to be politicizing. I don't think this is a good way of scoring points off our government in fighting this fight, because I don't think it is in the best interests of Canadians right now to have this revealed and to create this controversy.
In the last paragraph of your motion as it is, to require the companies to—
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Dr. Powlowski, I advise you to please direct your comments through the chair.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Okay, Mr. Chair. You're perfectly correct.
I would point out that the last paragraph of the motion is requiring the vaccine companies, I believe, to produce the details of the contract. We still have to work out the details of national security interests, about translation and about holding things in camera, but this is going into the bull arena and waving a red flag at the bull that says we want your contractual obligations revealed to the health committee.
Do you really want to do that when we're all depending on the vaccines? I mean, you're all telling us how important it is.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Mr. Chair, I would question whether it's really in the interests of Canadians to be antagonizing the vaccine industry at this time. We want to be really prudent on this. I'm not sure this motion is really a good idea and something to support.
In terms of making it in French, absolutely. Let's make it in French.
Thanks.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Mr. Chair, I would not want to do your job, but I remind you that we are dealing with the amendment. Yet, you tolerate a lot of comments that relate to the motion itself.
[Technical difficulty—Editor]
I don't want to keep people from talking, but it seems to me that we should focus on the amendment.
Also, I don't know if the clerk has read the amendment correctly so that it is clear where the proposed wording is inserted. I just didn't hear him. As a courtesy, he was speaking French. Since I too use the French channel, that is probably why the volume was not adequate.
My amendment is inserted immediately after the word "suppliers," then there is a comma, and the text continues.
Is that where it is inserted?
12:20 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes, that's right. It will be "in both official languages."
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
It's perfect. Then I am ready for the amendment to be put to the vote.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Monsieur Thériault, my understanding—and perhaps I didn't hear correctly the wording the clerk read—is that in English the paragraph would be modified to say “seven vaccine agreements with suppliers be tabled with the committee in both official languages, that the documents be vetted”, and so forth.
Is that correct, Mr. Clerk?
12:20 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes. That's in the French. I'll have to check the English, but the spirit of the motion is to make sure that everything will be in both official languages.
For the French version and the English, I will make sure that everything will be okay.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Still on the amendment, I know these motions and the amendments are read off the floor, but they're not necessarily circulated through email in English, let alone in French. I often think of Mr. Thériault, who, being the sole francophone on the committee, always has to be so patient on this committee with things coming off the floor in English. I have done this in the past as well. I've moved amendments off the floor in English and, of course, not had them written down.
Not to go back and forth with Mr. Thériault, Mr. Chair, but I don't have a sense of what the amendment is saying and where it comes in. Mr. Thériault said it comes after the word “suppliers”. I think Mr. Thériault has a handful of motions that he is hoping to move someday at this committee as well to make things more fair and level and to balance the playing field to make sure that everything is in English and in French.
I ask you, Mr. Chair, or to the clerk through the chair, is this amendment, in English and in French, presented to us and to Mr. Thériault? It has been said a few times, but I am not scribbling it down as it's being read. Is there a way of having this sent out in English and in French, or is Mr. Thériault confident in what's there in the amendment?