Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In order to maintain the public's confidence and support when it comes to the Public Health Agency's guidelines and messages, the agency has to act in a consistent manner and, as Dr. Tam said, apply the precautionary principle.
The last time we met, three countries had decided to suspend use of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Back then, the agency and Health Canada were saying that it was just three countries, that the cases were not that serious, and that Canada would keep using the vaccine.
I've lost count of all the attempts made to save the AstraZeneca vaccine and keep the same messaging out there. Nevertheless, had we suspended use of the vaccine and waited for the European Medicines Agency to come out with its decision, it would have saved a lot of wasted breath and defensive communications. Not to mention, it would have fostered greater public confidence.
It would have been clear that the authorities were being proactive and applying the precautionary principle. We were not proactive and we did not apply the precautionary principle, undermining the very principle we wanted to uphold. Instead, we went against it. Public fears about receiving the vaccine have emerged. Conversely, when the vaccine was offered to people 55 and older in Quebec, without an appointment, we did see an appetite for it. However, it was thanks to the fact that they did not need an appointment.
Since then, the appetite for the vaccine has dropped significantly. Vaccination clinics are nowhere near full, even when people don't have to have an appointment. It pays to take a cautious approach so as not to produce the opposite effect. A mistake was made, and recognizing that is important.
Dr. Tam, can you explain how the variants work to help us understand what's going on right now? How are we seeing so much variant spread when we are taking so many precautions and when the government claims to be strictly enforcing measures and controls? Do you have any data that would tell us more about the main hot spots?