Health Committee on April 30th, 2026

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

You answered the question, Mr. Kochhar, and the answer was yes.

If the planning was sound, why is the centre's closure being postponed to March 2028?

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

Since this is a three-year comprehensive expenditure review, one of the things we have done over time is planned for it to go into March 2028. Hence, we have used our ability to allow people to continue to be employed up to that time. In between that, we will do planning, as well as re-profiling this work to all the other laboratory networks we have.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

I'm trying to understand, Mr. Kochhar.

Do you still stand by the statement your colleague made on March 12, claiming that closing this lab posed no risk and that, supposedly, all the expertise that was available at the Longueuil lab was already available at another lab in the country?

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

I need to mention that this work is done in different laboratories. As I said, we have a laboratory network.

I'll give an example, for ease. The Longueuil lab detects marine biotoxins. We have a capacity in Burnaby and Dartmouth, which both perform similar tasks. Basically, moving the work over there would be an important piece for us. We're planning for that. Similarly, allergen testing is conducted at the Burnaby laboratory and other western laboratories, so we'll use that laboratory network.

There will be other things that we may not be able to immediately identify and may not be in the mandate. We are working towards that, in a planning way.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Kochhar, could you be more specific?

The closure of a centre is being postponed by two years. This isn't just a matter of transferring employees.

Can you explain what led to this decision? I'm particularly interested in why the announcement was made a few days before the originally scheduled closure date.

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

I need to respectfully mention that the intent was to close our part of Longueuil laboratory in 2028. The letters that were sent out were actually sent out as “surplus”. However, realizing that creates anxiety, and although the date was to be 2028, we have moved them to “affected” status, which means that they will still have employment continuing on.

At the Longueuil laboratory, the CFIA operation is going to be closed. The laboratory belongs to Health Canada. Those other aspects at the Longueuil laboratory will continue to happen.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Kochhar, why haven't the analyses that were promised to the committee on March 12 been submitted? We haven't received anything yet.

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

We could provide you with more of a concise response to that in a written format, if that is what is being asked for by the committee.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

I'll be happy to assist you in that, Mr. Kochhar.

Mr. Chair, I hereby give notice that I will be introducing a motion. The committee requested information more than a month and a half ago and it is still waiting for a response. We have been getting bits and pieces of information from the media. I believe it is important to reassure the public regarding food safety.

In order to get a comprehensive, data-driven picture, I move the following motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee order the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) to table, within 21 calendar days, the following documents, unredacted: 1. All analyses, assessments, scientific opinions, and public health risk analyses, including preliminary and internal versions, that led or contributed to the decision to close, postpone, suspend, or modify the closure of the Longueuil laboratory; 2. The capacity analyses and the plan for transferring activities to other laboratories, including those related to food allergens, nutritional analysis, and marine biotoxins; 3. All internal or external correspondence related, directly or indirectly, to this decision, including communications with the minister's office and with Health Canada; 4. Any assessment of the impacts on Canada's international obligations and on access to export markets; 5. Any analysis concerning business continuity and risk management; 6. A complete chronology of decisions, including: a) the decision that led to the issuance of notices to employees in January 2026; b) the information available at the time of the testimony of Mr. Ianiro before the committee on March 12, 2026; c) any developments that led to the postponement announced on April 24, 2026; That these documents be submitted to the clerk of the committee, and that all confidential information be provided, under seal, to the members of the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

The clerk does not have the motion, but I have a speakers list that I have to honour.

Mr. Mazier, please go ahead.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the member for introducing this motion. I guess this is how transparency is going to work.

I can't believe that you actually have to take the time to put through a motion in this committee to beg for information on what's going on here. I congratulate you wholeheartedly for doing this.

This is after 10 years of cover-up. The Liberals have had how many years to do this? Even the new government—supposedly so, as they call themselves the new government—has had a year to come up with this information. It's unbelievable.

We'll see what happens here, but I wholeheartedly support this motion. Hopefully, we'll get some answers to your questions and get to bottom of it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Mr. Mazier.

It's Madam Konanz, and then Madam Chi.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Following up on that, I want to support the point that when we as a committee ask for information and transparency, we should receive information or documents. There are many documents that we have ordered as a committee that we have not yet received, or our requests for them were voted down by our Liberal colleagues.

It's important that we receive as many documents as we can so that we can let Canadians know how their dollars are being spent, particularly in health care. Obviously, from our first year as a committee, we see that we are lacking so many things in health care, such as doctors, health clinics and specialists.

This is important. This committee should vote for any documents required by or asked for by a member so that we can receive them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

I just want to be clear to the honourable members that the clerk has not received the text of the motion.

Madam Chi.

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I thank my colleague for bringing forward a motion. Based on what I've heard, it is fairly substantive, and we haven't had time to read it on our side. It would be great to consider the clauses within the motion. I think the honourable member—who is online—and folks around this table would agree with that. When we are considering matters at hand, it would be great to see them, especially when they're substantive.

We have witnesses here today. We've barely gotten through one witness, and there is another witness waiting in the committee room. Out of respect for our witnesses today, I move to adjourn the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Clerk, take the vote, please. It is to adjourn the debate on the motion.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

I'm going back to the witness now. The next round will be three minutes, three minutes, a minute and a half, three minutes and three minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Chair, I just want to let you know that I still had some time left before I introduced my motion. As you know, under the standing orders, speaking time—

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

You have two minutes left.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you for respecting my speaking time, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Kochhar, since we have yet to receive any helpful answers from the government, I would like to ask you the following question.

A former national manager at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency said that it's unrealistic to believe that food safety can be maintained while closing the Longueuil lab.

Do you dispute this assessment, yes or no?

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

I would say that the whole mandate of CFIA is food safety. That is our top priority. We do not compromise on food safety, animal health and plant health. Any of those decisions are taken into consideration, keeping in mind that there are other programs or other ways to reduce redundancy and duplication and still deliver for Canadians.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Kochhar, is there a laboratory in Canada today that has the same level of expertise as the one in Longueuil?

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

We have 13 laboratories at CFIA, including the Longueuil lab, and we have varied expertise in different labs. I mentioned the Dartmouth lab and the Burnaby lab, where we can actually have similar testing done. If there are things that we believe are not in the mandate of CFIA, we will have to look at industry, provincial labs and others that are partnering with us in any of these situations.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Kochhar, international standards require that biotoxin analyses be completed within 72 hours.

Can you guarantee that these deadlines will be met after the Longueuil laboratory closes?

Is there another laboratory in Canada capable of meeting these standards?

[Harpreet S. Kochhar]

We are very cognizant of the fact that marine biotoxins have to be tested in a very timely manner, and we are working towards making sure that the service standard does not go down.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?