Evidence of meeting #54 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was contracts.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I didn't want to interrupt our colleague, but now that she's finished the first part of her questioning, I just want clarification. I think that a staff member handed—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Yes.
Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, in the future, when you have documents for witnesses—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I understand, but in the future, it will have to go through our clerk so that we can be absolutely certain that it's in both official languages.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. Fragiskatos, your point is well taken.
All documents need to come through the clerk before they are passed on to witnesses. In this case, it was just the motion. I appreciate that, but we do want to make sure that we operate so that we're all aware of what's being passed to witnesses. I appreciate your restraint on that, Mr. Fragiskatos, as well.
Next is Mr. Desjarlais.
You have the floor for six minutes, please.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I too want to thank the representatives from the several companies who are present with us today.
For the record, I do want to read into the record the important absence of AstraZeneca Canada, which is not represented here today. Canadians do deserve, as a matter of fact, to have these individuals who are doing business in our country, particularly on something so serious, be present for accountability.
I want to mention how disappointed I am in that fact, but how pleased I am to see that there are representatives willing, in this country, to participate in our public institutions in a way that can build confidence for Canadians, because that is what we are doing here today. That is the work of public accounts, and that is the work that parliamentarians are tasked with. I hope you can sympathize that, beyond your own confidentiality purposes or purposes to secure company confidentiality, our purpose here is to ensure that the proper amount of light is shed on the kinds of things that can assure that we both can achieve our means: the public scrutiny that's required on behalf of parliamentarians, and, of course, the work you folks have in running the operations of your business.
I want to make specific mention as well of the fact that this was an extraordinary circumstance. I do acknowledge that fact. This is a once-in-a-100-year pandemic, and it required swift and immediate action by the government, which is something that New Democrats called for and some of the many members of the opposition called for. I also want to recognize that important fact.
I also want to recognize the fact that several companies, many of them present here today, also acted swiftly to ensure the needs of Canadians, particularly in the production of vaccines and their quality to ensure that Canadians were protected. The matter of science is quite ingenious in many ways, so thank you to your scientists and to the many good doctors and researchers who made these life-saving, miracle vaccines possible so Canadians can enjoy moments such that we are having right now, returning to our duties in Parliament, for example, which is one of the very things that I'm proud that vaccines have been able to achieve for us.
However, I do want to distinguish between my comments in relation to the advent and importance of science in Canada and the difference between science and corporations. Corporations are a different entity in Canada, and corporations should not be seen to have any extraordinary powers in the sense that they could circumvent the will of the public and particularly the will of governments and the will of our Parliament.
I'm really happy to see that the law clerk is present here today. I want to thank the law clerk for his letter describing what is important to this committee and how we can ensure that we can utilize our powers here to do both, to ensure that we have accountability and light shed on the work that we're doing while simultaneously protecting the confidentiality of these companies.
Maybe I could ask the law clerk to clarify his letter or maybe even to repeat how the process that was moved by the motion from my honourable colleague is, in fact, a process of confidentiality that has been taken by committees and has, in fact, demonstrated confidentiality in other cases.
Could you comment on the efficiency and efficacy of that process and the comments you made in the letter?
Michel Bédard Interim Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel
As you indicated, committees have the power to send for records and papers. This power is absolute. That said, once concerns are raised respecting the confidentiality or sensitive nature of documents, the committee, of course, can put measures in place with a view to protect the confidentiality of the information. A variety of means have been used in the past by committees.
This motion moved by Ms. Sinclair-Desgagné will make sure that the documents are consulted by members only under the supervision of the clerk, without any cellphones or any other electronic devices. When the committee considers these documents, they are considered at an in camera meeting.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much for that.
My question is to the witnesses now. In relation to what you've heard in terms of the powers of Parliament in order to ensure that these things are.... We deal with serious issues here, not many beyond the seriousness of COVID but also issues of national security. These are processes that we have undertaken before to ensure the protection of national security information. It becomes a matter of whether or not you trust our Parliament in many ways. It's important that Canadians understand that we're having a relationship with corporations that should in fact be able to comply with the rules and regulations in Canada, but also to comply with the democratic process.
My question directly, and I'll follow up in some subsequent rounds....
I also want to make mention of the fact that I am very pleased to hear the member from Medicago is willing to release that information. I think that's important to our process. Your willingness demonstrates your ability and knowledge of our system.
To the other witnesses, are you not confident in the processes we utilize in this place to ensure that we have confidentiality needs protected?
Maybe we'll go through all the present witnesses first.
General Manager, Vaccines, Sanofi Canada
I respect your position, but I maintain that Sanofi doesn't want the contract information disclosed to the committee. We believe it's a matter of balancing the need for transparency with the need to respect the confidentiality of the contract.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
The confidentiality measures are present there, so either you're not recognizing those confidentiality aspects or you don't want to do it.
General Manager, Vaccines, Sanofi Canada
We believe that the role and mission of the Auditor General of Canada and her office have been respected—
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
I'm not asking about the Auditor General's office. I'm asking about Parliament.
General Manager, Vaccines, Sanofi Canada
I read through the Auditor General of Canada's website. It says—
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Actually, Mr. Desjarlais, you're out of time. Why don't we let him finish?
You are out of time, so—
General Manager, Vaccines, Sanofi Canada
I have to say that the Auditor General reports to Parliament. Sanofi has been transparent, and we believe that we've provided the information we felt we needed to provide.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I'm sorry, Mr. Desjarlais. You were on the money with the time, but I figured it was best to get an answer before moving on.
We'll now commence our second round.
Mr. McCauley, you have the floor for five minutes, please.
