Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House today and discuss this motion. Just to review it, the motion is:
That the House recognize the devastation that Ebola is wreaking in Western Africa and the serious threat to public health that the virus could pose to Canada; and call on the Minister of Health, the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada, and the Minister of Public Safety to appear before the Standing Committee on Health twice monthly to report on Canada’s efforts at home and abroad to ensure that the outbreak does not pose a threat to the health and safety of Canadians.
That is the motion we are looking at. The attempt from the Liberal Party here is to have these people come to the health committee, of which I am a member, and report back to the committee twice a month until, I guess, further notice. There is no start time and there is no end time. There is nothing in the motion that mentions that the minister of development, who could also be a liaison, should appear.
I really disagree basically with the entire portion of the motion. The reason I say this is that the Health Canada website lists everything that it is doing. It is right there in real time. The minister and the Chief Public Health Officer have held press conferences. They have put out press releases. It is in the news every evening, so the information is out there and it is getting to Canadians. All of the provinces are working together. They are working with the minister and with the local public health units.
In Ontario, the Liberal government and the Liberal minister, Dr. Eric Hoskins, actually complimented the minister on television a few days ago. They pointed out what a great working relationship they have on this issue and how provinces, ministers, public servants, health officials, and everybody involved are working to make sure that Ebola does not come to Canada but, most importantly, that if it does, they have the ability to recognize it, detect it, treat it, and make sure that the health care officials who are providing front-line care are protected when doing their job.
It is an important comment when we hear someone from a different party from ours complimenting, rising above partisanship, and stating the facts on what is taking place.
That is what I feel. I feel as well that a lot of this is about recognizing the roles of the federal government, the provinces, the local health units, and the local hospitals. All these areas are doing their jobs and are working collaboratively. Just the other day, the federal response team was in Nova Scotia doing a trial run. That is a further example of how each level of government and each agency is working to make sure it is done correctly.
We have been doing what has been asked of us by the WHO. We have delivered, both in dollars and in the personal protective equipment that we have sent over. We have been there. Obviously, we want to work with the WHO to make sure that we are addressing the issues in Africa and that we are trying to contain the issues there so that they do not spread to Canada. Travel advisories have obviously been set up. With other air traffic coming into Canada, direct flights are not available in many cases.
These are important facts to show what we have done, but let us get back to the point about the actual process that the Liberal Party brought forward on this motion.
To my mind, the committee is maybe not the best avenue for this work to be done. I will point out why. It is because of the way the committees are set up in the Standing Orders. Basically the minister, the Chief Public Health Officer, and the Minister of Public Safety would be there, and they would each have 10 or 15 minutes to present their information.
All that information is already in the public domain. It is available. The Liberal Party would have seven minutes to ask questions.
Canadians are being informed. That is the point: Canadians are being informed. Anything that would be presented in committee is already in the public domain.
If members of Parliament, specifically the Liberal members, need information or want information, the minister literally sits right across from them. If they had a question, they could come over and ask it during question period. They know all the minister's staff, and they could contact the staff. The information is flowing. There is not a problem with information. All the information is in the public domain.
The other important thing is that we are not resting on our laurels. We are working, as I said, with the World Health Organization, but we are also monitoring, very closely, what is taking place in Texas. We are working with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to make sure that if there are any areas for improvement, we are taking those actions.
It is important to recognize that there can always be improvement. We can always do better. We can always find ways to make those important front-line health care officials as safe as possible, because we do know how this disease is transmitted.
One thing I wanted to talk about here with prepared notes was one of the institutes, the Institute of Infection and Immunity, or III, which supports research and helps build research capacity in the areas of infectious disease and the body's immune system.
In addition to supporting research, III plays an important role on infectious disease issues in Canada, including helping to coordinate Canada's rapid research response to infectious disease outbreaks, especially those caused by new and emerging pathogens.
To respond to these emerging threats, CIHR III has led the effort to strengthen Canada's vaccine research landscape through strategic investments, leadership, and partnership activities. For example, starting in 2006, CIHR III led the development of the pandemic preparedness strategic response initiative, and our government made an investment of $21.5 million.
A lot of these investments were made some time ago so that we would be prepared as a country to protect our citizens from these outbreaks.
Tremendous leadership in developing this initiative was shown by forming linkages and building partnerships with provincial, federal, and international stakeholders. As I mentioned earlier in my comments, these partnerships increased the total amount of funds available for research from $21.5 million to $43.3 million. This investment allowed CIHR to support more than 92 projects involving 345 researchers across the country.
The projects supported through this initiative produced a variety of research and commercialization outcomes. For example, over a third of the projects researching vaccines and immunization produced results that could lead to a new drug or vaccine.
There is no doubt about it: we have done a great job in working with our partners, both abroad and locally. All should be commended on this point.
I do have an amendment to the motion.
I move, seconded by the member for Yukon, that the motion be amended by replacing the words “the relevant minister and ministers to appear twice monthly” with “the Minister of Health” and replacing the word “monthly” with “as soon as possible”.
I will now take questions.