Debates of Oct. 22nd, 2020

Opposition Motion—Instruction to the Standing Committee on Health

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, when evaluating one's actions, it is important to have all the evidence and data available.

Asking for all the data will help us make a proper judgment and better evaluate the government's response. That is just one purpose of this motion.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to reciprocate my talented colleague from Salaberry—Suroît's kind words. She is a role model for me. To work with her is to emulate her.

I want to thank the people of my riding, Manicouagan. I have not had the opportunity to do so yet. We have been very fortunate on the North Shore. Throughout the whole COVID pandemic, we have had only about 150 cases. I want to congratulate the folks back home who follow the public health guidelines and encourage them to not give up. Just because we have no cases does not mean we can let our guard down.

I also want to thank all the health care workers. Although we have had few cases in my region, they are always on duty.

I also want to thank everyone who has come up with smart, innovative and creative solutions. That is exactly what we need during a crisis like this one.

I have to say, tody's topic is of particular interest to me. We are talking about health and the crisis. I am a person with my own story. I come from a family of individuals who have worked in health care. There are a lot of nurses in my circles.

My mother is a nurse. All my life, I have heard people talk about the health care system and its pressing needs. I am now in my forties, and I was hearing about that when I was five, seven or eight years old. I am still hearing about it now, and I think the needs are becoming increasingly desperate. If I might pay tribute to my mother, at one point, the needs were so dire that she was thinking of quitting her job for her own health. The health care system is clearly in a terrible state. These people are committed. As I have said before, it is a calling.

I support the motion before us today. I would like to see a comprehensive study of the government's actions during the crisis. That is the opposition's role. As I was thinking about what I would say today, I decided to reiterate some of my remarks. On too many occasions in this Parliament, I have risen because attempts were being made to silence the opposition. The Liberals did not want to talk about WE Charity, so they prorogued the House. Now they do not want us to adopt a motion to examine the government's actions because they do not want to talk about that.

The government is always trying to avoid dialogue, which is the cornerstone of democracy. This is where one side has one way of thinking, and the other side has another way of thinking. There needs to be a discussion. As my colleague from Salaberry—Suroît pointed out, we need to be able to ask the tough questions and dig deeper. We always need to push further, but the Liberals will not let us.

In the past few weeks and months, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and government members in general have not stopped going on about how this is the biggest crisis Canada has faced since the Second World War, from 1939 to 1945.

This is the biggest crisis, a time when we should be assessing how we can improve and how we can save lives, but the government refuses to talk about what it did. We are not trying to make improvements just for the sake of it. People are depending on us. We must be responsible.

I have spoken about my past, my own personal story. I want to point out that members in the House come from different backgrounds. I have a teaching background, having taught at the CEGEP level. I cannot help but draw a parallel to my own experience and what I do as a teacher. My colleague drew the same parallel to her experience as a manager.

One of my roles as a teacher is to correct students. It is not always fun, because I have to focus and ask myself what the person might have been thinking, what they had access to, and what they were able to do in order to objectively and thoroughly assess the assignment. The purpose of all that is for the student to achieve certain objectives. I do that with students aged 17 to 21 who are heading to university. I prepare them for starting university. I ensure that they acquire the necessary knowledge.

We have a government that is managing the second-biggest crisis in history, but it does not even want to check or find out or be told if it has done something wrong or if it could be doing better. It says we cannot do anything because we are in the middle of the second wave. There are people who may die of COVID-19.

Exams are not fatal, fortunately, but if I had a second exam next week, I would certainly want to know what I did right in the first exam and what I can do to improve.

As elected members, we have a responsibility, but we must also be humble. Humility enables us to learn and grow in order to do better moving forward. That is truly the role of the opposition, which I will talk about more later, but the analogy is appropriate. I believe that the government should learn its lesson, because no one is above learning from the past. That is what it should do, and fast.

I will say this again, because as a teacher, I believe that repetition can make the message stick. The Bloc Québécois decided to vote against the throne speech because of the health transfer issue.

Premier Legault asked for a significant increase in the health transfer, because year after year, the federal government has been shirking its responsibilities to a significant degree. The concept of responsibility will come up many times, I believe.

The federal government's share of health care used to be 50% and used to cover 50% of Quebec's health expenditures, but its share has been shrinking steadily and is now just 21%. Health care is not a federal responsibility, it is the jurisdiction of the provinces and Quebec. Despite what the premiers are asking for, and regardless of what previous governments did, the current federal government is shirking its responsibilities.

Then it stands up and lectures us. I find that arrogant, insulting and disrespectful towards our constituents, and I will explain why. It lectures us and tells us that it saved us. It is playing the saviour.

Let me suggest an analogy, a dramatic one. Imagine if I were to starve a child, give them nothing to eat, even though I am responsible for feeding them, and then accuse them of being hungry. That is what the feds were doing with other governments. The federal government told Quebec that it sent in the army to help because Quebec was utterly incapable of taking care of its own people. Outwardly, this was a show of kindness and generosity on the part of the federal government, but there was really nothing generous about it.

They cause the problem, and then they decide to be the solution. Maybe their goal is just to interfere where they do not belong or, as the leader of the Bloc Québécois adroitly pointed out, maybe they just want to be able to put a little Canadian flag on a cheque and send it off to reinforce the impression that Canada is the one in charge of people's health.

The thing is, that is Quebec's responsibility. The nurses and all the other health care workers work for Quebec. Quebec pays, but Ottawa is withholding Quebec's money.

Eventually, the system will break down, because we have an aging population. Not only has there been a shortfall for many years now, but the aging population will create additional needs, so the transfers will need to be increased even more. Add the COVID-19 crisis on top of that, and it is easy to imagine how far off the mark we are.

I have not said half of what I wanted to say. I could go on and on, but I will wrap up now.

In the House today, in response to questions about what is going on at the University of Ottawa, the Prime Minister once again pretended that the problem does not exist. If nobody mentions it, there is no problem. It was the same with the WE Charity scandal and with the Aga Khan. These problems simply do not exist, because the Prime Minister says so. I do not know what happens in committee, but when it comes to health care, just because we are not talking about a problem does not mean it does not exist.

As I enjoy literature, I would like to quote a passage from 1984 by George Orwell:

And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, I just love the fire of the member. She gets me fired up every day. It is great.

I have a really interesting question for her. It is my understanding that right now the Liberals are filibustering their own motion in the official languages committee so they will not get to the Bloc motion. The Liberals are shutting down any parliamentary accountability whatsoever. I wonder if the wonderful colleague could use her fire to tell us if she thinks this is appropriate and if Parliament should be able to do its job.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I am going to admit to something else: I greatly admire my colleague, who is so energetic and animated. She is a strong woman.

I obviously do not want someone to decide to use power to silence the opposition parties and put limits on the work we do. That is what the Liberals have done from the beginning. I am still wondering why they were surprised when we told them that we have absolutely no confidence in them these days. The Leader of the Government was surprised, and I think almost everyone on the other side of the House was surprised. One need only see what is happening in every committee. The Liberals want to undermine democracy and silence the opposition. I have no confidence in them.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is nice to see the Conservatives and the Bloc bonding and solidifying their support.

My question for the member is based on what the member for Calgary Nose Hill said in committee not that long ago, “but I think it behooves all committee members to remember that the committee is the master of its own destiny, and therefore, we are entrusted to take on studies that can look at anything we want.” This is what the person who introduced the motion we are debating today said previously. It seems to be a contradiction. It is okay for Conservatives to filibuster in a committee if they do not like what is happening there, but, oh my God, if the Liberals do it, it is undemocratic. I see a bit of hypocrisy there.

I wonder if the Bloc recognizes the obvious. One cannot say, yes, the committees set their own agenda and then bring forward a motion saying that instead of the committee doing one report, it is going to do 14-plus reports. That is hypocrisy.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I would respond by asking him how we are supposed to have confidence in a government that is mired in scandals. There were the situations with the Aga Khan, WE Charity and the Liberalist for judicial appointments, and then Frank Baylis was awarded a contract through a shell corporation. Did I hear something about a contradiction?

I will always side with democracy. I may contradict myself occasionally, but I will always fight for democracy. At the risk of repeating myself, I do not have confidence in this government.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member talking about her sister who works in health care. We all need to acknowledge her sacrifice, especially during COVID-19.

This motion is pretty straightforward. It asks the health committee to study the emergency situation facing Canadians in light of the second wave of COVID-19.

The member lives in Quebec where there are red zones. She knows how important it is that we look at the plans and preparations the government has made on the pandemic, the communications it has had with the WHO, the purchase of personal protective equipment or the purchase of testing products used to diagnose those with COVID-19. Our request has been to release all records related to the COVID-19 vaccine task force.

Given the importance of a safe and effective vaccine for addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, does the hon. member agree that Canadians deserve details on the government's vaccine distribution strategy, especially right now when people are hopefully getting ready for some vaccines that are going to be approved soon, and let us cross our fingers on that, and the government's plan for that? This is a reasonable request.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be brief. I agree with my hon. colleague.

As responsible parliamentarians, we, of course, ask the government to be transparent and give us access to reliable information we can use to keep people safe and healthy. We need this kind of information very quickly. We are talking about the health and safety of everyone.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Speaker, first off the top, I would like to note that I will be splitting my time with the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek.

Today, as Canada and the world continue to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, Conservative opposition members find ourselves once again fighting to do our jobs as parliamentarians. We are fighting for an accountable and ethical government. We are fighting for Canadians to get the answers that they deserve. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister and his Liberal government yet again continue to fight us every step of the way.

The motion we are considering today would allow the health committee to thoroughly study and evaluate the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and present its findings to the House. This is at a time when Canadians need answers and confidence in their government. The necessity of the motion should be indisputable. It is a motion that could and should have been settled at the health committee, but the Prime Minister's Liberal members of Parliament have been hard at work preventing the adoption of this motion.

They have wasted time filibustering and coming up with any excuse to shut down the health committee meetings. This is the same behaviour that we have also seen at the ethics and finance committees ironically, and it is disrespectful to all Canadians who are facing so much uncertainty. It is disrespectful to all Canadians who have been asked to and have sacrificed so much.

There is a troubling pattern with the Liberal government that started well before this pandemic. The Liberals have repeatedly shown disdain for Parliament and the duties of parliamentarians. This is a Prime Minister who has so much to hide that he threatened an election just this week to avoid the formation of a special committee to review the WE Charity scandal. In what seems to be an effort to avoid accountability at all costs, we have had a prorogation, a resignation, hours of filibustering and threats of sending Canadians to the polls.

The Prime Minister claims that he wants to focus on the pandemic. If that is sincere, then there should be no reason to obstruct the motion. We are already seeing rising numbers of COVID cases in Canada this fall, and Canadians need confidence that there is a plan to navigate us through this pandemic and beyond. However, this government has failed to demonstrate that it has any kind of plan.

The Prime Minister claimed to have prorogued Parliament so that he could deliver a throne speech with a detailed path forward. As we know, that proved not to be true. There is no detailed plan to keep Canadians safe and healthy, and there is no real plan to keep our economy going. In fact, the Prime Minister has now broken a record for the longest stretch in Canadian history without the federal government presenting a budget. Canadians deserve to know exactly what decisions have been made by this government and based on what evidence. They need to know that the Liberals are learning from their failures in this pandemic.

The Prime Minister would prefer to compare Canada to countries that are faring the worst so that he can pat himself on the back. That low bar fails Canadians, and none more so than Canada's seniors who have been the hardest hit in this pandemic.

Long-term care homes have been at the epicentre of this health crisis in Canada. The Canadian Institute for Health Information released an analysis in the spring that painted a clear picture of the devastation in long-term care. Long-term care residents accounted for 81% of COVID deaths in Canada. Compare that with the average of 38% in other OECD countries, and it is more than double our international counterparts. That is the standard we need to measure ourselves against, not those who are doing worse. We need to understand how other countries manage better in long-term care homes and work in collaboration with provinces to quickly adopt better measures. We owe that to Canada's seniors living in long-term care, their families and those working in these facilities.

That same Canadian Institute for Health Information analysis identified prevention measures taken in countries with fewer infections and deaths in long-term care, which included infection control measures, broad testing, increased training, isolation wards to manage clusters, increased staffing and access to personal protective equipment. When we consider those prevention measures, we already know that Canada is not up to par.

Well before the pandemic, long-term care voices were asking for infrastructure investment and raising the alarm on staffing shortages. We have seen these issues exacerbated during this pandemic, and we have all read the heartbreaking reports on the conditions in some of these care facilities.

However, what actions have really been taken in the immediate term to protect seniors living in care? Long-term care voices are still asking for stable access to adequate personal protective equipment. They are asking for regular and mass testing. They are asking for a plan to ensure the effective delivery of a vaccine. The Liberal government has not been forthcoming with a concrete plan to ensure their health and safety.

Either the Liberals have a plan and do not believe they need to be transparent about it or there is no plan. Canadians need answers.

While this motion would allow the health committee to ensure that there are real-time lessons learned to help improve our response to the pandemic, it would give the committee direction to study, evaluate, review and examine the government's response. It covers testing procurement, vaccine development, the efficiency of long-term care protocols, the adequacy of health transfers, levels of preparedness and so much more. It would also compel the government to produce documents in relation to the decisions that it has already taken during the pandemic.

The comprehensive motion is necessary and it is completely within the health committee's purview. This is an opportunity for the government to work with Parliament to improve its response and to ensure transparency.

The notion that the Liberal government would throw so much effort at blocking this motion at committee is troubling. The Liberals' all out efforts to prevent this motion raises so many questions. What do they have to hide? Why are they trying so hard to prevent Canadians from getting answers? What is so incriminating in the documents that they do not want Canadians to see it? What happened to the team Canada approach?

We already know that the Liberals were slow to close the borders. They closed Canada's early pandemic warning system. They failed to maintain our emergency stockpile of personal protective equipment. They sent critical personal protective equipment to China when we did not have enough in Canada. They flip-flopped on the use of masks. They failed to keep up with our allies in the procurement and approval of rapid testing. We are lagging behind on securing COVID-19 vaccines.

What more do the Liberals have to hide that their Liberal members of Parliament on the health committee would spend hours filibustering and playing games to prevent this motion from passing? The more they protest, the more pressing it seems to become that there is greater need for accountability and transparency surrounding their COVID-19 response.

The Liberal government's failures cost Canadians their livelihoods and cost some them their lives. At a minimum, the Liberals should be willing to evaluate the lessons we have learned from those failures, not fighting the opposition tooth and nail.

The Prime Minister has asked Canadians to sacrifice a lot this year in the interest of public health, and they have. Canadians have sacrificed and they have given the government time to develop better responses.

The only solution to the pandemic cannot be to keep shutting down our economy and just hoping for the best. That is not sufficient for Canada's seniors, who have seen the highest infection and fatality rates. It is not sufficient for Canadians who are living with compromised immunity, for health care workers who are on the front lines or for our small business owners who are barely hanging on.

Rather than just cancelling Christmas, months in advance, it is time the Prime Minister demonstrate to Canadians that he has a concrete plan to navigate through and beyond this pandemic. This motion is an opportunity to demonstrate just that and to work together to improve Canada's response to this health crisis.

Let us pass the motion and get on with the work that Canadians elected us and expect us to do.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, there is nothing the government is trying to hide. The reality of the situation is that we value the contributions our civil servants make, day in and day out, as they work with Canadians in all sectors of our society, so that we can minimize the negative impact of the pandemic. It is all about the health and well-being of Canadians and our communities.

If we take a look at the games the Conservatives want to play, and I will have a chance to expand on that very shortly, this particular motion goes into a wide variety of things. We could have 12 or 14 studies from this one motion. There is a little bit of mischief at play.

I would ask the member what she is she trying to hide. Why is she trying to manipulate the situation? Why is she trying to get civil servants to do tasks over the next 14 days that would take them away from what is important to Canadians, which is combatting the pandemic?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Speaker, that was a shameful question and statement. I believe that every single one of us who has been elected to this place wants the best for our constituents.

I spoke about our seniors, who have been failed by the Liberal government. It is absolutely pathetic that the member wants to talk about political games. He is in the government that prorogued. I am sorry, but that was six weeks when we could have done work and when the government should have been doing work. It chose not to.

This is shameful. The member's remarks are shameful. They are ridiculous.

[Derek Sloan, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned certain Liberal delays and other approaches to the pandemic, which have cost Canadians their livelihoods, and even their lives.

In her opinion, does the member feel that the stall and delay tactics, which may cost us even more lives, are being done solely for the purpose of protecting themselves politically?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely agree. We were in the first wave months ago, and now we are in the second wave. Some parts of the country are at the height of the second wave.

What has been done? I sit on the HUMA committee. I was very saddened to see, when Parliament was prorogued, our study and all the work we had been doing was just done. It vanished.

I really feel that if the Liberal government truly cared about Canadians' well-being, their livelihoods and their ability to put food on the table to feed their children, Parliament would not have prorogued. At the very minimum, the throne speech could have had a plan to help get us out of this mess. Rapid testing is an example. If we—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question the member just asked our Liberal colleague about why the government prorogued the House for five weeks if it is so worried about public servants losing 14 days gathering documents. We could have been responsible and worked for the well-being of Canadians and Quebeckers, but the Liberals prorogued Parliament for five weeks.

I will now move on to my question. We are in a very difficult situation. Premier Legault said again today that we will not be able to handle 1,000 cases per day in Quebec for very long. People are dying. It is not easy. It is a well-known fact that health care has been underfunded for the past 20 years or so, but the Liberals do not seem prepared to permanently increase health transfers.

Does my colleague agree that the provinces' request to increase health care funding from 21% to 35% is legitimate?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, our long-term care homes are in crisis, in critical mode, so if anything, this crisis shows that every level of government needs to collaborate and work together. We cannot have an Ottawa-knows-best approach. That is not going to work, especially when the various jurisdictions in this country as so different from one another.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate this motion. We can all agree that it is important for accountability and transparency. We need to get the right information. To maintain public trust and combat misinformation, we have to get answers regarding the government's response to COVID-19.

Given that there are six red zones in the member's home province, COVID numbers are rapidly rising and small businesses are waiting for urgent relief through the revised programs that had flawed designs, does the member believe this is the right time to plunge the country into an election? The Liberals are now calling almost everything a motion of confidence or vote of confidence. Does she see this as a vote of confidence, and does she think we should be going to the polls in light of what is happening with the second wave?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, in my home province, all of our municipal and provincial elections are happening at the same time right now, so I do not think that is wise. I also do not think it is fair or honest for the governing party to be bullying opposition into corners and threatening to call an election. It should be transparent and be held accountable for what it is doing and what it is not doing.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, as I rise today to speak to our Conservative motion calling on the health committee to begin a large-scale review of the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, I want to note that this is the first time I have had the opportunity to give a speech in this place since the decision was made back in March to change how we function as a result of COVID-19. I also cannot help but remember all the catchphrases that have been used every day by the Prime Minister, as he sought to reassure Canadians: there will be a “whole of government response” to this pandemic; “we are team Canada”, after all; and “we are in this together”.

Here we are debating an opposition day motion calling on the Liberal government to be transparent and provide parliamentarians, and all Canadians, with answers regarding how and why decisions were made in the early days of the pandemic and to provide a concrete plan to protect their health and our economy going forward. This study will bring much-needed transparency to what has been an opaque process. It is so opaque in fact that the Liberals have blocked the health committee from accessing routine documents on pandemic readiness, PPE purchasing and rapid testing approvals.

The government has made a habit of refusing to answer even basic questions, acting offended by the very idea of being held to account. That is why we are deliberating this motion in the House today rather than at health committee, where it ought to be debated.

We know that the Prime Minister's Office directed the Liberal members of the health committee to block the release of documents on the pandemic response, documents that the government has no right to block. Those documents belong not to the Liberal government, but to the Canadian people.

There was a time when the Prime Minister understood that. On June 16, he tweeted the following, “Canadians have high expectations of me and I intend to meet them by continuing to raise the bar on transparency and openness.” He made that comment in 2013. It is safe to say that those expectations have been crushed.

This is not merely an academic debate about the role of government and its responsibility to Parliament and ultimately to the Canadian people. No, this is about people's lives and livelihoods. Canadians need clear answers on what the future holds for them, on what plans the government has made and the progress made to date.

Well over a million Canadians are out of work through no fault of their own. Millions more are working fewer hours and suffering the economic consequences, with nearly all Canadians being forced at one time or another into lives of self-isolation, which has had untold consequences on their mental health.

Are we really asking too much in requesting that the members of Parliament serving on the Standing Committee for Health review the impact of the government's use of the World Health Organization advice in early 2020 to delay the closure of borders and delay the recommendation of wearing masks; or the availability of personal protective equipment in Canada and a review of Canada's emergency stockpile of PPE, otherwise referred to as the NESS, between 2015 and present? Is it too much to ask the government to tell Canadians why they shut down the pandemic early warning system, or how long they can expect to wait before rapid testing kits are available or where we are at in the development of a vaccine and how long before it will be available? The government seems to think it is, and this has been the case all along.

From the moment the House of Commons was recessed on March 13 until today, the government has refused to be open and transparent with Canadians. Time and time again, the Conservatives have called upon the government to clearly outline its processes and address important questions regarding its response to the pandemic, and every time the Liberals have obfuscated. Canadians rightly expect the government to adhere to the highest ethical standards when it comes to the procurement of medical equipment or PPE as well as any potential vaccines or treatments and understand that these things take time.

Given the motion we are debating today, we are left to surmise, as we were after Tuesday's debate, that the government has something to hide. Perhaps the information we do know regarding vaccine procurement, for example, can help us understand why the government is vehemently opposed to transparency on these matters.

The Liberals have failed on numerous counts by placing all our eggs in one basket and that basket is China. China has repeatedly shown that it will not act in good faith. It has shut down the import of Canadian pulse crops on false pretenses. It has illegally held Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor as political prisoners for nearly two years and it has blocked medical supplies from being shipped to Canada, not to mention its abysmal human rights record toward the people of Hong Kong and minority communities within their borders such as the Uighurs.

Despite all of that, the Liberals chose China. It certainly was not for lack of other options. We had an opportunity to work on a vaccine with the University of Oxford, in a little place called the United Kingdom, one of our closest allies. Instead, their choice has left us scrambling to find alternatives and placing us at the back of the line to receive a vaccine when it finally arrives. Their troubles with a vaccine is not the only problem we know of.

With such an abysmal track record, I suppose we should not be surprised that the Liberals would avoid transparency as much as possible, but Canadians deserve better. As my colleague, the shadow minister for health said, at a time when it is very clear that the Liberals were unprepared for the second wave of the pandemic and Canadians are worried about their loved ones, their jobs and their futures, they deserve clear answers from the government.

On that note, I would like to move, seconded by the hon. member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill:

That the motion be amended by replacing paragraph (aa) with the following:

aa) minutes of meetings of the Cabinet and its committees be excluded from this order and all documents issued pursuant to this order (i) be organized by department and be provided to the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel as soon as is practicable in light of the pandemic but in any event not later than November 30th, 2020, and if this is not possible, the Clerk of the Privy Council may request an extension, of no more than seven days, by writing a letter to the committee, (ii) be vetted for matters of personal privacy information, and national security, and, with respect to paragraph (y) only, be additionally vetted for information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with contractual or other negotiations between the Government of Canada and a third party, by the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel within seven days of the receipt of the documents, (iii) be laid upon the table by the Speaker, at the next earliest opportunity, once vetted, and permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Health; and

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Members will know that for an amendment to an opposition motion to be moved, it must have the consent of the sponsor.

I, therefore, ask the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill if she consents to the moving of this amendment.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I do.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I will have to go through the amendment she put forward, but it is encouraging to a certain degree that the member is starting, at this late hour, to recognize there is a need for change. It has been overextended. In fact, I would ultimately argue that this would have been better dealt with in the health committee. That would have been the most appropriate place to have dealt with the amendments to whatever agenda the health committee would like to pursue.

I have referenced this particular aspect of the motion on a couple of occasions throughout the day, where (u) states, “all memoranda, emails, documents, notes or other records from the Office of the Prime Minister, the Privy Council Office, the office of the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, the office of the Minister of Health, Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada, concerning options, plans and preparations for the GPHIN since January 1, 2018”.

Does the member's motion have anything to do with that?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, COVID-19 is the number one concern of all Canadians right now. By reducing Parliament to a committee, proroguing Parliament and now filibustering committees, the Liberals have wasted precious time that has cost Canadians their lives and jobs. The Prime Minister directed Liberal members on the health committee to block my colleague's motion to study the pandemic. Forgive me if I do not respond the way this member would like me to when he feigns such indignation that this is not being debated in committee.

We are left to believe that the Prime Minister and the government have no plan to give Canadians the tools needed to prevent the spread of COVID-19 without an economic shutdown. That is why we have moved this motion today.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague on her intervention.

In the last question my colleague was asked, there was talk of trying to understand the amendment and we were told that this could have been done at the Standing Committee on Health. To me the motion has a lot of merit, as exhaustive as it may be, as some colleagues have said. It has merit because it brings home to all citizens, Quebeckers and Canadians, the importance placed on the COVID-19 pandemic and the importance of getting answers.

Currently, in every province, there are committees studying this issue. Why would we not be able to have the same transparency here and to ask the real questions with this motion?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, over the past six months, Canadians have sacrificed a lot and done their part. They have stayed home, missed important milestones in their lives, lost their jobs and have had to watch their life savings disappear, all the while believing the government was working hard on their behalf to develop a plan to ensure we would come out of this pandemic stronger and with the ability to see our economy come back.

We have the right to this information. I firmly believe that. I believe the Prime Minister and the government need to ensure they are being accountable to Canadians through the health committee by answering the questions of parliamentarians.