Debates of Oct. 22nd, 2020

Opposition Motion—Instruction to the Standing Committee on Health

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Brandon—Souris.

It is a pleasure to rise in the House today to speak to our opposition day motion and to, frankly, agree with the government. It has said it wants to talk about the response to the pandemic and talk about COVID-19 to help Canadians in every part of the country get through these challenging times. However, I have been listening with interest as Liberals come up with every reason they possibly can not to support our looking into the government's COVID-19 response.

I want to thank our shadow health minister, the member for Calgary Nose Hill, for her fantastic work on this issue. The Liberals are trolling her Facebook page for quotes and coming up with reasons not to support her, but she is idolized on this side of the House. Apparently she is even idolized on the government side, as they have been tracking her every move these last few days. I think that speaks volumes about the need to be back in Parliament to ask tough questions.

In my previous work, before becoming a member of Parliament, I proudly served as the mayor for the township of North Dundas, which is just south of Ottawa, and on the United Council of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry. I know what it is like to have to govern. A key part of all municipal work is scrutiny and accountability, and that is required when we make tough decisions.

Yes, we are in challenging times and our party and this Parliament have responded by helping Canadians get the assistance they need. However, a key part of being on the opposition benches is asking tough questions, scrutinizing and getting the information that Canadians deserve. Remember, never before have we seen this amount of money go out in the period of time we have seen.

We are now into the second wave, and I am pleased to support this motion, which looks at how to get through the second wave and help Canadians. As I said last night when doing some media interviews and talking to constituents on the phone back home, this motion helps us move forward and improves our response to COVID-19 by going back and looking into the expenditures and the way things were done. The health committee is the appropriate spot for this. I also agree with my colleague from Timmins—James Bay that we have to bring this to the floor of the House of Commons, because the Liberals are filibustering on COVID-19 at the health committee.

We need to scrutinize and we need to get the documents, but not just the documents the government wants us to take a look at. We need all documents that are relevant for us to make an assessment and do an analysis, going through the law clerk and through a procedure, and making sure of that. Yes, there is quite a long list of documents being requested, but hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent in the last seven months. This is what Parliament is for. This is our job as the opposition. We work together where we can but also scrutinize and get answers.

I can say Bill Morneau's name now in the House because he is not here anymore. We have seen a key theme: filibustering. It was nothing to see here, nothing to do. A few months later, the former finance minister saw a different path and now he is no longer the finance minister for Canada or the member for Toronto Centre, which is in the midst of a by-election. It is when the opposition gets the opportunity to ask tough questions, dig and scrutinize that we can get the truth out, not the rosy picture that we always see.

One thing I want to focus my comments on today is rapid testing. We have been asking lots of questions on this in question period, and the media has been picking up this issue. Most importantly, Canadians are realizing it. What the heck is happening with rapid testing? It is a massive failure on the government's part, for small businesses, parents, students and everybody else. It has been months and months since COVID-19 hit us here at home. We have worked with countries around the world, such as Japan, Germany, the U.K. and the United States, in sharing national intelligence, for example. We have a good working relationship with them on this matter, but when it comes to looking at approvals for rapid testing, they approved rapid testing months ago and tests are nowhere to be found in Canada. We are months behind. The Conservatives are rightfully asking about what has gone wrong. Why are we months behind? When we share intelligence information with those countries, why can we not share some of the health best practices in this serious economic and health crisis we are facing?

We need all hands on deck, we need to get access to the information, and we need to be able to pressure this government to treat this issue with the urgency that it deserves.

When I speak in the House, I always try to bring a context of Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry into the chamber, and I want to share the story of Krista and Mike O'Neill from O'Neill's Pub in Long Sault. Our eastern Ontario health unit had been contemplating for the past few days reverting to stage 2 in our region. The outcry from businesses was very emotional and overwhelming, and Mike and Krista posted on their Facebook page of O'Neill's Pub. I printed it off last night, and there were 1,200 shares and counting. It was talking about the desperation and frustration that small businesses like their restaurant are facing. If we go back, and if they cannot keep their doors open, they are panicking and worried about going bankrupt.

I just want to make sure that I put into the record an acknowledgement of their work, effort and stress and also note that while the testing, the testing sites and the response on the front lines is handled at the provincial level, it is Health Canada that has not delivered good options to businesses like O'Neill's Pub in Long Sault. If they had access to rapid-testing options, like many other advanced countries did months ago, they could have that tool at their disposal to test their employees every day to build an even better case of staying open and staying in business. That is the contrast that people are facing and it is the frustration people are facing, because this technology, these advancements and this whole process has not been there.

We have seen lineups of cars miles long in eastern Ontario in Casselman. In Winchester, the assessment centre for the testing model saw 1,000 phone calls on a Friday morning when the wave hit. It is not sustainable the way the government is operating these testing options and approvals. We want to get access to those documents. We want to see what they did, frankly, what they did not do, to get a proper process in place to make a tangible difference as we get through the second wave. I look forward to getting those answers and asking those tough questions for the betterment of a wide variety of people.

I mentioned the restaurant industry in my riding. I think of the Glen Stor Dun Lodge in Cornwall or the Hartford Retirement Residence in Morrisburg. If they had access to rapid testing now, like many other countries have and have done approvals, I think they would feel a lot more comfortable in the coming months as we get into this second wave.

I also want to touch on the frustration I have with the line of this Kumbaya approach that I have heard from the government the last little while: We work with provinces and territories and all the stakeholders, and it is all wonderful. There has been progress. Our colleagues here on this side of the House have supported where need be, but I also want to highlight that when it comes to rapid testing, there are far from pleasant reviews from our provincial partners on this.

The Government of Manitoba had issued a press release begging the federal government to not block their work on rapid testing to help the province out. To have to beg for that through a news release in the news media does not symbolize to me a good, collaborative working relationship that is set on good communication.

About a month ago, I quoted the Premier of Ontario who talked about the rapid-testing failure. He was doing an event in Huntsville speaking with passion about the frustration on the delays that he had with Health Canada. I just want to read this into the record and make sure that Canadians see that it is not all rosy, it is not all perfect. There are tough questions that need to be asked.

He said that:

The reason there are lineups, very simply, is Health Canada. We have been waiting for months for the antigen tests, the saliva tests. God bless them, they work hard, but they need to get moving on this. This is affecting the whole system. Nothing is more important to the people of Ontario right now than getting Health Canada to approve the test. I am hearing crickets, nothing, silence. How do you expect us to plan?

On something so fundamental, we need access, and not just to the documents that the Liberals want to give but access to them all to see the full story and, most importantly, allow us to advocate how we can get through the second wave and get this issue to the health committee so that we can get results for Canadians.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, I find the member's speech interesting, especially leaving on the point about the Premier of Ontario. In his leader's speech earlier, when answering a question to the member of the Bloc, he said that he, the leader of the official opposition, would not take an approach of “Ottawa knows best”. Yet, the Leader of the Opposition criticized Premier Ford's response to COVID.

I am curious, and I actually have two questions. Why is it that classic Conservatives say one thing in French to Quebec and something else to everyone else, and how does the member opposite feel that his leader does not want an “Ottawa knows best” approach, except to Premier Ford, who did not support his leadership while he praises Premier Kenney, who supported him? Why does the member from Ontario not have a problem with the Leader of the Opposition criticizing the very—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Stormont—Dundas—Glengarry has the floor.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am really glad my fellow Ontarian got up to the House, so Canadians can see the games the Liberal government is playing on this. The Liberals are trying to pit people against each other. We want the information. There was no talk about working together here in Ottawa to get access to information about rapid testing or to get the document; there was nothing about that.

The member for Calgary Nose Hill gave a very reasonable proposal. If 15 days was not appropriate, they can give us a number and work with us; they will not do that. They will not work together, they will not give anything and they will try to switch the subject. People see right through it, and that is why they are trying to change the channel every which way they possibly can.

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

Madam Speaker, what is so heartening about this debate today is that I have had colleagues from the NDP and the Bloc stand up to say that we all need this place to be facilitating a path forward related to COVID-19, so that families can be reunited, people can get back to work, schools can stay open and we can keep people healthy and safe. This motion focuses on what every Canadian, regardless of political stripe, wants Parliament to be working on right now.

Can my colleague, who is part of our leadership team in our party, speak a bit about the fact that we have reached out to the Liberals today to talk about timelines for document production, and they have not even returned our phone call on this? What kind of message does that send to Canadians who are looking to Parliament to be collaborative, when it comes to dealing with the COVID-19 crisis?

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, yes, our leadership team has reached out to the government to say “Let us work together”. The Liberals want to talk about COVID-19, let us get the information. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP and our party are united in saying we deserve full access, and the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader said that is a lot of documents. That is correct; we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars. These are unique times. If there ever has been a need for Parliament, for scrutiny, and to work together and scrutinize, to make sure the government is doing the right thing, this is the time. Now is not the time to shut down Parliament. Now is not the time to filibuster for 20 hours, especially at health committee.

Let us get to the results. If the government has a counter-proposal to say 15 days is not enough time, there are staff within the federal government who could address these issues. I ask that we let them do their work and let Parliament do our job.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's mention of Manitoba. Currently in Manitoba we are facing a Liberal government that is trying to filibuster, putting the lives of Manitobans at risk, and we also have the Pallister government, which is cutting back on health care. It is Liberals and Tories, with the same old story.

I want to ask the hon. member what he feels we should do in Manitoba, when we continually have Conservatives and Liberals denying the Manitobans critical access to health care during a pandemic.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will go on the record commending Premier Brian Pallister for his leadership. I said during my speech that they are trying to make advancements and taking a leadership role on rapid testing. As I mentioned in my comments, they are being blocked by the federal government on this. It is very hard to be able to deliver results. We have this rapid-testing option, and we all agree rapid testing could change the game of our COVID-19 response, and they have to issue a news release begging the federal government to let them do what they want to do in their own provincial—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Brandon—Souris.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I just want to take a moment, as my colleague from Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry just did, to thank my friend and colleague, the member for Calgary Nose Hill for drafting this motion.

In just a very short time, she shone a giant spotlight on how ill-prepared the Liberal government originally was to deal with the pandemic. Now, the member for Calgary Nose Hill confirms what many of us have suspected all along, that the Minister of Health had no plan for the second wave.

Right now there are thousands of Canadians waiting in lines to get a COVID-19 test. In fact, I and my Manitoba colleagues wrote a letter to the health minister to let her know how disappointed we were that even though the government had authorized rapid tests, Manitoba could not access them, because of her government.

In some cases, people have been standing in line for hours, hoping they will get tested. Some might get their results tomorrow, while many will have to wait days to find out the results. Right now, we have an entire airline industry on the ropes, and the livelihoods of its employees are threatened as well. Just yesterday many of them were outside of Parliament, protesting this very Liberal government.

While the Liberals tell us that they have a plan, they should try telling that to these airline employees who do not know if they are going to have a job to return to, or they should try telling that to those who have not seen their loved ones in months because the Liberals have yet to find a way to reunite them while keeping Canadians safe.

I want those watching this right now to know why we are debating this motion. As a member of the health committee, I have now sat through two meetings, approximately four hours, of the Liberal MPs filibustering and talking out the clock. Why are these Liberal MPs filibustering? To begin with, those pesky opposition MPs just want access to information and documents that Canadians are asking for.

The motion we are debating here today is almost identical to the motion we have been trying to vote on at the health committee, but because the Liberal MPs refuse to have a vote in our committee, we are using an opposition day to advance this cause.

What documents do we want that the health minister and the Liberal MPs do not want us to see? Let us start with the record of communications between the government and the World Health Organization. What did the government know, and when did it know it? Many Canadians might be interested to know that we, as opposition MPs, have no idea what internal information was shared by the World Health Organization with the Government of Canada.

Given the serious concerns that are being raised by China's influence over the World Health Organization, Canadians deserve to know if the minister had concerns or doubted the early information she was getting. We have no idea what the World Health Organization was telling the Minister of Health. We have no idea if the Minister of Health questioned that information. We have no idea if the Minister of Health took decisive action to check on Canada's supply of PPE or other necessary equipment.

What we do know is that even after outbreaks in China and multiple other countries, the Minister of Health kept telling the House that the risk was low. I want to know what information she had at that time that led her to that conclusion.

In preparation for this debate, I reviewed the February 3 health committee meeting minutes, specifically on Canada's preparation for COVID-19. The president of the Health Agency of Canada said:

Canada's public health system is well-equipped to contain cases coming from abroad and their potential for spreading within Canada.

We now know that that was not true. We did not have enough PPE. We had people coming into the country without any extra level of screening, other than being asked if they had visited Hubei province.

The president of the Health Agency of Canada went on to say:

The system is working as it should to protect Canadians against this novel coronavirus, and the overall risk to Canadians in Canada remains low.

I wish that was true. I wish that our system had been ready for what descended upon us. At the time of this February 3 committee meeting, COVID-19 was already in 27 other countries. Thousands and thousands had already contracted the virus, and many had died.

I want to remind the House what action the Liberal government took at the time. As of February 3, only three airports in Canada had the CBSA agents asking passengers if they had visited Hubei province.

In seven other airports, passengers could self-report at an electronic kiosk if they visited Hubei province. I want to thank my Liberal colleague from Thunder Bay—Rainy River who was at that committee meeting and asked a great question about the screening process. He wanted to know if the CBSA was asking passengers if they had visited other provinces in China, other than Hubei, in order to be properly screened. He was told, no, the CBSA was only asking passengers if they had visited Hubei. That response boggles the mind.

It even bothered my colleague from Thunder Bay—Rainy River and he pushed back, saying, “My understanding is that there are two other provinces with almost 900 cases. There are a number of other provinces with over 500 cases. That's gone up pretty dramatically over the last couple of days, from when it was almost half that number.”

The next question he asked was this: “My understanding is that the United States is asking all people returning from China to voluntarily self-isolate for two weeks.... Has Canada contemplated doing the same thing, asking all people returning from China to self-isolate for two weeks?” Remember, that was February 3. What a great question. Sadly the answer he received was that the government was only recommending people limit their contact with others if they had visited Hubei province.

I am starting to wonder whether, if the member for Thunder Bay—Rainy River was our health minister, we could have been far better prepared.

The other issue in our motion that I want to speak to is our efforts to get more information and how the government responded and is continuing to respond to the issue of purchasing COVID-19 test products.

As many have heard, we still do not have widespread access to rapid test kits. Just yesterday, the government announced it had gotten its first shipment, but we still do not have any idea where they are going. Now we have heard some conflicting words from the Minister of Health on rapid tests. For a government that just purchased 100,000 of them, why did the minister say, just a couple of weeks ago, “many jurisdictions that have used rapid tests in that way have seen a worsening of their outbreaks”? She went on to say that “around the world there are very high-profile examples of how rapid tests have actually added confusion and increased the risk of infection.”

These are not words from a pundit. They come from the one person in the country who is supposed to be in charge of the federal government's COVID-19 response. While the minister may think Canadians are not paying attention to what is said in this place, I can assure her they are. It is very disconcerting that, while the government is seemingly getting around to approving and purchasing rapid test kits after much pressure, the minister is sewing doubt about whether they can be trusted. That in itself is very troubling. I question whether the minister said those words because she did not like the questions posed to her from the member for Calgary Nose Hill, or if her officials told her to say that. Who knows? However, I want to get to the bottom of it.

In closing, I implore my colleagues to vote in favour of the motion. Let us review what steps have to be taken so that we can provide the best recommendations to the government moving forward, and the sooner the better. Canadians are counting on us.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to hear what my hon. colleague thinks of the government members' stubborn refusal to take us up on our invitation to amend the motion to make it more acceptable to them and to show some honesty and transparency to Canadians.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, if Liberals want to move amendments and put them forward, the other opposition parties are up to doing that. All I know is that they did support a very similar motion at the committees that we had. I commend them for their support in those areas because this is a very, very important issue, and the government is not taking it to heart.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Madam Speaker, as a member of the committee, I would like to ask the member opposite if he feels it is appropriate for members opposite to make light and make fun of an individual's inability to read a document that was produced in very short minutes? Are those the values that his party represents?

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I cannot believe I am hearing this. We have a situation where Liberal members were looking at the font size and saying it was too small to be read. We read lots of documents and lots of books, and I do not have any problem with it.

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

Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to say to the House how awesome my colleague from Brandon—Souris is. He is a pretty awesome guy. He is great to work with on the health committee, so I want to thank him for his service and all of his hard work.

I know he was so frustrated watching the Liberals block this common-sense motion, which other parties collaborated with us on, especially at a time when we need these answers. Maybe he could talk a bit about how he feels as a member of Parliament when the governing party will not even return our phone calls to look at what a document production timeline could be, even though we have the support of the other parties.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the commendation. I really did enjoy working with her on the immigration committee as well, and with my colleagues from east and west who are also on the committee with us right here in the House. It is a pleasure to be on the health committee, particularly at this important time in our Canadian history with COVID being so relevant across the whole country.

As I pointed out in my speech today, it is so frustrating to see the reluctance of the government to move, even on the rapid testing, faster than it is to make sure it could be used as an option for the many businesses we could be keeping open in this country. That is one of the things we need to look at right away. We are looking at a situation where we have many people who want to go to work and cannot.

We need our tourism industry and our airline industry, which was here in the House making presentations yesterday. We need a proper rapid testing mechanism, like many of our allies and even other countries in the world are using right now, which we do not have access to yet. I will back up on that a little as the government did make it available, but as I pointed out in my own comments about the letter we wrote from our Manitoba caucus to the minister, when the Manitoba government tried to purchase those rapid tests it was told it could not because the federal government had the contract for them all and would distribute them however it wanted. We received 100,000 tests yesterday and we still do not know where they are going.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Madam Speaker, we heard from a number of Conservative speakers who are making it seem to Canadians like rapid testing is a panacea, a magic bullet.

I was wondering if the hon. member could comment on the White House, for example, and that every person in the White House was subject to a rapid test, yet it was the source of an outbreak and a superspreading event. Could he talk about that, and that it is not a magic solution and is only part of an overall solution?

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I cannot believe that coming from a Liberal member. Actually I can believe it coming from a Liberal member. He is saying that rapid testing does not work. Is that what he is saying?

That is certainly not what we are saying. We are saying it is an alternative to the present tests and one that we can get the results of in a very short order, which Canadians are asking for. If we are ever going to allow them to be safely back to work and going to school and day cares, we need to have those tests. I take exception to—

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. You heard, as I did, the member across the way, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, shout an unparliamentary term in heckle to my colleague. Through you, I would ask him to stand and apologize for the term. I know you heard it as well.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I did hear it. I have heard quite a few today from different sides of the House, not just from one side, that I personally would object to because I consider them unparliamentary. I have not brought it up.

I invite the member to apologize.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, unfortunately I have heard it on all sides, but I will take responsibility for my comment and apologize to the House.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Thank you.

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to share my time with my colleague, the member for Outremont.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise in the House to speak to the motion put forward by my hon. colleague.

As we all know, this pandemic is the worst and most serious public health crisis that Canada has ever faced. We have taken a proactive approach. We have taken a productive approach. We have taken a transparent approach. Most of all, we have taken a co-operative, team Canada approach, one that I humbly submit is not reflected in the motion that we are debating here today. We have consistently informed parliamentarians and Canadians, frequently and regularly, about the work we are doing.

From the start of this crisis, our government has remained focused on one thing: taking care of Canadians. We have their backs. Nothing has been more important to us than making sure Canadians have the support they need to make it through the pandemic while remaining healthy and safe.

A significant part of our government's action to meet the challenges of this crisis has involved procuring the essential supplies that Canadians need to protect themselves against COVID-19. Our government, through the hard work of procurement officials, has worked incredibly hard over these last few months to put in place a solid strategy to get supplies into the hands of those who need them the most. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them and to highlight some of those efforts.

I also commend the people of my riding, Gatineau, who, like people everywhere in the national capital region and across Canada, are working around the clock to help us get through the pandemic.

I will also highlight the extraordinary efforts we have gone to in providing transparency to Canadians with regard to procurement contracts.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, Public Services and Procurement Canada officials have been working around the clock to procure personal protective equipment.

This equipment includes masks, N95 respirators, face shields and hand sanitizer as well as protective gowns and gloves. In total, we have acquired more than 2 billion pieces of personal protective equipment and we continue to receive more every day. We are making every effort to procure the materials needed to administer COVID-19 tests, including test kits, swabs and reagents.

To obtain such huge quantities in such a short period of time, our government has taken a two-pronged approach. At the beginning of the pandemic, we faced a volatile market amid scarce resources and fierce global competition. We had to be aggressive in our procurement efforts, often with new suppliers. We also had to create new supply chains and sort out warehousing and shipping logistics, all while making sure that all products meet Health Canada standards.

Second, as we continued to deal with firms overseas, we also turned to domestic manufacturers and suppliers. We issued a call to action to Canadian businesses, and thousands of them responded. These companies stepped up to contribute to the national effort and retooled their assembly lines to design entirely new products, so that we could establish secure supply chains right here in Canada. This unprecedented mobilization of domestic manufacturing not only helped to save lives but also helped to keep people employed and contributing to our economy when this country needed it the most.

Because of our strategy, more than 40% of the dollar value of our contracts is for made-in-Canada goods, like surgical gowns, non-surgical masks, face shields and hand sanitizer. These domestic suppliers significantly add to the regular shipments of personal protective equipment that we continue to receive from overseas and will do so for months to come.

Buying PPE will not get us through the pandemic. We will not be out of the woods until we have a safe and effective vaccine.

I can assure the House that the government is working hard to get ready for that. Once we have approved vaccines, we can start vaccinating Canadians from coast to coast to coast. We had to be aggressive in sourcing PPE domestically and abroad, and now we have to be aggressive in negotiating access to potential vaccines.

Once again, Canada has to navigate a volatile market. We have to be ready for the unexpected. Even though we do not yet know which vaccines will be successful in clinical trials and get approval, we cannot stand by and wait. That is why we are making vaccine procurement decisions based on the advice and recommendations of the COVID-19 vaccine task force and on the latest scientific evidence.

To date, we have signed agreements with six of the most promising vaccine candidates: Johnson & Johnson, Novavax, Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline. Moreover, the government continues to negotiate additional agreements with both domestic and international supplies to establish a guaranteed supply of a potential vaccine.

We know that with renewed efforts to keep community transmission at a minimum, testing for the virus and tracing where it may have spread is more important than ever. To that end, we are pursuing rapid test solutions to help us meet urgent demands from provinces and territories to reduce wait times for results. This is key to reducing the spread of the virus.

In addition to these bilateral agreements made directly with pharmaceutical companies, we are also collaborating with our global partners to fight the virus. Our government is investing in the Gavi COVAX Facility, a pooled procurement mechanism for purchasing COVID-19 vaccines and allowing them to be distributed equitably around the world. This pandemic cannot be fought at the domestic level alone. We know that in order to come out the other side, we need to do our part to protect other countries as well.

I want to reiterate our government's commitment to procuring supplies to fight against COVID-19 in a transparent and responsible manner by giving hon. members and all Canadians as much information as possible on the efforts we are making. Since there is a global shortage of the supplies we are procuring and we are competing with other governments, it has not always been possible to immediately disclose certain confidential details about the contracts. That remains the case.

In any event, I am pleased to inform the House that we have taken various measures to disclose as much information as possible. For example, Canadians can go to our website and get informed on the procurement and delivery of essential supplies as well as the names of the suppliers and the value of the contracts for COVID-related procurement. In addition, we regularly update Canadians on agreements the Government of Canada reaches for obtaining access to promising vaccines that are being developed around the world. We also update them on agreements that are signed to gain access to the most effective testing solutions possible, because the technology is rapidly evolving. I am proud of the efforts our government is making to keep Canadians informed about how we are acquiring these much-needed supplies.

Overcoming a pandemic requires the work and resolve of every single Canadian. On all fronts, we have made significant progress, but our work is far from done. Now that we are in the middle of the second wave of infection in many parts of the country, we know it is time to return to those actions that allow us to minimize community transmission and successfully flatten the curve early on.

To support these actions, our government will continue to ensure that Canadians have access to PPE, testing solutions and, one day, a safe and effective vaccine. Canadians are counting on the government to do everything in its power to help them get through this pandemic, and we will do so with the help of our procurement activities and strategies.

Since the beginning of this pandemic, the government has sought to co-operate with the private sector, with provinces, with suppliers, and co-operate and challenge Canadians to come up with domestic supply. I do note the auto parts manufacturers saying today that firms from across the country dropped everything to help save lives by making critical medical goods for every government in Canada, every political stripe. We did this together. That is what team Canada is.

What team Canada is not is driving the bus from the rear with a motion that goes from A to Z and starts over again, that seeks to micromanage, that seeks to have the government spend all its time with document retrieval and not in solving and protecting Canadian's public health. The government will keep being transparent and co-operating. The government will keep having the backs of Canadians.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, listening to the government talk about the team Canada, transparent, open approach it has taken reminds me of an episode of Seinfeld in which George is asked how he beat a lie detector test. He said, “It's not a lie if you believe it.”

A manufacturer in my riding was bidding on a federal contract and he had to prove he had the capacity to manufacture the good on which he was bidding. He did not get the contract and now he has more than $300,000 worth of merchandise just sitting there. All Frank Baylis had to do was prove that he was a Liberal and he got $237 million worth of contracts.

Where is the team Canada approach in that? Should the rules that Brad had to follow not be the same for Mr. Baylis?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, we asked Canadian companies from coast to coast to coast to step up and give us solutions for made-in-Canada domestic supplies that would protect Canadians. By the thousands, they signified their interest; by the thousands, we responded to them.

We have reached arrangements with manufacturers of personal protective equipment. We have reach arrangements with academic institutions. We have reached arrangements with suppliers all across the country, some of whom have gone to great lengths to retool and help Canada and provinces in this effort. We will continue to do that.