Debates of Dec. 3rd, 2020

Opposition Motion—Status Update on COVID-19 Vaccines

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Calgary Nose Hill for her tireless efforts. In fact, we have heard from stakeholders. We have heard from people in the private sector, thanking us for pushing the government for a faster response. The member has been a key part of those efforts.

We are tired of Canada being late. We are a G7, leading bioscience country. Why did this Prime Minister partner with China after being told for several years that CanSino Biologics was actually a national security risk?

As the member knows, tests and vaccines are tools and so is information. Our goal with the motion today is to give Canadians the certainty of information before Christmas, so that we have a better and successful year with vaccines in 2021.

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

Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has ably outlined the necessity of the motion, in terms of what it means to deliver a plan for Canadians, for us to see a way out of the COVID-19 crisis.

What I want to do with my time is to talk for a minute about why it is so important to support the motion. The Leader of the Opposition has outlined the gaps in the government's response, the panic that we have seen in the government and the need for certainty. He has done a wonderful job of that.

However, I need to explain to members of the government what is happening. There is a story that came out today, and a quote from a man named Doug Manuel, a physician epidemiologist at the Ottawa Hospital. Here in Ottawa, we are actually seeing lower numbers of COVID-19, and I give credit to public health officials and to people, but Doug Manuel says that this is because of the high number of government employees who can afford to work from home.

What I worry about is that here in Ottawa there are a lot of people making decisions and a lot of people who are scrambling around who might not feel the urgency that is being felt in other parts of this country. There are millions of Canadians right now who had stable incomes, who had businesses, who had hope 11 months ago and who do not have that hope now.

I am not saying that there is anything wrong with public sector employees. I thank them for their work. However, the reality is that there are people suffering. When the Prime Minister comes out of his cottage and says that businesses will be better off with extended lockdowns, that is a comment from somebody who is so privileged that he cannot understand the stress that millions of Canadians have been going through this year because of the lockdowns, because of the lack of certainty and because of the flailing that we have seen from the government.

This is why the motion is in front of the House today. It is compelling the government, in good faith, to give Canadians a way out, to give them a plan, to give them certainty.

I asked Canadians, about a week ago, to send me stories of their experience. This is one stack. Hundreds and thousands of stories have poured into my office. I want to read one email.

It says, “I returned to my full-time job from maternity leave at the end of March, during a time when I had no access to consistent child care and had three children at home, two requiring online schooling. My family struggled until our child care reopened. Life has not stopped because of COVID-19, all of the challenges that families usually face have only become more difficult to juggle. In addition to raising three children and working a demanding full-time job remotely from home and navigating the never-ending, shifting messages and restrictions and reopenings and closings that came between spring and fall this year, I also got the additional hit of having to navigate a legal custody battle in a confusing virtual setting that threw all the checks and balances of the old system out the window, all of which have led to a massive increase in my stress and anxiety for my family. I can say with certainty that my health and well-being, and that of my family, have been impacted by government lockdowns.”

She continues, “Here is a quick summary of how we have been affected: loss of child care, loss of income from companies making staff forced to take pay cuts due to the energy sector downturn and COVID, massive increase in anxiety related to school reopening, guidelines changing literally by the day, causing stress and anxiety for my children, loss of charter rights, freedom of association, limits placed on visitors in our own homes, loss of freedom of peaceable assembly, limits placed on gatherings, loss of freedom of mobility, loss of travel plans and cancellation of much-needed trips and meetings, increase in stress and anxiety, inability to see friends and family who need my help and are isolated due to travel restrictions, loss of ability to participate in our faith community.”

This is what is actually happening. This is what is at stake here, not to mention the fact that we have seen thousands of Canadians die from COVID. We are seeing dire situations in our nursing homes. That is what is at stake here when the government cannot tell us basic information about how we are moving forward.

Then, at the same time, when these Canadians are writing to my office, they are seeing the United States deliver their vaccines. People are going to be getting the vaccine in New York state within hours or days. The United Kingdom has been deploying it today. Where is our plan? The current government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars, has shuttered Parliament and has abrogated our democratic institutions, all under the guise of stopping the spread of COVID but it has not stopped the spread of COVID. It is worse than it was when we started. We cannot stay on this course. We cannot.

Person after person has written to me with medical conditions that they have not been able to get treatment for because of the lockdown. People have written to me with severe mental health issues. People are desperate. We sit in here fiddling while Rome burns. The fiscal economic statement, the quasi-budget, that the government put forward last week had no plan. It was a bunch of guesswork, saying we are going to spend our way out of a virus. We need to have a plan on things like basic public health information, rapid testing and vaccines. That is why the motion is here in front of the House today.

Why does it take the opposition party to push the government to do what is right? Frankly, I think it is an issue of competence at this point in time. We have seen flailing from the health minister on masks and closing the border. She said it does not transmit person to person but then maybe it does, and that we shut down our early warning system for the pandemic but do not worry we have the data, but we are not sure if it is three-ply or two-ply masks.

It is enough. People cannot get their kids to school. They cannot access mental health support. They are separated from their families. I sit here in a position of privilege, pushing for these things. I have not seen my kids in over six months. Do members know what that is like? Do they know what it is like to go home to an empty condo every day, knowing I cannot see my kids?

I sit in a position of privilege. I have a paycheque. I want to know these things on behalf of millions of Canadians. When can I see my mother-in-law, who has stage four breast cancer? My story is not unique. I am privileged. When the government stands up and says maybe it will be September or maybe January and that the opposition is playing games, the government is playing games. It is enough.

All we are asking for today is some basic information. When can we possibly hope to receive this vaccine? How many days after receipt is it going to be deployed into the provinces? What is the federal government doing to deploy it? The government needs to be held to account. It has failed.

The motion today is very simple. It would compel the government to give Canadians a plan with clear direction before Christmas, given that countries around the world have already done what is in here. They have been working on this for months. This is not asking for something that is unreasonable. This is asking for something that is vital to the lives of every single Canadian, millions from coast to coast and across party lines.

The government has to get it together, and we are going to make it happen.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Minister of International Development]

Madam Speaker, I can say that all members in the House share the concern, share the desire for certainty and hear from our constituents on how they are suffering every single day. When the member talks about the fall economic statement and our not having done anything, I question it, because we have sent billions of dollars in direct support to individuals and businesses to bridge them through the worst health crisis in over a century.

When it comes to vaccines, I would like to ask the hon. member if she believes in science and believes that we should allow our public servants, whom she commented on and said she supported, to do the vital work to keep Canadians safe.

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

Madam Speaker, for people who are watching this today, and I know there are thousands on my live feed right now, what they just heard was an answer from a minister of the Crown. This is somebody the Prime Minister has tasked to come up with a plan to get people who are listening out of this. They did not hear anything from her on information on when that vaccine is coming out. All they heard was that there is no plan at all.

It has taken the Conservative Party to push them on the need for vaccines and rapid tests. Every step of the way, the only things the government has done were because of the actions of the people on this side of the House. The people on this side of the House are on the side of Canadians, across opposition parties: NDP, Bloc and Conservatives. This is what we see. It is political gamesmanship at a time when we need leadership, and we will not stand for it.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to work with my colleague on the health committee.

I would like to ask her opinion on where Canada sits in relation to other countries. We know that Brazil has released its contract with AstraZeneca, pretty much totally unredacted. We know that Australia has published a 12-page detailed plan laying out how its plans to vaccinate. The United States established November 15 as a vaccine readiness day, and it has received Pfizer vaccinations, pending FDA approval, where Canada has refused. We have seen that many countries of the world negotiated the right to produce vaccines in their countries, accelerating the receipt of vaccinations by their populations. The Prime Minister even acknowledged that last week, and Canada did not negotiate that right.

With respect to our global allies, where would the member place Canada in our response to prepare for vaccinating Canadians against COVID?

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

Madam Speaker, what should encourage Canadians is the fact that opposition parties are working together to push the government for a response.

I want to take this moment in the House to put partisanship aside and thank my colleague. He has been excellent to work with on the health committee. He is pushing for the same answers, because this should not be a partisan issue. He sees it in the health committee. We have seen it every day.

The government has provided Canadians, at a time when they need stability and certainty, chaos and incompetence. If the government is so confident in its plans, then it should be able to comply with this simple motion.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

The government has already announced that priority groups such as seniors, health workers, firefighters, police officers and indigenous peoples would be the first to receive the vaccine. Dr. Tam has already said that we may not have enough doses for that many people. We already have that information.

Could the government share with us who it intends to vaccinate first? What are the member's thoughts on that?

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

Madam Speaker, the reality is that we do not know who is getting the vaccines and in what order. The government talks about some interim guidelines, but given that other countries are already deploying the vaccine, why do we not have more detail? As little as a week ago, provincial governments were decrying the lack of direction or certainty from the federal government, and provinces like Quebec should have that information.

Provinces should have a clear partner with the federal government, but what we have seen is ministers of the Crown basically guessing on national television, like vaccine distribution date bingo. That is not how we should be deploying a vaccine. That is not how we should be choosing who gets it and in what order. That is why this motion needs to pass.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, I am proud to rise today to speak to the Government of Canada's work to ensure that Canadians have timely access to a safe and effective vaccine for COVID-19. There are now more than 200 COVID-19 candidate vaccines in various stages of development around the world, with dozens in different stages and phases of clinical trials.

This week, the vaccine manufactured by Pfizer became the first to be approved in the United Kingdom. Many other manufacturers are expected to submit their final data to the regulatory bodies in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union soon.

As things stand now, we expect vaccines to become available in Canada in early 2021. After a long and very difficult year, this is welcome news and news for which we have been preparing for many months.

Canada's vaccination programs and regulatory approval systems are among the best in the world. We have well-established systems to deliver vaccines to Canadians and we have a long history of delivering vaccines for diseases like influenza, measles and polio. We will benefit from this experience as well as the infrastructure that we have built up over many decades.

Over the past several months, there has been a lot going on behind the scenes to ensure that Canada is well positioned to obtain and deliver a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine to Canadians in 2021. From the earliest days of the pandemic, we knew we had to start to lay the groundwork for success. We acted quickly to put the mechanisms in place to ensure that when a vaccine was ready, Canada would be ready. One of those mechanisms is procurement.

Based on the recommendations of the COVID-19 vaccine task force, Canada has signed agreements with seven different companies to reserve COVID-19 vaccine doses for Canadians.

We still do not know which vaccine will be most effective at preventing transmission. That is why we have pre-ordered the most promising vaccine candidates, with the possibility of increasing our order to have enough for all Canadians.

Also, the government has committed $220 million to the COVAX Facility. I want to thank my colleague, the Minister of International Development, for that work. The COVAX Facility and its advanced market commitment is designed to guarantee rapid, fair and equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines for every country in the world to slow the pandemic.

This agreement includes the option of acquiring doses for 20% of Canadians and a commitment to invest $220 million supplementary to provide vaccines to countries that are developing.

With these purchase agreements in place, the next step is to ensure that the new vaccines are safe and effective.

Vaccine development is highly complex and is a long process. Now in normal times it can take years to carry out extensive research needed to produce safe and effective product. However, these are not normal times and we are fighting a pandemic and human lives are hanging in the balance. The clock is ticking and scientists and researchers have leapt to the challenge. They have been working all around the world to accelerate development of a vaccine. This includes collaborating and taking advantage of the latest innovations.

Health Canada is the regulatory body that reviews new vaccines to ensure that they are safe and effective and approves them. These reviews normally take place once all clinical trials are complete and the results have been released.

However, given the urgency of COVID-19, we recognize the need for flexibility early to expedite this process without compromising safety, quality and efficacy. That is why this fall I signed an interim order to import, sell and advertise drugs during COVID-19. This interim order allows us to accept rolling submissions for drugs and vaccines. This means that manufacturers can submit data as it becomes available.

Once an authorized vaccine is in use, Canada continues to monitor its safety through post-market surveillance. This system allows public health authorities to respond quickly to changing trends or unusual, adverse events. So far, Health Canada has received submissions for authorizations of vaccines for COVID-19 from four companies: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna and, most recent, Janssen.

As these submissions are carefully reviewed, we are preparing for a successful rollout and distribution of the vaccines to Canadians. This will be an ambitious and complex program.

Vaccines are typically sent directly from the manufacturer to provinces and territories. However, with certain COVID-19 vaccines a different approach is required. Due to their novel nature, they will have different sets of logistical considerations.

For example, ultra-low temperature vaccines need to be kept at very cold temperatures, up to -80°C and these will need to be delivered directly from the manufacturer to the point of use and transport will be controlled by the manufacturer. Other frozen vaccines will be transported by a federally contracted logistics service provider from the manufacturer to the point of delivery, as identified by the provinces and territories.

Of course, this requires deep collaboration with provinces and territories. The Government of Canada is working closely with all of them as well as other public health partners to ensure the process is timely, fair and well-coordinated.

As I mentioned earlier, we expect vaccines to become available in early 2021. Initial supplies of vaccines will be limited, and just three million Canadians will have access to them.

Since the number of vaccines will be limited in the early stages, we will have to strategically determine who will be vaccinated first.

In Canada, we look after the most vulnerable among us. That is why the Government of Canada is working with external advisers to identify the high-priority groups that will benefit the most from being vaccinated.

The National Advisory Committee on Immunization is a standing body, an external advisory body that provides the Public Health Agency of Canada with independent, ongoing and timely medical, scientific and public health advice in response to questions from the agency relating to immunization.

On November 3, the committee released its preliminary guidance on key populations for early COVID-19 vaccination and outlined a targeted vaccination program. The committee identified several key populations including those that are at high risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19, such as the elderly and others with high-risk conditions; those who are most likely to transmit COVID-19 to those at high risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19; and workers essential to maintaining the COVID-19 response, such as health care workers and caregivers in long-term care facilities and people whose living or working conditions put them at an elevated risk of infection or where infection could have disproportionate consequences, including indigenous communities.

These recommendations will help provincial, territorial and federal authorities decide how to distribute the vaccine. It is also important to note that we are working actively with national indigenous organizations to determine how to distribute the vaccine properly and respectfully in indigenous communities.

Although the initial supply will be limited, I want to be clear that there will ultimately be enough vaccine for every Canadian who wishes to be vaccinated. However, as our country is geographically large, we will face some logistical challenges, such as the need for ultra-cold storage, reaching remote communities and coordinating between levels of government to name a few.

In the face of such challenges, no one is more effective or has more experience than the Canadian Armed Forces. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Canadian Armed Forces have been fully involved in the Government of Canada's action.

Last week, Major-General Dany Fortin was named vice president of logistics and operations at the Public Health Agency of Canada, and he is overseeing logistical planning. He joins the 27 Canadian Armed Forces personnel who are already seconded to the agency, including logistics experts, operational planners, pharmacists, health care administrators, engineers and information technology experts. We thank the Canadian Armed Forces for their assistance and expertise.

In addition, the Public Health Agency is also taking action to prepare for the rollout of the vaccine. The stockpile has sites all across the country and has already started sharing necessary supplies with provinces and territories. This includes millions of needles, syringes, alcohol swabs as well as freezers for vaccine storage.

It is important to note that each provincial and territorial government is responsible for deciding how to deploy COVID-19 vaccines within their jurisdiction as well as who will get vaccinated first. The Government of Canada is working closely with provinces and territories, first nations, Inuit and Métis partners to help them get ready. This includes ensuring they have the necessary supplies and equipment as vaccines need to be managed safely and securely while ensuring rapid and efficient delivery.

I know Canadians are encouraged by the progress that we have made. Vaccines are on the horizon and they are almost within reach. We are about to embark on a future that is safer, healthier and, indeed, more secure for all of us.

In the meantime, we cannot let our guard down. We must continue our efforts and continue to practise physical distancing, wash our hands and wear a mask. That is all the more important now that the cold weather is forcing us inside and the holidays are approaching.

We need to stay vigilant as we wait for a vaccine to be ready. We need to support our seniors. We need to support our neighbours with high-risk conditions. We owe it to our health care providers and essential workers. They are counting on us to protect them. I know people have been trying really hard and we need to keep trying for the next several months.

The government is taking every step necessary to authorize safe and effective vaccines quickly and to distribute them to everyone who wants them. We will be ready. Until then, we have to stay focused and steadfast in our public health measures, because, together, we will see a brighter future, one where everyone is protected from COVID-19.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Madam Speaker, a failure to plan is a plan to fail, and time is of the essence.

The minister has clearly stated that the logistics, distribution, storage and approval of this vaccine is highly complicated. The speed and effectiveness of Canada's plan will be measured in deaths prevented and livelihoods saved.

Will the minister share with all Canadians, as quickly as possible, by next week, the national COVID vaccine distribution plan?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, we have been working with provinces and territories since May to ensure they are well situated to deliver on vaccinating Canadians. I would like to remind the member opposite that, in fact, provinces and territories are not new to this work. What is new and complicated is the distribution of these ultra-cold temperature track 1 vaccines.

We have been transparent with Canadians. Each week, we are providing a tech briefing to the media so we can get that information out to Canadians. In fact, today, at noon, there will be more information from Dr. Njoo and General Fortin. This will be an update on the work that has been happening with provinces and territories to ensure they are ready to embark on this immunization program.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister of Health for her speech.

We understand that the vaccine is going to arrive in dribs and drabs and that certain target groups, such as seniors and health care workers, will be vaccinated first.

If a large number of doses of the vaccine become available as of a certain date, for example, January 15, what is the capacity of the system and how many people could be vaccinated per week or per month once things really ramp up?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his interest in the provinces' work to plan how to vaccinate Canadians. As I mentioned in my remarks, it will not be the Government of Canada vaccinating Canadians, except for the federal populations that we have responsibility for; but, it will be provinces and territories that will be doing the vaccination, and that is the plan that they are working out right now.

Of course, the federal government is there to support provinces and territories in the logistics of getting the vaccine to the deployment sites, making sure that the vaccine is stored in a way that it can retain its integrity, and making sure that the provinces and territories have the supplies that they need, like the syringes and the swabs and other medical equipment that will be necessary. That is the work that has been ongoing since May.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, given that Canada has the lawful authority to receive promising vaccines on Canadian soil pending Health Canada approval; and given that, in the United States, officials have done exactly that and the U.S. has received Pfizer vaccines even though the FDA has not yet approved it, can the minister explain why Canada has not taken possession of promising vaccines, like the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, on Canadian soil pending Health Canada approval as the law allows? In light of the fact that it would easily speed up the delivery of vaccination, if and when those vaccines are approved, why is that?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite is right. The interim order does allow, if possible, early placement of vaccines that have not been approved by Health Canada. Usually vaccines and any other medical product that are not approved by Health Canada are stopped from entering into Canada, but, in this case, companies can apply for an exemption to that rule and place it early.

I want to thank the Minister of Public Services and Procurement for doing the incredible yeoman's work of ensuring that we have such a diverse portfolio and such good relationships, on top of that, with the manufacturers of seven promising candidates, including Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen and all of the others that are in the queue.

What is really promising is that four of those companies have applied for regulatory approval. In fact, we were one of the first countries to receive all four applying to Canada. It is an indication of just how positive that relationship is between the minister, our government and these manufacturing companies.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Madam Speaker, the travel, tourism and hospitality industry has faced economic ravage as a result of the border closures and the economic shutdown globally. Countries like the U.K. and the United States will have people getting vaccinated, and some of those people will receive a vaccine that Canada may be getting.

If somebody has been vaccinated in the U.K. or the U.S. or another country and that vaccine is approved in Canada, what will her response be at the cabinet table in encouraging people to be able to travel across the border safely and get our economy back on track, especially, in the travel, tourism and hospitality industry?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, vaccines are not 100% certain as of yet. In fact, we are talking about a potentially 95% effectiveness rate. At the border, Canadians expect us to do our absolute best to protect against importation of the virus.

That is why the study with Alberta is so important in terms of looking at importation of cases, how long a quarantine has to be and whether we can shorten the length of quarantine and combine it with tests. That evidence is gathering, not just from the Alberta study, but also the study on the west coast and in the east with McMaster University.

This is something all countries around the world are trying to figure out. I know that we are working with our international community as well, to understand the implication of vaccines and whether that might add another tool at the border to protect from importation.

[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, the minister and Prime Minister often talk about the portfolio of vaccines and why that is so important in ensuring Canadians are going to be covered when the time is right is and we are not just dependent on one vaccine.

Could the minister expand on why that is so important for us?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, the short answer is because we were not sure, especially in the early days when we were purchasing these vaccines, which ones would be successful. On top of that, we do not know if a particular vaccine is going to be indicated for use in a particular population.

Early on, we knew we would need guidance as a federal government to place our bets, if you will, on promising vaccines. That is why we struck the vaccine task force. It is composed of experts in virology, pharmaceutical companies and vaccine development, and they have ably advised us in the diversity of our portfolio, which situates Canada in a very ideal spot.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, we are talking about vaccines as if they are sort off the shelf and we have been late getting them. I then go and look at science journals and realize we still do not have a vaccine for SARS. This is complicated stuff, and certainly we would not have been able to predict one vaccine in the pipeline would need -70° refrigeration.

In response to opposition parties' demands, I certainly support we get as much information out to Canadians as fast as possible. I object to politicizing this. Is the Government of Canada still considering at all the use of the Emergencies Act, which I think would deal with the expectations of people who want to know why we are not coordinating better, why we are not moving faster? In a federation like Canada, would we move faster if the government went to the Emergencies Act as a way of moving forward?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, thanks to the member opposite for acknowledging that vaccine technology is complicated and that Canadians expect whatever we approve here in Canada, whatever we distribute here in Canada, will go through the utmost rigour in assessing its safety and its effectiveness.

I also want to thank the member opposite for acknowledging that these ultra-cold vaccines use a novel technology, so it is especially new and it is especially important we understand its safety and effectiveness.

In terms of the Emergencies Act in the context of distributing vaccines, at this point I do not think we need to use the Emergencies Act. We are having incredible collaboration with provinces and territories.

In fact, I reject the opposition's assertion that we have not been talking to the provinces and territories. Just this week, we conducted a tabletop exercise with provinces and territories to go through a dry run of what the delivery would look like and assess any kinds of complications. Provinces and territories at all levels, technical tables, medical tables and political tables, have been meeting to talk about vaccine deployment for months and we are very thrilled we are as far along as we are.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois will give its consent and vote in favour of the motion introduced by the leader of the official opposition because we believe that accountability is key in any issue. We believe that Quebec and the provinces, which will have to manage the distribution and administration of vaccines, require more specific information. The minister cannot claim that all the necessary specific information is available, since the people responsible for these issues in Quebec have been expressing a certain amount of dismay about the lack of information on a daily basis.

The government has a strong tendency toward denial. For example, when we ask the government questions about health transfers, the Prime Minister tends to respond, with unsettling obstinacy, that it is working hand in hand with the provinces, which are certainly not saying the same thing. Some provinces, civil society, Quebec's National Assembly and Parliament, as we heard yesterday, are saying that there is a problem with the health transfers, but the Prime Minister stubbornly says that everything is fine and that he is working hand in hand with people with whom he has no constructive contact.

For example, when we mention the French language in institutions under federal jurisdiction, he stands up and says loudly and clearly how much he loves the French language, while the facts, the behaviours, the delays, and the white papers conveniently pushing any action to after a future election clearly show his obstinate refusal to take any action at all in favour of the French language.

When we ask when the vaccine will be available, we are given one or more explanations that do not always make sense. The people have the right to decide whether or not they find the answer valid. The media have the right to question the validity of the answer. The official opposition and the Bloc Québécois also have the right to ask these questions, because it is our job, and because we hear the stakeholders who will have to manage the administration of the vaccine saying that they do not have the information they need.

Before publicly improving a situation and saying that it will do better, the government has to admit something. The government has to say that it would have liked to get the vaccine at the same time as everybody else, but that it did not succeed in getting it at the same time as everybody else, and then explain why it did not succeed in getting it at the same time as everyone else. Then, it needs to say what it is going to do to get it as soon as possible after everyone else gets it first.

There is something very basic about this admission, because it is not a partisan stunt. It is a process for getting out of an unprecedented health crisis that costs dozens of lives and affects thousands more every day. How can we take such an important matter lightly?

The admission is crucial. Our political issues notwithstanding, I think that the population of Quebec and Canada would not react so badly. They would say that it is unfortunate, and that the government could have done better, and then they would ask what it is going to do now. Quebeckers and Canadians would react better than they will when, in the coming days, they start seeing people in the United Kingdom get the vaccine, then people in the United States, Germany and India, while they are still watching the press briefings of the Premier of Quebec and Dr. Arruda telling them how many new cases there are, what they will not be allowed to do at Christmas and, unfortunately, how many more people have died.

The comparison will be hard to ignore, and the government will not emerge triumphant under full sail in the glory and enthusiasm of its great success. It will become obvious that it should have admitted its failure sooner.

We understand that the matter is going to be stretched out until next weekend, because then the government will not have to account for its actions in Parliament until the end of January, hoping that its faults, errors and bad deals will go unnoticed.

The delay is by no means trivial. In Quebec alone, we are talking about 1,000 to 1,500 new cases and several deaths a day. The government needs to admit its mistake in order to make amends and mitigate the negative effects of its false discourse.

I suppose that the government is negotiating in private with vaccine manufacturers to try to shorten the delay. It should be negotiating, but not in private. However, it said something rather astonishing: it does not want to reveal how much it paid for the vaccines it has purchased so far because that could hinder its negotiations for future purchases.

That concerns me. Why does it not want to tell us how much it paid? How could that hinder future negotiations, unless it overpaid? If it overpaid because it had no bargaining power, any future supplier will want the same amount the other company got. I will get back to this. This will have an adverse impact on the government's bargaining power.

There are things like this that we do not know about. The government could have done any number of things, not to control the result, since people all over the world were waiting, but to improve the chances that we would achieve the desired result. Since we do not know exactly what was done, we are obliged to fill in the blanks, just like the media, commentators and analysts are doing.

The government had options. One was to manufacture the vaccines here in Canada, which would have been dependent on a number of variables. We understand that it wanted to upgrade a production facility at a cost of over $40 million. Delays have now built up, and that will not happen before next summer. We understand that another facility can be used to produce RNA vaccines, a relatively new technology, but that that will also have to wait, this time until July. Could the government have acted sooner or managed the production facility option differently?

It could also have obtained patent licensing; in other words, it could have negotiated with the patent holders to pay a royalty to get the authorization to manufacture, replicate or copy patented technology. This principle also applies to industry and the arts. Some countries procured patent licences to produce vaccines. Canada did not. If it had, it would probably have been better able to speed up the process.

It could also have produced vaccines without a licence. Producing vaccines without a patent licence may not be entirely appropriate, but it was an option under the emergency measures adopted in March, one which lapsed at the end of September. The government did not bother to extend these measures and retain Canada's right to manufacture what it needed to protect and save lives. It could have made subsequent arrangements with the patent holders. It gave itself the right to do it once, then waived that right.

That would have been a success factor for several reasons, not the least of which was that it would have given the government some negotiating leverage. When the government negotiated with the various manufacturers, it could have told them that, if it was not happy with the agreement, it would still manufacture the vaccine. That would have been quite conceivable.

Although the government will not answer our questions, it is our duty to make these assumptions. If the government had told the various manufacturers that it was going to manufacture the vaccine no matter what, the manufacturers would undoubtedly have been more accommodating when it came to the delivery date. However, the government did not use the leverage it once gave itself, having decided to forgo that leverage in September.

It could also have synchronized its own approval process with that of the countries producing the vaccines. I understand that Canada has certain powers to ensure the safety of products used in Canada, but the Canadian process is relatively long, not to say very long or even too long.

In this case, in an unprecedented emergency, could the government not have decided to make an exception and to synchronize our approval with what was happening elsewhere in order to proceed at the same time as everyone else, at least in terms of authorization?

None of these measures would have provided a certain or absolute solution to the problem, but each of them would have improved the likelihood of more rapid delivery and administration of the vaccine, which is the government's fundamental responsibility.

When the government talks about 400 million doses, we see that it is just a political smoke show. We understand that the number of doses we will get in the first quarter of 2021, based on current guarantees, is probably not enough to cover the base, meaning, of course, those mostly likely to die or to spread the disease. I presume that negotiations are once again under way to accelerate delivery and obtain a larger supply of vaccine.

I also understand that pharmaceutical companies in Canada are not very excited—or would not have been very excited—about the government forcing them to produce a vaccine created by a competitor. I understand that, but does that justify a delay in treating Quebeckers and Canadians for a disease that is too often fatal? Probably not. However, these companies want to keep their facilities for themselves because they think they too will be able to develop a vaccine.

Is the government capitulating? I am asking the question; I do not know if it is. It is a good question, and we are here to ask questions. Did the government acquiesce to pharmaceutical companies in Quebec and Canada that did not want to make their facilities available to their competitors, even though they are in a better position than pretty much anyone else to retool their equipment? There is no way of knowing when that would have happened, but now we know it can never happen because it has not started. Did the government go along with what they wanted? Claims of having done the right thing will soon be revealed as mere pretense because people will notice that some people are being vaccinated and others, here, are not.

As with health transfers, there are also significant economic impacts. The provinces and Quebec need some flexibility to contribute to their own economic recovery. For example, the hundreds of millions of dollars in health transfers required are hundreds of millions of dollars that Quebec is using to invest in its economic recovery.

In this case, we are talking about workers. There are thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, even millions of workers employed by hotels, restaurants and the industrial sector. There are also teachers and mental health care workers. There are many factors that influence the economy directly or indirectly.

I want to remind members that every unemployed worker represents an expense for the government. Every time we make it possible for a worker to return to work, it represents tax revenue for the government. Yesterday, I called that a four-point game. You take someone out of the expense column and put them in the revenue column. That is not neutral, it is better than neutral. A delay of six, eight or twelve weeks in obtaining the vaccine will delay the return to work and the economic recovery. That is a consequence that is all the more serious when we have a government that says, “to hell with expenses”.

Of course, this is just the beginning. The post-COVID-19 mass distribution and pre-election budget will be presented in March. There is something rather irresponsible about willfully ignoring the economic issues.

I think the Prime Minister is in a state of denial. This obstinacy is harmful, just as it is when it comes to health transfers. Everyone is against him: the Quebec National Assembly, all the premiers across Canada, the Premier of Quebec, the Quebec finance minister and civil society in general. Polls have even shown that the public shares this point of view. However, the Prime Minister continues to say that he is working hand in hand with people who are looking at that hand and saying they want nothing to do with it.

This is pure denial and we can also see it when the topic of French comes up. I mentioned this earlier. The Prime Minister likes to talk about how much his government loves the French language. We might have believed him at first, but very little has actually been done. I much prefer to hear the Leader of the Opposition say that he has changed his mind on this issue, after having voted in the past against applying the Charter of the French Language to federally regulated businesses. I personally have no problem with that and welcome his change of heart. However, when someone scoffs at us, in a sense, when they say they love us but their actions suggest otherwise, that smacks of denial.

As for the vaccine delays, this denial is detrimental to people's health, and the Prime Minister's responses are appalling.

Again, as with health transfers, we have to keep up the pressure to prevent this from becoming a partisan spectacle of 20-second sound bites on the news. If Parliament, if the other legislative assemblies and if civil society put enough pressure on the Liberals they will realize that this will hurt them the only place that seems to matter to them: the pre-election polls.

All of us together have the power to put pressure and use good arguments to make the Prime Minister and his government realize that they have to do better and be accountable for their actions. They have to take much more decisive action and get the vaccine delivered sooner. They have to provide predictability to patients, people who fear for their life, the families of those people, those who want to return to school in person, and those who want to return to work in person. They also have to give a sense of security. They will not achieve any of these things by being in denial and sooner or later that will become clear.

I offer the government my collaboration and I am sure that everyone in Parliament will do the same. I invite the government to be transparent, clear, lucid and compassionate and vote in favour of the Conservatives' motion. Then we all might make progress together on a real strategy for getting out of this crisis.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague and his party for their support of the Conservative motion seeking to give Canadians the straight goods on the pandemic and the need to procure vaccines as soon as possible.

First, I would like to know whether it was a good idea for the Liberals to put all their eggs in one basket, a Chinese communist basket, which has now left us in the lurch.

My second question has to do with vaccination delays. My colleague gave a good explanation of how people who cannot work because of a lockdown actually cost the government money. Could he share his thoughts on what impact the vaccination delays will have on public finances, which are a complete mess because of the Liberals' mismanagement?

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Speaker, in answer to the first question, it is understandable for the government to consider a variety of solutions when it is facing a difficult challenge. It was not necessary to rule out a Chinese solution, but it was dangerous to give it too much weight.

The government will say that it purchased 400 million doses from seven suppliers. When it says that, I think that it is covering up something else that I would like to know more about. I do not want to make any accusations. However, did companies in Canada get special privileges in the fight against the pandemic because they wanted to win the race to develop a vaccine? If that is the case, and they do not find a vaccine soon, Canada's manufacturing and innovation capabilities will not be used to get us out of this crisis when the time comes to produce, manufacture or copy vaccines. I think that that was a grave mistake on the government’s part. Diversity is important.

As for spending, I think it is understandable that it is so high. All the western countries have spent a lot of money. In most, if not all, cases, the central banks purchase government bonds, which is a way of printing money without causing damage, since it maintains the competitive balance between countries. However, that does not mean that we can spend whatever we want.

Sometimes it is a matter of symbolism. I am eager to see what the Conservatives are going to do. I gather that they intend to pay back the money they received under the Canada emergency wage subsidy. I am shocked, though, that the Liberals will not do the same, and I am offended that the Green Party and the NDP will continue to collect money that should be going to businesses.

[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, virtually from day one, the government has recognized the necessity of vaccinations. In fact, we had experts, civil servants and others engaged on the issue. Today, we have a wide spectrum of ways to provide vaccinations, which is providing a great deal of hope to Canadians.

I was here during the summertime, and I am trying to get an understanding of something. Out of the hundreds of questions I sat through during the summer inside the chamber while listening to opposition parties, I am trying to recall when they started to talk about the vaccination issue on the floor of the House.

Can the leader of the Bloc indicate when his party was first aware of this and when they started to talk about the issue of vaccinations on the floor of the House?