Debates of June 1st, 2021

Opposition Motion—Documents Related to the Transfer of Ebola and Henipah Viruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, again, I want to say that I respect my colleague from Manitoba, who was elected a year and a half ago. He is doing a tremendously good job in the House of Commons, in his riding and, I can say, in our caucus.

Unfortunately, the Prime Minister is so naive. However, we also have to remind everybody that the Prime Minister, when he was the opposition party leader, said that he had great admiration for the dictatorship of China. What a shame that is.

We also have to remind everyone that a year and a half ago, when the problem of the pandemic situation arose, the first move by the Prime Minister was to knock at the door of CanSino to be sure to have a deal with China. We all know that six months later, it crashed. Yes, the Prime Minister could like the Chinese regime, but I hope he will not put China's interests first, before Canadians' interests.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to address the motion of the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

As summer approaches, we are seeing a strong and steady decline in COVID-19 cases across Canada. Strict public health measures and ramped-up vaccination campaigns have pushed the national case count to its lowest level in weeks. In much of the country, the pandemic outlook is improving. COVID-19 infection rates have peaked in most areas of the country, followed by the slower decline in hospitalization rates.

As members know, there are exceptions. In places where infection rates are still very high, such as in Manitoba, hospitalization rates have not yet begun to decline. That is because the average length of stay for people hospitalized with COVID-19 is two weeks. For those experiencing more severe illness, it is closer to three weeks. The number of hospitalized patients accumulates over time while infection rates remain high, but, as I said, the situation is improving in most areas of the country.

With the steady decline of infection rates and strong and steady increases in vaccination rollout and uptake, we are on track for a better outdoor summer and a safer fall. That is great news for everyone, but we have to continue this momentum. The more people who get fully vaccinated, the safer it will be to ease restrictions and individual precautions. Only then can we get back to more interactions and activities, including spending more time together indoors.

As immunity builds up across the population, keeping infection rates down is crucial. It is still important that Canadians continue to follow local public health advice, including when and where to maintain essential precautions, such as masking and spacing. Now is not the time to relax our measures. Doing so would increase the number of community-wide in-person contacts that would likely result in a resurgence of the virus.

The experiences of other countries show the need to maintain strong public health measures as vaccines roll out. Easing measures must be done in a controlled and gradual way as COVID-19 infection rates decline.

In the U.K., more than 70% of adults aged 18 or over have had at least one dose and over 45% are fully immunized. It is important to note that measures have been relaxed slowly and cautiously in that country. It is also worth remembering that the U.K. sustained the most restrictive measures until incidence rates were several times lower than they currently are in Canada.

While countries with high vaccination rates are making great strides, some of them experienced resurgences along the way. Even the U.K. is still experiencing pockets of increased disease activity fuelled by variants of concern in areas with low vaccination coverage. In Canada, gradual and cautious lifting of restrictive measures can happen safely once infection rates are low. We will need to maintain vigilance everywhere, while vaccines continue to build up immunity across the Canadian population.

Several conditions must be met before we consider easing restrictive public health measures. These are controlled transmission; sufficient testing and contact tracing capacity; a low number of cases, allowing for testing and tracing to cope with outbreaks and surges; and high vaccine coverage in at-risk populations and settings, such as congregate living for seniors.

With a plan in place, public health measures could be eased in very low-risk settings. However, if modelling-based forecasts suggest a resurgence, an increase in COVID-19 positive cases or a declining adherence to public health measures, then public health measures should be reinstated. Public health measures should also be reinstated if the spread of variants of concern becomes increasingly prevalent.

So far, Health Canada has authorized four different COVID-19 vaccines: Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Janssen. Health Canada has also authorized the use of the Pfizer vaccine in children 12 to 15 years of age. Each of these vaccines have been shown to be very effective at preventing hospitalizations and death. We are making excellent progress in distributing these vaccines to the provinces and territories, with deliveries increasing every week.

More than 22 million doses of COVID‑19 vaccines have been administered in Canada since vaccination began in mid-December, providing 62% of eligible adults with at least one dose of COVID‑19 vaccine.

Indigenous communities and the territories have made excellent strides—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint‑Hubert on a point of order.

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

Madam Speaker, we have a motion before us and my hon. colleague is speaking about the progress of vaccination in Canada. She is completely off topic. I will therefore ask my colleague to speak about the motion before us.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I thank the hon. member for his intervention.

The hon. parliamentary secretary and all members know that there is some latitude during debate, however, the speeches must be relevant to the subject at hand. I am sure the hon. member will mention the wording in the opposition motion and ensure her speech is related to that.

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, who I am sure will get to it very shortly.

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

Madam Speaker, it is surprising that in the middle of a health pandemic, members opposite are not invested in vaccinations and the state of where we are as a country. That is very concerning.

Part of the groundwork I am laying is connected to the important work of the microbiology lab, so I absolutely will continue. However, this is important information for all Canadians.

Indigenous communities and the territories have made excellent strides in increasing vaccination coverage. To date, more than three-quarters of adults in the three territories have received at least one dose of COVID‑19 vaccine and 66% have received two doses.

A first dose of COVID‑19 vaccine provides us with primary protection, but for maximum protection, we need a second immunity-boosting dose.

The Government of Canada expects that by the end of the next two quarters, Canada will have received in Q2, end of June, more than 40 million cumulative doses and by Q3, end of September, more than 100 million cumulative doses. Looking ahead, we expect weekly shipments of 2.4 million Pfizer doses per week in June and close to 2.3 million doses weekly in July. Regarding Moderna, we are actively working with our colleagues at Public Service and Procurement Canada and the manufacturers to determine the delivery schedule and shipment sizes for June.

Last month, my hon. colleague, the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, announced that Canada had secured COVID‑19 vaccines from Pfizer for 2022 and 2023, with options—

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Again, on the point of relevance, the member seems to be referring to production orders in a completely different sense than what the motion talks about. The motion talks about the government not giving information to a committee. Now the House of Commons is debating that so we can hold the government to account.

You were very clear, Madam Speaker, that the member should be directly linking her comments to the motion before us, yet that has not happened. I would ask you to rule again on whether the member is following it.

Again, this is an important issue. I would hope the member opposite came prepared to talk about this issue and not her portfolio or other interests.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. You were absolutely clear in your ruling. You said that there was some latitude. After you said that, the parliamentary secretary explained that she was laying the groundwork for what she deemed was important to the discussion.

We can keep interrupting her all day long, but all these points of order do is push out possible speakers later in the day. Therefore, we should let the parliamentary secretary finish her speech.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I greatly appreciate the attempt by the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands to help me in my deliberations here.

I want to remind the hon. parliamentary secretary, once again, that the speech really does have to be relevant to the motion at hand. Although there is some leniency in speaking about other matters that seem to be related, I would respectfully ask that she consider ensuring she makes reference to the motion throughout her speech.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

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

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, and I will say it again, part of our COVID pandemic response has been directly influenced and supported by the work of the microbiology lab, so it is quite important to talk about the significance of the pandemic during this debate.

I would also point out that there were no interruptions when hon. members of the Conservative Party spoke about Afghanistan, which was not directly related to this motion either. I would ask for the same consideration and opportunity to talk about the global pandemic. I will continue to wrap up my comments on the motion, but it is important groundwork in relation to the work of our scientists.

As we have stated before, we expect that COVID-19 vaccines will be available to every eligible Canadian who wants to be vaccinated by September. Let me assure everyone that the Government of Canada continues to hold regular discussions with provinces and territories, with a particular focus in the coming weeks on ensuring that capacity to administer vaccines is aligned with vaccine availability. This is just part of our commitment to provinces and territories that we stand together in the fight against COVID-19.

We are continuously working with our provincial and territorial partners to ensure they have the help they need to manage outbreaks and keep people safe, from purchasing vaccines and personal protective equipment to boosting rapid testing and contact tracing. Testing and contact tracing is an area in which the microbiology lab is very much involved.

In fact, $8 out of every $10 spent across our country to respond to the pandemic has come from the Government of Canada. Much of the support is being provided through the COVID-19 public health rapid surge capacity initiative. This initiative, in addition to the safe restart agreement, has provided the provinces and territories with more than $19 billion in federal investment. These investments support health care systems, capacity testing and contact tracing, and other social services for Canadians. This allows provinces and territories to respond more effectively to outbreaks and to mitigate transmission in hot zones where there is pressure on health care systems.

I will speak now about testing and screening, work in which the microbiology lab has been critical.

Testing and screening, along with public health measures and vaccination, are key to slowing the spread of COVID-19. As of May 18, nearly 27 million rapid tests have been shipped to provinces and territories. When combined with the federal allocation, more than 41 million rapid tests have been distributed across the country. Provinces and territories determine how to use the test based on the specific needs of their respective jurisdictions, informed by guidance from a variety of sources, including the federal government. The Government of Canada is encouraging jurisdictions to use rapid tests as part of their screening practices and as an additional layer of protection to help slow the spread of the virus.

The Government of Ontario recently launched a new online COVID-19 rapid testing program, the provincial antigen screening program, so essential businesses could access free rapid testing kits. This supports the province's rapid testing initiative for small and medium-sized enterprises through the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, a system and testing that has been directly influenced by the microbiology lab. The provincial antigen screening program provides free rapid antigen tests to screen for asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 in Ontario workplaces. Alberta will also offer free rapid antigen testing to businesses and not-for-profit organizations through chambers of commerce.

Rapid testing can help detect asymptomatic COVID-19 cases and help limit the spread by isolating these individuals early.

It is important for those administering rapid tests to be adequately trained. The Government of Canada has provided provinces and territories with guidance on the use of these tests through the federal testing and screening expert advisory panel; the industry advisory roundtable on COVID-19 testing, screening, tracing and data management; and the Public Health Agency of Canada's guidance on the use of antigen tests.

The Government of Canada will continue to work closely with provinces and territories to ensure they have the tools they need to respond to the pandemic, including procuring these point-of-care PCR tests and rapid tests. In addition to the public health measures already in place, this is another layer of protection to keep workers safe.

Our response to this pandemic continues to be driven by science. Our National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg is known around the world for its scientific excellence. The work done at this world-class laboratory includes surveillance for infectious diseases, emergency outbreak preparedness and response, training, and research and development. It helps keep Canadians safe each and every day.

Canada is home to some of the most skilled and brightest researchers in the world, and they have been working hard to support domestic and international efforts to fight this virus. COVID-19 is a global pandemic, and it requires a global solution. The participation of researchers around the world to combat COVID-19 is truly a new model for global collaboration. We are proud of that as one of the global leaders in infectious disease research.

The National Microbiology Laboratory has been working tirelessly with Canadian and international partners on this front. Every day we are adding to our knowledge of COVID-19, keeping pace with the rapid growth of new scientific evidence as it emerges. In order to continue to slow and eventually stop the spread of infection, we need to continue to mobilize Canada's research and scientific communities to advance research and technology development.

That is why, in March 2020, the Government of Canada announced a $1 billion government-wide COVID-19 response fund, which includes $275 million to enhance our capacity to test antivirals, develop vaccines and support clinical trials. It is why what I was speaking about earlier in my speech is so critical to this.

Through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research rapid research response program, the Government of Canada has invested a total of $54.2 million to support 99 research teams from across Canada. These teams are focusing on developing and implementing measures to rapidly detect, manage and reduce transmission of COVID-19. This includes vaccine research and the development of strategies to combat stigma, misinformation and fear.

Canada's public health advice will continue to be based on trusted, expert science provided by our National Microbiology Laboratory scientists and our international partners.

Let me also answer some questions regarding former employees of the National Microbiology Laboratory. The two scientists in question are no longer employed by the Public Health Agency of Canada. We cannot disclose additional information for privacy and confidentiality reasons. However, I can say that the National Microbiology Laboratory will continue to play a critical role in protecting the health and safety of Canadians.

We are committed to supporting open, collaborative research while also protecting our research, our national security and our economic interests. Outside interference poses real threats to Canadian research security. This is a threat we have always taken seriously. In 2020, public safety officials met with more than 34 universities to help ensure the safety and security of their research, and CSIS has engaged more than 225 different organizations, including universities, to ensure they are aware of foreign threats.

In March, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry requested the development of specific guidelines that incorporate national security into the evaluation of any research partnerships. As we move forward in our fight against COVID-19, we continue to ensure that we welcome the international scientific community. At the same time, we will work with our security agencies to help keep Canadians safe.

To date, more than 22 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered in Canada. Relatively few cases of the virus have been reported among people who have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and fewer still among those who have received two doses. We must remember that vaccines take time to work, including up to 14 days after the first dose, to provide good protection, and up to seven days after the second dose to provide strong protection.

Based on data provided by nine provinces and territories up to May 25, people with infections occurring 14 days or more after their first dose accounted for 0.15% of people who had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Compared with unvaccinated cases in these jurisdictions, these individuals were more likely to report no symptoms and less likely to experience severe illness requiring hospitalization. This aligns well with vaccine effectiveness studies showing strong protection against severe illness.

The good news is that nationally, we expect the third wave to continue to decline as long as we maintain current measures and do not increase in-person contact rates around the community. The downward trends show that measures put in place across the country are working to suppress the third wave as vaccination continues. Things have taken a great turn for the better, but we always need to stay the course.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have three very quick questions for the member. I did not hear from her whether she supports or opposes the motion in front of us. Does she support or oppose the motion?

My second question is this: Does she believe the lab in Winnipeg should continue its collaboration with scientists from China's military?

Finally, does she believe the government should continue to grant access to the lab for scientists from China's military?

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

Madam Speaker, as someone who actually has security clearance and who has gone through that process, and as somebody who has attended secure meetings, I understand that if the member opposite is genuinely concerned about national security, he would not ask for documents that could be of national security interest in an unsecured situation.

I have trust in our national security and intelligence community to do the work of ensuring that the microbiology lab is secure. I question the hon. member and the Conservatives with this motion. Either they truly do not understand national security or they simply do not care.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I must admit that I had to pay very close attention to the parliamentary secretary's speech to ensure that she understood what today's motion is about, since her comments seemed to be all over the place.

I find it hard to understand this cavalier attitude towards the lack of transparency shown by the Public Health Agency of Canada, which is actually a very serious issue. It is as though this is no big deal and there is nothing there.

Could our colleague reassure us that the government does, in fact, take this very seriously? What happened at the lab in Winnipeg is very worrisome. I am very concerned about the government's apparent indifference to this issue, and I worry about what this means for the future.

I look forward to hearing the parliamentary secretary's response.

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

Madam Speaker, let me start by apologizing to the member for his having to pay attention to my speech for an extended period of time. However, given the fact that we are in a global pandemic, I think discussing the pandemic and rates of vaccination are things that Canadians deeply care about.

In terms of the member's question, as has been said many times, the microbiology lab is a secure facility. Anyone working there or visiting must obtain the proper security clearances. The two employees in question are no longer employees with the Public Health Agency of Canada. We take national security and the protection of Canadians extremely seriously, and the suggestion otherwise is simply not accurate.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, I listened while the member used her time to talk about the pandemic, viruses and vaccinations, in particular, but I did not hear her address the question of the special committee carrying out its duty and due diligence, and looking at the goings-on at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.

Does the member believe that this committee has the obligation and the power to require these papers to carry out its duty under the Constitution and under the rulings of previous speakers of the House?

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

Madam Speaker, I believe committees have the ability to request and acquire these documents. That is precisely what was provided to the committee; however, the documents were redacted for privacy and national security reasons.

If the member opposite, the NDP and the Bloc want to prop up the Conservatives by having an unsecured meeting to address confidential documents, again, I ask whether the hon. member understands the difference between national security, secure documents and secure meetings and meetings that are in camera in the House of Commons.

It is an important distinction that members need to take very seriously when thinking about this motion.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I certainly listened to the member's speech and I think that she was very much on point when trying to lay the groundwork for what this microbiology lab actually does. It provides context for the debate we are having today. A lot of Canadians are probably unaware that this lab even exists, let alone of the incredible work it has done throughout the pandemic.

Could the parliamentary secretary please provide some more information with respect to what the lab does, how it operates, what it is responsible for and perhaps some of its accomplishments?

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

Madam Speaker, the member for Kingston and the Islands is absolutely correct. Many Canadians probably do not know about the existence of this lab. The fact remains that the lab has been operating and studying infectious diseases for a long time. When the pandemic broke out, it had some of the top scientists and experts who had already been working on infectious diseases in this country.

I spoke often about the role of testing. The microbiology lab has been crucial in the development and understanding of testing to ensure that we help stop the spread and save lives.

When it comes to our scientists and our research, this lab has allowed Canada to be at the forefront of fighting this incredibly dangerous disease. I thank the scientists and researchers for their work.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I am not sure what that speech was. For a second I thought our parliamentary system had turned into the CCTV broadcast out of mainland China, where the member was going through a job application as a spokesperson.

My question for the member is simple. Is it her position that the Government of Canada is no more obliged to provide documents to Parliament than the Chinese government is to provide documents to the people in China? Is there no right of accountability in Canada during a pandemic?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In the preamble to the last question, the member seemed to suggest that the parliamentary secretary was working for the Chinese government or applying for a job for the Chinese government—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I would say that is a point of debate and not a point of order.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for rising on that. I was actually going to point out how incredibly offended I am that the member opposite questioned my allegiance to this country. I would ask that the member apologize.

As I stated, I have served on the National Security Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. The suggestion that my allegiance to Canada is in any way in question is incredibly offensive, and again it shows me the complete lack of knowledge that the Conservatives have when it comes to the serious threat of China to this country.

The member's offensive comments are a disgrace to this country and to parliamentarians. I strongly recommend that he apologize, because he has absolutely no idea what he speaks of and it is deeply offensive that he would question my allegiance to my country in this fashion. He may disagree with the politics, but he is outrageous and offensive. I deeply urge him to apologize for those baseless comments.

Alleged Use of Unparliamentary Language

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, our procedural rules specifically state that one cannot impute motive upon another member of this House.

I encourage you to review your previous ruling and ask the member to apologize for the extremely offensive comment he made toward one of our colleagues in this House.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I appreciate the point of order and the comments made in response to the question put to the parliamentary secretary.

I will review the previous comments made and will come back to the House with my feedback and recommendation. I also remind all members to ensure that they are respectful toward each member of the House and ensure there is no language being used that is derogatory toward members.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Montarville.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.