Debates of March 24th, 2022

Opposition Motion—Federal Vaccine Mandates

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, with the greatest respect to the hon. parliamentary secretary, it might have been a good question if there was any basis in fact to support it, but the problem is that there is no basis in fact to support it, because it has never been the position of the Conservative Party to impose these types of restrictions on Canadians to limit the ability of Canadians to enter and leave and re-enter Canada.

These are unprecedented measures, they are draconian measures and they are inherently un-Canadian measures.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member for St. Albert—Edmonton today spoke a lot during his speech about the obligations we have to Canadians and the freedoms that Canadians are entitled to. I want to read to him what Dr. Katharine Smart, who is the CMA president, had to say.

She said, “While governments and Canadians are hoping to move past the pandemic, an exhausted, depleted health workforce is struggling to provide timely, necessary care to patients and make progress through a significant backlog of tests, surgeries and regular care.”

My question for the member is this: What do we owe our health care professionals, who have stood on the front line and worked so hard? Do we not owe them that? Further, in addition to protecting our health care workers, I would ask the member whether or not he would be supportive of increasing the health transfers to provinces, as the premiers have all asked for, to 35%. Would he be supportive of that?

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my brother is a health care worker, a medical doctor, so I appreciate the important role that health care workers played on the front lines throughout COVID. What I would say to them, and what we owe to them, is that we do not fire them the next day after they were there on the front lines.

The member speaks about COVID being here and says that Canadians are tired. Yes, we are tired; yes, it is here; and yes, it is going to be here for a long time. The questions that must be answered are on these mandates. Is there a scientific basis to support them? Is there a rational connection? Are they actually making a difference? All 10 medical health officers across Canada have said no and that it is time to move on.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, an hon. member speaking earlier used a line that stuck out to me. She said that what the Liberals have presented to the House and to Canadians as a whole is “opinion masquerading as science”.

When we see the difference between political science and medical science, I believe we certainly see where this government has followed the former, the political science. In other words, it has done whatever was politically advantageous to it at the time. Right now, 10 provinces have lifted their mandates and countries all over the world have lifted their mandates, yet this government insists that truckers cannot cross the border and come back into Canada without a vaccine, and it has no science, zero science, to reinforce these mandates.

My question to the member is this: Does he see an ounce of evidence or scientific proof that these mandates should in fact continue in place as they are now?

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for Lethbridge. She is a great champion of freedom.

In short, there is no evidence that the Liberals have tendered. The ball is in their court. Where is the evidence? There is no evidence. What they are more interested in doing is playing COVID theatre, which they do in this place every single day.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Pickering—Uxbridge.

It is truly amazing to listen to some of the Conservatives, especially my friend from St. Albert—Edmonton. In responding to a question from my colleague in regard to travelling, he tried to give the false impression that the Conservative Party, at no point in time, wanted to limit travelling outside of Canada or coming into Canada.

That is the problem with the Conservative Party. It is that there is that extreme right element, and then there are those who want to be more on the progressive side of the Conservative Party. The member who made that statement is the one who was standing out there when we had the blockade, preaching, at least through the media, in support of the blockade.

As for misinformation, we have what he stated today. We were all here inside the chamber when the Conservative Party was asking the federal government to put in more restrictions on travel. He does not have to take my word for it. I know he can read. He can read Hansard, and he will see that this is in fact a fact.

I would like to take a look at what the Conservative Party is actually saying today through its opposition motion. It is in essence a proclamation to all Canadians from the Conservative Party in Canada that they should not worry and that mandates are no longer necessary. They are not saying to give due diligence. They are not saying to review science or consult with health care professionals. They are not saying that at all—

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Have you read the motion?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

—and I have read the motion. The motion says, “the House call on the government to immediately lift all federal vaccine mandates”. To my friend who posed the question, the real question is whether he has read the motion.

The Conservative Party collectively, inside the House, stands alone once again. It is not just the Liberals, the New Democrats and the Bloc members agreeing; we are all saying “no” to this motion because it is a stupid motion. The Conservatives cannot click their heels and wish an end to the pandemic. Members should keep in mind that there was a blockade that cost the economy millions of dollars, and potentially billions. There were a number of Conservatives who were out there encouraging—

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

The member for Lethbridge is rising on a point of order.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think if you look back about 30 seconds, you will note that the hon. member across the way called this motion stupid. He said, “a stupid motion." I believe that if you were to look at parliamentary history, you would know, and I believe this member knows as well, that this is unparliamentary language, so the House would like an apology for that.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, our rules, and in particular if we look at Beauchesne's, are very clear. It would be most inappropriate if I were to say that the member is stupid, but it is okay to make a generalization about a political statement and classify it as being stupid. There is nothing wrong with saying something, especially if it is about the real situation, and in this case it is, and I hope that the point of order will not take away from my time.

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

I heard the arguments from the two members and we will resume debate for now. I remind all of my colleagues to conduct themselves with decorum in this chamber.

Before resuming debate, I want to assure the parliamentary secretary that this point of order has not cut into his speaking time.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think if we were to canvass our constituents, taking a look at how the Conservative Party has brought forward this motion today, they would suggest that it has been greatly influenced by the far right. I really and truly believe that. Even the right-wing guru Jason Kenney from the province of Alberta, the one many Conservatives look up to, would not, I think, support this particular motion. It is quite possible that I could be wrong, but what I do know is that Jason Kenney was very critical of elected officials talking with individuals who were participating in the illegal blockades.

There is a reason I raise that. What were those individuals asking for? They were asking for an end to vaccines. The illegal blockades and the protests that were taking place were demanding an end to mandates, and today we have the Conservative Party echoing, at least in part, what the blockaders and the protesters were saying just weeks ago. That is, in fact, the case.

Let us take a look at what has actually happened. Right from day one, when the pandemic came to Canada and went around the world, the government responded by putting in a litany of programs and supports to be there for Canadians as we got a better understanding of the cost of the pandemic from a health perspective. We invested a great deal of resources, whether it was civil servants or financial resources, and had a team Canada approach in dealing with the many different stakeholders out there and in coming up with ways to minimize the damage of the pandemic. That was led by looking at science and listening to what health experts had to say.

Members should have listened to what the Minister of Health said in his opening remarks on this today. He talked about the easing of some restrictions on April 1 for pretesting when crossing the border. That is based on what we are being informed through the numbers.

We had a dramatic increase that occurred through the omicron variant, and we were not the only ones to put in place certain aspects to protect Canadians. We saw different provincial governments take action too. The Province of Quebec implemented a curfew. My home province put in more lockdown measures. Who would have anticipated this back in November and December?

The federal government provided somewhere in the neighbourhood of 30-plus million rapid tests to the provinces and territories in the month of December alone last year, which was more than a number of months prior when there was no demand for rapid tests. We had to put into place stockpiles in order to accommodate changes because the pandemic is not gone. We still need to be sensitive to what might be around the corner. As an increase in the demand for rapid tests came, in the month of January, through procurement, we received approximately 140 million additional rapid tests, in good part circulated to where the demand was: to our provinces and territories and, as I understand, even to businesses and other stakeholders.

At least on this side of the House, we recognize that the pandemic is not something people can just wish away. There is a responsibility for all of us to make decisions based on facts and science and to continue to listen to health experts. When members of the opposition talk about Dr. Tam, one might get the impression that she is saying to lift mandates. That is not the case. Our chief medical officer is saying that we need to be diligent. We need to have reviews and we are having those reviews. That is the responsible thing to do.

As for the Minister of Health, if we read his comments from earlier, we can see there is a plan in place that has some fluidity to it because circumstances change. We on this side of the House recognize that, and we wish the Conservative Party would do likewise.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is certainly a lot that could be unpacked in terms of falsehoods, misdirection and avoiding the very clear question. I am confident, and in fact I know, that many Canadians from Liberal ridings have been reaching out to Conservatives across the country, desperate for somebody to listen, desperate for somebody to hear their concerns. Those individuals are among the thousands of public servants who have been fired by the government because of a vaccine mandate.

Members opposite laugh when we bring forward the concerns of these Canadians within this place. However, what is the member's message to the people of his constituency who lost their job because of the federal vaccine mandate that the Prime Minister promised he would not implement but then a few months later did, right before an election? What would he say to the constituents of MPs across the country and the members of the public service who have been fired because of the government's mandate?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would say to my constituents, as I have, that as a government, from day one we have been listening to and following the advice of health experts, realizing that the very best thing we can do for Canadians is work with Canadians in getting through this pandemic. That is one of the reasons that, ultimately, Canada has fared so well in ensuring we have the vaccine supply and the supports in place to be there for workers, seniors, people with a disability, students, just name it. We have been there in a very real and tangible way because we care about the people of Canada and we are not going to put politics ahead of that caring.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given the rough week that the member for Winnipeg North has had, I can understand why he is so energetic and impassioned here today.

We are calling for a plan and for more predictability with respect to health measures. This will help maintain social cohesion.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the idea of a flexible plan that would enable us to look forward and provide some predictability surrounding the measures.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that opposition members will often ask for plans. I was in opposition at one point too and asked for plans. That kind of implies that there is no plan, but nothing could be further from the truth. There is a plan. We have ministries with very competent civil servants who work every day to ensure that we are listening to what health experts and science are saying and what Canadians are saying. We are ultimately making decisions based on that.

It is not that on April 1 we are saying we do not have to have the pretest. That was decided a little while ago in anticipation, because the science and the numbers were allowing us to make that adjustment. In essence, when members say there is no plan, I would counter it by saying that we do have a plan and we see that plan in action every day.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji.

Nunavut's chief public health officer has stated that they will be cautious in lifting these measures. These changes in public health rules do not mean that COVID-19 is gone, but rather that we must live with COVID-19.

Does the hon. member agree that measures to protect vulnerable communities remain a priority and increased investments on current commitments are necessary?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member raises a very valid concern and it is something I tried to emphasize. There is a lot of fluidity with regard to the pandemic, and there are certain sectors of our communities where we do need to ensure that extra attention is given. That is one of the reasons the Prime Minister and many of us have recognized that there are ways in which we can learn from the pandemic to enhance programs going forward. The best example that comes to my mind is the issue of long-term care. Let us understand it and look at ways we can improve it through, for example, national standards for long-term care.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak out against the revisionist party of Canada, also known as the Conservative Party of Canada, and its motion today to confuse and conflate what we are dealing with and every sacrifice that Canadians have made throughout this pandemic, as a way for them to try to save their floundering party and the division within it.

It is shocking to sit here and listen to the Conservatives today, although it should not be shocking after the last six years of being in this place with them.

Let us talk about the pandemic and the mandates across the country, in particular the fact that I do not think there is a single Canadian who has not been impacted by the pandemic and who does not want to see the lifting of these mandates. Everybody, on all sides of the House, wants to see a return of normalcy, but what Canada and countries around the world have done and what responsible governments around the world have done has been to implement public measures to keep people safe.

A recent Harvard study actually indicated that if it were not for vaccinations and strong public health measures, over 400,000 Canadians would have died during this pandemic.

I sat here today and listened to Conservatives scream and say they wanted their freedom back. What about the freedom of those 400,000 families that would no longer have that family member sitting across from them, or that employer who would no longer have that employee, or that young person who might have lost their grandparent before they had the time to have more cherished memories?

While the Conservatives say they want their freedom back, they mislead the House and they mislead Canadians with regard to the very real tragedies across the country. The actual number of Canadians who have sadly passed due to this pandemic has been over 37,000. It is a number that I find the Conservatives continue to gloss over.

They talk all about the inconveniences. Trust me, it is an inconvenience. It has been difficult not to travel like we want to, to wear masks and to have limitations, but the alternative has been losing lives, losing family members to this disease and having worker shortages across the country due to infection rates.

While the Conservatives scream and talk about freedom, they very much do not represent the reality of the over 37,000 Canadians who lost their ultimate freedom because they died due to this disease, and of the family members who have lost that opportunity to spend time with them.

With that said, obviously, the need to lift restrictions is inevitable. We have seen provinces and territories do it across the country, but what the Conservatives like to gloss over is the fact that, throughout the pandemic, over the last two years, every province and territory has experienced different things at different times. They have had the ability to adjust and put in place measures based on the risk profiles at the time. Leave it to the Conservatives to be out of touch and say they know better than provinces and territories what is needed in their local jurisdictions.

I come from Ontario, and we have had a very different experience than, for example, my friends and colleagues from Nova Scotia have. Does that mean that the Conservatives know best and they will just implement whatever they want, no matter the local dynamics at the time?

It is no wonder that Canadians did not trust Conservatives in this place to deal with their health care needs.

Let us talk about flip-flopping and changes in positions, because I have listened to the Conservatives. The member for St. Albert—Edmonton actually said in his speech, or in a reply to a question from me, that the Conservative position has never been to restrict Canadians' travel abilities. It was actually his former, former, former leader. I forget now how many they have had, as there have been so many. It was the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, who in April 2021 slammed our government for not restricting travel more.

Also, the member for Calgary Nose Hill, who I sat on committee with when I was parliamentary secretary to the minister of health, demanded that we put more travel restrictions in place, but then a few months later, once the Conservatives had another leadership convention, they changed their position back.

Let us talk about the ultimate hypocrisy coming from the Conservatives. Their former leader, the member for Durham, said in the last election campaign that anyone travelling with him or his family had to be fully vaccinated, yet for the rest of Canadians travelling on planes, buses or trains, that requirement was not there. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander, but we know that when it comes to members of the Conservative Party, they will take measures to protect themselves, but then try to stoke up the flames of the party's base.

Let us also talk about the fact that I have listened in this place to the members opposite say that they support science and that there is no science for these mandates. It is a little rich to hear members of a party still debating whether or not climate change is real say that Canadians should listen to them on their accreditations about science. Even without that, if the members opposite truly care about science and think that science is going to lead us out of this pandemic, which I certainly believe, then why is it that they still allow members, such as the member for Niagara West, to actually promote Ivermectin as a treatment? It is horse dewormer. I am sorry. The Conservatives are correcting me on the pronunciation. It is something that they have been researching and promoting.

Conservatives suggested that instead of vaccinations, Canadians should use horse dewormer. This has been widely proven to be false information, but those are still the voices in the Conservative Party that they want Canadians to listen to. They say they are the arbiters of science. There was also the member for Provencher who had to apologize in this place because he made the claim that double vaccines were 13 times more likely to kill people than the delta variant. The member had to apologize. He is still a sitting member in this place on the Conservative benches.

It is outrageous to think that Canadians should trust the Conservative Party of Canada with their health or with the decision of when mandates should be lifted. There is no question that all mandates will eventually be lifted, as they should be and as we have been doing constantly. As the pandemic has changed, so have our mandates because we have been following the science. What I think Canadians find truly offensive, and certainly I do after listening to the debate in this place, is the suggestion by the party of climate change deniers and horse-dewormer medication strategies that vaccines are not safe. It will not even disclose who is vaccinated or not, and its members continue to spread conspiracy theories on their social media and in this place. Those are not the people who Canadians have trust in to lift mandates and take care of their health.

The pandemic has been incredibly difficult for everybody, but we must never forget the lives lost and the heroes throughout this pandemic, such as health care workers who are still overwhelmed in hospitals and still care for residents in long-term care homes. We want out of this pandemic, but the only way to do it is through science-based decisions, not the revisionist type of conspiracy theory policies that Conservatives have put forward.

On this side of the House, we will continue to look out for Canadians, for their health and for the well-being of their families and the economy, and we will reject the politicized alt-right policies of the Conservatives.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is so unbelievably virtuous and knowledgeable about science. If we had not moved this motion today, we would not have even had the opportunity to debate the issue of vaccine mandates.

On my side of the House, we think that scientists have the right answers. Could my colleague explain why the advice of 10 Canadian provinces that have scientists working on COVID-19 is not valid?

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

Mr. Speaker, I never suggested that the decisions of provinces and territories, and the scientific advice they are following is not correct. In fact, if the member was listening to my speech, he would have heard that I said that as provinces and territories have made decisions about their particular situations, we, as a federal government, should listen to what provinces and territories feel is best in their particular jurisdictions.

However, that is not what the Conservative motion is. That member should know that the Conservative motion is saying that Ottawa knows best, and that it should tell provinces and territories how best to deal with this pandemic. We are saying we are going to continue to work with them and we are going to follow the evidence.

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

Mr. Speaker, I cannot quite believe what I am hearing. All the scientists' ears have got to be ringing. As much as they want us to believe their decisions are informed by science, I think it is actually the opposite because this feels like we are in the magical land of unicorns.

The House is debating an important issue, but the mood is all-or-nothing politics. The Conservatives are in camp nothing. They say we should cancel all the measures. The Liberals say they are keeping the status quo and will lift the measures someday, who knows when. Is there even a plan? The Liberals say they have one, but they are not telling us what it is.

Is there any way they can tell Quebeckers something of substance about the public health measures and when and how the Liberal Party will give us some kind of plan so we know what to expect and have some predictability, all without remaining frozen in time?

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

Mr. Speaker, I actually agree a lot with her statement that it is this all-or nothing proposal that we seem to be debating. In fact, I disagree with that.

For example, on April 1, there will be another federal restriction lifted when it comes to vaccinated travellers and testing requirements. As much as I wish we could provide a predictable plan, I think in the past two years of the pandemic, we have seen that there is nothing predictable about COVID except that it is serious and it is deadly. We need to make sure that we are agile to lift restrictions and ensure that Canadians can live as we always have, but that it is done with public health measures at the forefront and ensuring that we do not see increased spikes or increased deaths across this country, including in Quebec.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that the other thing that is fairly consistent is the fact that the Conservative Party has never taken this issue seriously from day one. As a matter of fact, at the beginning of the debate today, one of the members in the Conservative Party started to talk about how the government has been late on everything. Meanwhile, the Conservatives were late to put on masks, they were late to support Canadians in the supports that were being rolled out to them, and they were late to get vaccinated. We still do not know how many of them are vaccinated. They have been late in almost every single regard as it relates to COVID-19, yet they seem to hold a superior opinion as to how the government should be dealing with this now.

Can the member expand on that?