Questions and responses 45th Parliament, 1st session May 26, 2025, to present

With regard to the Public Health Agency of Canada’s “Cases Following Vaccination” reports published from August 2021 to September 2022: (a) why did the Public Health Agency of Canada decide to begin calculating and comparing COVID-19 deaths using vaccination status, on the date of COVID-19 vaccine approval in December 2020, rather than the date on which each corresponding dose level actually began to be administered, or using weekly death counts, as is done for Statistics Canada’s Deaths by Age and Deaths by cause statistics; (b) what internal documentation, analyses, and external scientific or technical references were consulted to inform the methodological choice described in (a); (c) within the Public Health Agency of Canada, which organizational units and officials or governing authorities (i) proposed the methodology described in (a), (ii) reviewed it (including any internal methodological or ethics review), (iii) formally approved it for use in the “Cases Following Vaccination” reports; (d) in what way does the methodology described in (a) permit the observation and analysis of time-based (for example, weekly or seasonal) variations in COVID-19 deaths by vaccination status in relation to contemporaneous factors, including, but not limited to, seasonal changes and the dates on which additional vaccine doses (for example, second, third, or booster doses) began to be administered; and (e) in developing and approving this methodology, did the Public Health Agency of Canada rely on, or explicitly reference, any guidance, standards, or methodologies issued by the World Health Organization or any other international public health body, and, if so, which specific documents or authorities were relied upon?

With regard to Health Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada and National Advisory Committee on Immunization expenditures between 2020 and 2023: (a) which projects and departments researched the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines and how much did each project cost, broken down by (i) project name, (ii) department name, (iii) start date, (iv) completion date, (v) cost; (b) which projects and departments researched manufacturers' COVID-19 vaccine applications and how much did each project cost, broken down by (i) vaccine name, (ii) project name, (iii) department name, (iv) start date, (v) completion date, (vi) cost; (c) which projects and departments informed Canadians and specialists about the adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccines, broken down by (i) project name, (ii) department name, (iii) adverse event, (iv) start date, (v) completion date, (vi) date Canadians were informed about the adverse event, (vii) cost; and (d) which projects and departments researched vaccine hesitancy and how much did each project cost, broken down by (i) project name, (ii) department name, (iii) start date, (iv) completion date, (v) cost?

With regard to preparations made by the government for witnesses representing the Department of Industry, who appeared or were scheduled to appear before parliamentary committees, since October 1, 2025: (a) were any off-site meetings or retreats held for the purpose of committee preparations in any way; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) list of attendees, (iv) scheduled date and subject of the related committee meeting, (v) name of the related committee; (c) what were the expenditures related to each such meeting or retreat, in total, and broken down by item; (d) what are the details of any contracts signed in relation to off-site meetings, retreats or preparations, including any contracts with consultants who were involved with the preparations in any way, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of the goods or services, (v) location, if applicable, (vi) date and name of the related committee meeting or scheduled committee meeting; (e) what are the details of any contracts signed in relation to on-site meetings, retreats or preparations, including any contracts with consultants who were involved with the preparations in any way, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of the goods or services, (v) location, if applicable, (vi) date and name of the related committee meeting or scheduled committee meeting; and (f) are there any other contracts related to committee preparation not covered by (d) or (e), and, if so, what are the details of each, including the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of the goods or services, (v) location?

With regard to supervised consumption sites approved by Health Canada, broken down by year: (a) has the Deputy Minister of Health, Greg Orencsak, visited any supervised consumption sites in his current role, and, if so, for each visit, what (i) was the date, (ii) were the name and location of the site; (b) has the Assistant Deputy Minister, Controlled Substances and Cannabis Branch, Kendal Weber, visited any supervised consumption sites in her current role, and, if so, for each visit, what (i) was the date, (ii) were the name and location of the site; (c) has the current Minister of Health visited any supervised consumption sites in her current role, and, if so, for each visit, what (i) was the date, (ii) were the name and location of the site; and (d) has the President of the Public Health Agency of Canada, Nancy Hamzawi, visited any supervised consumption sites in her current role, and, if so, for each visit, what (i) was the date, (ii) were the name and location of the site?

With regard to COVID-19 vaccine mandates for public service employees, contractors and temporary workers: (a) how many employees and temporary workers were terminated because they didn't have the COVID-19 vaccine, broken down by (i) department, (ii) role, (iii) employment type (full-time, temporary, contractor); (b) how many employees and temporary workers had their pay suspended because they didn't have the COVID-19 vaccine, broken down by (i) department, (ii) role, (iii) employment type (full-time, temporary, contractor); (c) were grievances filed against the government for the COVID-19 vaccine employment mandates; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, for each grievance, (i) what is the department, (ii) what is the role, (iii) what is the grievance, (iv) what is the state of the grievance, (v) what is the amount of money paid to the employee, (vi) did the government apologize for their actions; (e) did the government receive religious exemption requests for the COVID-19 employment vaccine mandate; and (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, how many religious exemption requests were received, broken down by (i) department, (ii) result of the request, (iii) who reviewed the exemption request?

With regard to the $157,028 in personnel expenses listed on page 290 of volume 3 of the 2025 Public Accounts of Canada for the Government House Leader between March 14, 2025 and March 23, 2025: (a) how many (i) full-time, (ii) part-time, (iii) contract or other, employees worked for the Government House Leader between March 14, 2025 and March 23, 2025; and (b) what is the government’s explanation for the personnel costs during this period being exponentially higher per day than the expenses for the other Government House Leaders?

With regard to information arising from an access to information request from the Public Health Agency of Canada – A-2023-000165, which stated that the Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam and “quite a few” pandemic managers at the Department of Health, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Department of Industry, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development and the Department of National Defence were required to sign a secret oath promising never to divulge information that “may result in embarrassment”: (a) which specific individual or individuals initiated the requirement for staff to sign a confidentiality agreement; (b) which divisions of which departments did the individual or individuals in (a) work in; (c) who was asked to sign this confidentiality agreement and what positions did they hold in their respective departments; (d) which divisions of which departments did the individuals in (c) work in; (e) what were the details of the confidentiality agreement; (f) why did the government feel such a confidentiality agreement was necessary; (g) did the government conceal or attempt to conceal any information from the public and media that could result in embarrassment; (h) if the answer to (g) is affirmative, what was the specific information that the government concealed or attempted to conceal from the public and media that could result in embarrassment; (i) what specific criteria do Department of Health officials use to determine whether it's more important to not embarrass the government versus the requirement to be open and transparent with Canadians; (j) are the staff who signed this confidentiality agreement still under a legal obligation to meet the demands as outlined in the confidentiality agreement; (k) under what other circumstances are these types of confidentiality agreements required of bureaucratic staff; (l) how did this confidentiality agreement differ from the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector; (m) who specifically wrote the confidentiality agreement and which division and which department do they work in; and (n) who approved the requirements of the confidentiality agreement?

With regard to Health Canada’s review of the manufacturing data, quality control and safety of lipid nanoparticles in the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, including all versions of Moderna’s SpikeVax, Pfizer-BioNTech’s Comirnaty and the boosters, and Onpattro (Patisaran): (a) was the purity of the starting materials for the lipids, such as residual halogenated solvents and elements, including metals, assessed for mutagenic risk in accordance with established norms and guidelines, and, if so, what were the results, and, if not, why not; (b) was the total amount of observed impurities assessed for mutagenic risk, and, if so, what were the results, and, if not, why not; (c) were any individual element impurities considered mutagenic; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, was this assessed with respect to multiple doses and with respect to the nature of transfection of the lipid nanoparticles; (e) was any assessment of the lipid nanoparticle as a nanoparticle performed; (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, did this include an assessment of the polyethylene glycol moiety; (g) was an assessment of the risk of complement activation-related pseudoallergy due to the polyethylene glycol moiety performed, and, if so, what were the results, and, if not, why not; and (h) were any complement-related assays requested from the manufacturer, and, if not, why not?

With regard to the Public Health Agency of Canada and the government’s future health approach: (a) which agency, entities or ministries are involved in (i) the pandemic prevention, preparedness and response protocols, (ii) the One Health approach; (b) what is the One Health approach and where or how did it originate; (c) which bills are currently tabled or have been passed which would operationalize (i) Canada’s pandemic prevention, preparedness and response protocols, (ii) the One Health approach in Canada, (iii) any other World Health Organization or United Nations international health or pandemic treaties or agreements; (d) have staff already been hired or will staff be hired and trained to integrate the One Health approach into Canadian policy and legislation; (e) if the answer to (d) is affirmative, (i) where and under which department or agency will these employees work, (ii) where are these positions posted, (iii) what are the hiring criteria for these staff, (iv) who selects the staff, (v) how many positions exist or will be created; (f) what is the budget allocation to integrate the One Health approach; (g) are there training programs for nongovernmental professionals in One Health and, if so, where are they located; and (h) if the answer to (g) is affirmative, (i) how are the training programs funded, (ii) what are their goals, (iii) who instructs these courses, (iv) what are the requirements to instruct these courses, (v) how did the instructors obtain these requirements?

With regard to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine safety and efficacy: (a) has Health Canada reviewed the peer-reviewed, published scientific article by Hulscher N, Alexander P E., Amerling R, Gessling H, Hodkinson R, Makis W et al. titled “A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination”, Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. 2024 Nov 17; v5.2019-2024; (b) what is Health Canada’s assessment of the study referred to in (a); (c) which department or agency makes the final determination about causality when a family member makes a vaccine injury death claim through the Vaccine Injury Support Program; (d) how many death claims relating to the COVID-19 vaccines have been made to the Vaccine Injury Support Program to date; (e) how many death claims relating to the COVID-19 vaccines have been accepted as being causally related; (f) how many death claims relating to the COVID-19 vaccines have been paid through the Vaccine Injury Support Program and what is that total amount paid out; (g) is an autopsy required in the case of a vaccine injury death claim; (h) if the answer to (f) is affirmative, what specialized immunohistochemistry is required to prove causation in the event of an mRNA vaccine injury death; (i) has Health Canada considered mandating autopsies with appropriate immunohistochemistry staining for sudden deaths; and (j) for the years 2019 to 2024, what is the excess all-cause mortality, broken down by year and reason for mortality?