|
Q-768
|
Thursday, January 22, 2026 |
With regard to government information on Canadian and international experiences with medical assistance in dying: (a) what comparative studies has the government conducted on psychiatric medical assistance in dying in Belgium, the Netherlands or other jurisdictions; (b) which safeguards adopted abroad to mitigate risks of premature or inappropriate psychiatric medical assistance in dying have not been implemented in Canada, and why; and (c) how does Canada’s medical assistance in dying regime compare internationally in terms of permissiveness, oversight and eligibility thresholds? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, March 11, 2026 |
|
Q-765
|
Thursday, January 22, 2026 |
With regard to federal oversight of medical assistance in dying: (a) how many cases of medical assistance in dying where safeguards were found not to have been followed have been reported to Health Canada since 2016, broken down by year and province; (b) what corrective or enforcement actions were taken in each case; (c) what audits or spot reviews, if any, has Health Canada conducted of medical assistance in dying case files to verify compliance with Criminal Code safeguards; and (d) what measurable outcomes or indicators does the government use to assess whether medical assistance in dying safeguards against coercion are effective, particularly for persons with disabilities, those in poverty and Indigenous Canadians? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, March 11, 2026 |
|
Q-764
|
Thursday, January 22, 2026 |
With regard to Health Canada’s review of the COVID-19 modRNA vaccine products: (a) did Health Canada consider the specific nature of the nanotechnology of the lipid particles used for the modRNA vaccine delivery; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what was their assessment; (c) why was the fact that modRNA vaccines contain nanotechnology omitted from the product monograph-label; (d) did Health Canada assess the toxicity of pegylated nanoparticles, specifically the risk for complement activation-related pseudoallergy (CARPA) with the lipid nanoparticles used in the mRNA vaccines; (e) if the answer to (d) is affirmative, why was this not included in the product labelling; (f) if the answer to (d) is negative, why wasn’t this assessed; (g) did Health Canada assess the risk of toxicity due to the nanoformat of these vaccines; (h) if the answer to (g) is affirmative, what was the assessment result; (i) if the answer to (g) is negative, why not; (j) did Health Canada assess the lipid nanoparticles as a novel excipient; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, what was the assessment; (l) if the answer to (j) is negative, why not; (m) with respect to nanotechnology products and their unique properties and behaviours, particularly in their application to the modRNA vaccines, did Health Canada examine (i) the safety, (ii) the effectiveness, (iii) the risk to the environment, (iv) its specific regulatory status; (n) if the answers to (m)(i) through (m)(iv) are affirmative, what were the assessment results; (o) if the answers to (m)(i) through (m)(iv) are negative, why not; (p) how do established safe levels of DNA apply (i) when using pegylated lipid nanoparticles as a delivery system, (ii) when a product that contains pegylated lipid nanoparticles requires repeated dosing; and (q) what assessment was performed to assess the risk of residual DNA when using pegylated lipid nanoparticles as a delivery system in a vaccine which requires repeated dosing? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, March 11, 2026 |
|
Q-763
|
Thursday, January 22, 2026 |
With regard to Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada and the National Advisory Committee on Immunization and their statement, “the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines outweigh the risks”: (a) what are the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines, broken down by (i) benefit, (ii) supporting studies or documents and their published date, (iii) start and end dates of the benefit analysis, (iv) name and title of those who analyzed the benefit; (b) what are the risks of the COVID-19 vaccines, broken down by (i) risk, (ii) supporting studies or documents and their published dates, (iii) date on which the risk was identified, (iv) start and end dates of the risk analysis, (v) name and title of those who analyzed the risk; (c) was a risk and benefit analysis performed for each COVID-19 vaccine product; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, (i) what are the start and end dates of each analysis, (ii) what are the differences between the product analysis results; (e) was a separate risk and benefit analysis performed for (i) various age groups, (ii) genders, (iii) pregnant women, (iv) the immunocompromised, (v) First Nations and Indigenous populations; (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, for each group in (e), what are the (i) start and end dates for each analysis performed, (ii) name and title of those who performed them; (g) was a risk and benefit analysis performed for Canadians who were previously infected with COVID-19; and (h) if the answer to (g) is affirmative, for each analysis performed, what (i) was the start date, (ii) was the end date, (iii) were the conclusions of the analysis? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, March 11, 2026 |
|
Q-401
|
Thursday, October 2, 2025 |
With regard to the 2021 recommendation of the Veterans Ombud to the government concerning mental health treatment benefits for family members of veterans in their own right for the conditions related to military service, in which the Ombud recommended government funded mental health treatment independent of the veteran’s treatment plan and regardless of whether the veteran is engaging in treatment: (a) does it remain the position of the government that it accepts this recommendation, and, if not, when the did the position change; (b) what is the government’s current progress in implementing this recommendation; (c) what tangible steps have been taken to implement this recommendation, and on what date was each step taken; (d) how many times, and through which methods, has the government communicated with the Veterans Ombud or her office concerning the implementation of this recommendation, and on what dates did the communications occur; and (e) how many times has the Department of Veterans Affairs communicated with or received communication from other government departments or agencies related to the recommendation, and what are the details of each communication, including (i) the date, (ii) who was involved, (iii) the type of communication, (iv) a summary of what was communicated? |
Answered |
Wednesday, November 19, 2025 |
|
Q-345
|
Friday, September 19, 2025 |
With regard to medical assistance in dying and Veterans Affairs Canada, since September 2022: (a) how many times has a (i) Veterans Affairs Canada employee, (ii) third-party contracted by Veterans Affairs Canada, advised, suggested, or discussed medical assistance in dying with a veteran; (b) what is Veterans Affairs Canada's current policy regarding its (i) employees, (ii) contractors, suggesting medical assistance in dying to veterans; and (c) on what date did the policy in (b) come into effect? |
Answered |
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 |
|
Q-340
|
Thursday, September 18, 2025 |
With regard to Health Canada and Public Health Agency of Canada messaging about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation and website messaging that reads, “Vaccination is an important part of a healthy pregnancy, with health benefits for both the pregnant person and their baby. Several vaccines are routinely recommended during pregnancy, including COVID-19 vaccines [...] Evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy helps to prevent: COVID-19 infection and the risk of hospitalization from COVID-19 in infants under 6 months of age” and the government response to Order Paper Question Q-2163 from the 44th Parliament, which reads, “As indicated in the specific Product Monographs, it is noted that the safety and efficacy of these vaccines in pregnant women have not yet been established. No indication for use in pregnant or lactating women was sought by the vaccine sponsors or authorized by Health Canada [...] Health Canada has not approved any safety claims with regard to pregnant and lactating women”: (a) how does Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada explain these two conflicting statements; (b) who wrote the statement on the government's website and who approved it; and (c) who wrote the statement in the response to Q-2163 and who approved it? |
Answered |
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 |
|
Q-218
|
Tuesday, June 17, 2025 |
With regard to the recommendations in Health Canada’s publication through the National Advisory Committee on Immunization titled, “Vaccination and pregnancy: COVID-19”: (a) how do these recommendations differ from the May 27, 2025, announcement by the United States of America’s Health and Human Services, stating the COVID-19 vaccine would no longer be included in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended immunization schedule for healthy pregnant women and healthy children (herein referred to as “cohort”) citing “mixed data” on booster safety and efficacy for pregnant women while seeking stricter clinical trials for vaccine approvals in healthy individuals under 65; (b) did communications occur, related to the Health and Human Services announcement, between Health Canada, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization or the Public Health Agency of Canada and (i) Health and Human Services, (ii) the United States of America’s Food and Drug Administration, (iii) the United States’Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (iv) the United Kingdom’s Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, (v) the European Medical Agency; (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, what (i) were the dates of the communications, (ii) were the modes of communications, (iii) were the names and titles of people included in the communications, (iv) was the outcome; (d) to Health Canada's knowledge, did the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency or the European Medical Agency agree with Health Canada’s recommendations for the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine to this cohort; (e) does Health Canada, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization or the Public Health Agency of Canada have mixed data regarding booster safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine in this cohort, and, if so, how does this impact the risk-benefit analysis; (f) is Health Canada , the Public Health Agency of Canada or the National Advisory Committee on Immunization including the same or different data than the United States of America’s Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the decision to continue recommending the COVID-19 vaccines for this cohort; (g) what clinical trials or data is Health Canada, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization and the Public Health Agency of Canada including in their decision that gives them confidence to continue recommending these vaccines that differs from the United States of America’s Health and Human Services, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; (h) is Health Canada planning to request stricter clinical trials for vaccine approvals in healthy individuals under 65 in the future, and, if not, why not; (i) if the answer to (h) is affirmative, what additional vaccine clinical trial requirements will be needed for approval; (j) are there plans to change the recommendations with respect to the COVID-19 vaccine in this cohort; and (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, when will these recommendations be announced, and what will they include? |
Answered |
Monday, September 15, 2025 |
