Health Minister Defends Time Lag Between Initial Alerts on Winnipeg Scientists and Launch of Investigation

Minister of Health Mark Holland gestures to a reporter as he takes questions in the Foyer of the House of Commons on Feb. 28, 2024 in Ottawa. The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld

Health Minister Mark Holland has defended the time it took for the government to launch an investigation into the two fired scientists at the Winnipeg lab, beginning the probe months after initial red flags were raised.

Mr. Holland testified before the House of Commons Canada-China committee on April 8, addressing the ongoing investigation into national security breaches involving scientists Xiangguo Qiu and Keding Cheng. Ms. Qiu and Mr. Cheng, a married couple, were removed from Canada’s top biosafety lab in Winnipeg by the RCMP in July 2019 and subsequently fired in January 2021 for having undisclosed ties to Chinese regime entities.

According to declassified documents, red flags about the two scientists at the National Microbiology Lab (NML) were first raised in August 2018, but an investigation wasn’t launched until December that year.

Ms. Qiu was first listed as an inventor on a patent filed in China in October 2017 without the knowledge of the management of the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), which oversees the NML.

Shortly after the initial alerts about the two in August 2018, Ms. Qiu still travelled to China in October 2018 and conducted a training workshop at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). She also accepted to become a member of the International Advisory Committee for the lab at this time.

Also in the same month back in Canada, a WIV senior technician whom Ms. Qiu had brought over to the NML was caught attempting to remove tubes from the NML, while restricted visitors under the supervision of Ms. Qiu and Mr. Cheng were left unescorted at the lab.

In November 2018, NML management approved the shipment of deadly Nipah and Ebola virus strains to the WIV, a request facilitated by Ms. Qiu.

It was on Dec. 21, 2018, that the governmental organization in charge of security issues at the PHAC hired a security firm to investigate the two.

“That’s months after the first red flags were raised,” Conservative MP Michael Cooper said at the committee. “And in the interim, a material transfer agreement was signed with Wuhan at the request of one of those scientists who was deemed to be a potential national security threat. Why did it take so long to launch a preliminary investigation?”

Minister Holland said that the government agency needed to follow “due process.”

“In this instance, the nature of that patent, and the reason why that patent hadn’t been disclosed, was being investigated,” Mr. Holland said.

Mr. Holland also said that the transfer of the virus samples to Wuhan was done in the interest of advancing science to protect all of humanity.

“The fact that there are countries that are engaging in activities that would endanger not only our country, but all human beings, is profoundly disturbing,” he said.

‘Sudden’ Resignations

During the committee meeting, Conservative MP Michael Chong asked about the “sudden” resignation of Matthew Gilmore, head of the NML, and Tina Namiesniowski, president of PHAC. Mr. Gilmore resigned in May 2020, “eight weeks into a global pandemic,” according to Mr. Chong, and Ms. Namiesniowski resigned in September 2020.

Heather Jeffrey, the current president of PHAC, said it wouldn’t be appropriate for her to comment on these employee issues, but added that the resignations weren’t associated with the issue of the fired scientists.

“They resigned for personal reasons,” Ms. Jeffrey said.

Mr. Chong asked for confirmation that the resignations were “not associated with this issue at all.”

Ms. Jeffrey this time said she is “not privy to their reasons,” before being cut off by Mr. Chong who asked, “but you know that they resigned for personal reasons?”

Mr. Holland chimed in at this point, saying there’s a need to be “careful” when discussing employee issues.

China’s Risk

Mr. Holland also faced a challenge from Bloc Québécois MP Stéphane Bergeron for his earlier comments that the influence of China on Canada’s scientific community was not as well known before as it is today.

During a press conference following the release of the government documents on the two scientists in late February, Mr. Holland told reporters that back in 2019, neither he nor PHAC would have been “certain” of the extent to which China was willing to go to “influence science and obtain information.”

“I think that there was an inadequate understanding of the threat of foreign interference,” Mr. Holland said on Feb. 28.

Mr. Bergeron said that for years before that, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) had been warning about the risks China poses.

“In 2010, CSIS published a report explaining the growth of the economic power of China, its new aggressive behaviour in recruiting foreign offices, which would suggest that the resources were inadequate when it came to intelligence,” Mr. Bergeron said in French.

“In other words, for the past 20 years, CSIS has been alerting government authorities to the fact that the People’s Republic of China is showing itself to be increasingly aggressive and is intensifying its intelligence-gathering activities, particularly when it comes to technological research and advancements from a biomedical standpoint.”

In response, Mr. Holland said public safety is a “complicated issue.”

“There’s so many dimensions to it, especially when it comes to a virus that threatens the general population,” he said in French.

“Of course, the government is going to do its utmost to protect the public. It’s going to try to act collaboratively and look for solutions such that if there are solutions available, well, then those will be used.”