Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, the equipment that was donated when China was in its outbreak was an important donation of nearly expired or expired goods that it was in desperate need of in its effort to try to contain the virus. As the member opposite knows, we've been able to work successfully with provinces and territories to ensure they have what they need.
Mr. Chair, I would suggest that during February and March our hospitals would have consumed that almost-expired product very efficiently, but I want to move on to another topic. When defending the sale of 22 seniors' homes to the Chinese government, the Prime Minister stated that we have a strong regulatory regime that imposes rigorous standards. He said that this regime ensures the care our seniors get is top quality. That was in 2017. Now he states he is saddened, shocked, disappointed and angered. Was the Prime Minister completely oblivious to the risks, or was he just too anxious to please the Chinese government when he sold those 22 homes?
Mr. Chair, the homes the member opposite is referring to are in the province of B.C., and I have to commend the province for the early work it did to protect seniors in those long-term care homes. The member opposite is trying to confuse the issue. As she knows, the review we did was entirely separate from the standards to which the province holds the care homes.
The Prime Minister does not have authority over seniors' homes, which he has clearly stated, but he does have authority over the act in which he approved the sale. At 18 months, government had an obligation to make sure there was compliance. Was that done?