Power Move: Liberals Use New Majority to Shut Down $300M Healthcare Scandal Probe — No Explanation Given

The Liberals have used their freshly minted majority to move a parliamentary health committee meeting behind closed doors — blocking public scrutiny of a government-funded healthcare program that ballooned from $40 million to $300 million before being quietly cancelled. Liberal MPs refused to explain why. Two of them walked past reporters without saying a word.

Here is what Canadians are not supposed to see.

PrescribeIT is — or was — a federally funded electronic prescription program run by Canada Health Infoway, a government-backed non-profit. Launched in 2017 with a $40 million budget, it was designed to connect pharmacists and physicians through a digital prescription network. A good idea, in theory. In practice, adoption was slow, the product never achieved critical mass, and the program was cancelled earlier this year. Operations end May 29, 2026.

So far, so unfortunate. Government programs fail. That happens.

What is not supposed to happen — at least not in a functioning democracy — is that when opposition MPs call for an auditor general investigation into how $40 million became $300 million over a decade, the governing party uses a procedural majority vote to slam the committee room door shut. No debate. No explanation. No accountability. Just: meeting adjourned, in-camera, no questions.

What Happened at the Health Committee

On Tuesday, April 29, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health was meeting to discuss PrescribeIT. Conservative health critic Dan Mazier moved a motion for the committee to obtain documents and financial records from Canada Health Infoway and Telus Health — the companies at the centre of the program.

Rather than debate the motion, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health Maggie Chi moved to hold the session in-camera — meaning: closed to the public and media, no transcript released, no accountability to Canadians who paid for the $300 million program.

A vote was called. The Liberals, who now hold a majority on committees thanks to their parliamentary arithmetic, voted it through. No Liberal MP provided any rationale. The meeting went dark.

The next morning, Liberal MPs Doug Eyolfson and Sonia Sidhu — both members of the health committee — walked past reporters without saying a word. When pressed on the matter, Government House Leader Steven MacKinnon said: "I reject the premise. No one's shutting down debate."

Someone should explain that to the Canadians who watched their government spend $300 million on a cancelled app — and then watched their elected representatives refuse to explain why, in public, in committee, as the rules of Parliament are designed to require.

The CEO Who Wouldn't Say What He's Paid

It gets worse. During testimony the previous week, Canada Health Infoway CEO Michael Green was asked by MPs to disclose his annual salary. He refused. He told the committee his compensation is determined by the board of directors and is "publicly available." He then declined to provide it.

This is the head of a non-profit that exists entirely on federal government funding — meaning taxpayer money — who will not tell the taxpayers' elected representatives what he earns.

Conservative MP Matt Strauss summed up the Wednesday morning aftermath: "It was astounding, it was awful. I think if that's what Mark Carney plans to do with his newfound majority, I think Canadians should be really, really distressed."

Conservative MP Burton Bailey said he was "very disgusted."

Conservative health critic Dan Mazier told reporters to direct their questions to the Liberals — since they were the ones with answers, and the ones refusing to give them.

The Majority As a Shield

This is the core issue, and it goes beyond PrescribeIT. When Mark Carney's Liberals secured majority status in Parliament — through a combination of floor-crossings and seat gains — they also gained majority control of parliamentary committees. Committees are supposed to be the watchdog function of Parliament: the mechanism by which the opposition, on behalf of the public, can force disclosure, compel witnesses, and obtain documents the executive branch would prefer to keep quiet.

A government with majority control of committees can, at any time, invoke in-camera proceedings, shut down document requests, or simply outvote any accountability motion. The rules allow it. The Liberals have now demonstrated they will use it.

The ArriveCAN scandal cost taxpayers $54 million for an app built by a two-person company. That investigation took years of committee work to produce meaningful disclosure. PrescribeIT cost $300 million and was cancelled without anyone in charge being held publicly accountable. The committee that was supposed to examine it just had its lights turned off.

The pattern here is not subtle: when Liberal programs fail expensively, the Liberal majority now has a tool to make sure Canadians never fully learn why.

What Accountability Looks Like

The Conservatives have asked the Auditor General to investigate PrescribeIT. The Auditor General is independent and cannot be voted into silence by a parliamentary majority. That investigation, if launched, may be the only mechanism left for public accountability on this file.

But the broader precedent set this week matters. Canada's parliamentary committee system only works as a check on government power if the government cannot simply override it whenever scrutiny becomes inconvenient. This week, the Liberals demonstrated they can — and will.

"If that's what Mark Carney plans to do with his newfound majority," said Matt Strauss, "Canadians should be really, really distressed."

He's right.