Front Burner - Unraveling the Winnipeg disease lab mystery

Episode Date: March 7, 2024

Since 2019, questions have swirled around why two scientists, originally from China, were marched out of a high-security infectious disease lab in Winnipeg. They were later stripped of their security clearances and fired, in a case that has raised suspicions about Chinese espionage, and prompted calls for the Liberal government to release more information.Now, at least some questions have been answered. Last week the federal government released hundreds of documents, largely from Canada’s spy agency, CSIS, about the scientists’ dismissal. The documents contain revealing insights — but also leave many questions unanswered, putting further pressure on the government to allow a deeper investigation into this story.Today CBC reporters Karen Pauls and Catharine Tunney join us to dive into the revelations in these documents, the political firestorm they’re causing, and what questions remain unanswered.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. So you may remember this story from 2019 about this high-security infectious disease lab in Winnipeg and these two scientists that were marched out of there under mysterious circumstances. The pair, a husband and wife originally from China, were later stripped of their security clearances and fired.

The story triggered concerns about Chinese espionage and led to calls for more information from the federal government. We spoke to our colleague Karen Pauls about this story back in 2021. She's been digging into it for years. And there were a lot of unanswered questions at that point. Now, at least some of those questions have been answered, thanks to the release of hundreds of documents largely from Canada's spy agency, CSIS. So today, we've got Karen back on the podcast along with the CBC's Catherine Tunney, who covers national security and has been digging into these intelligence documents.

We're going to recap this story and explain what we've now learned and what mysteries still remain. Hi, guys. Thanks so much for being here. Hi. Hi. So, Karen, I think let's start with you. And could you remind us what this high-security lab is and who these scientists are? Sure. Well, Level 4 is the highest biosafety level, and it's used for research on easily transmitted and deadly pathogens like Ebola. We only have one lab like this in Canada, which opened in Winnipeg in 1999. There are only 51 in the world. So, Jianguo Chu was part of a team doing groundbreaking work on a treatment and vaccine for Ebola, and they saved thousands of lives during outbreaks in Africa.

Canada was at the leading edge of this research, and it was a really big deal. She won a lot of accolades and awards for her work. This work can't be done without teamwork. We were proud she was working here in our lab in Winnipeg. It was a big deal. Her husband, Kenning Chung, is a biologist who is doing research on things like SARS and HIV, but she was the star. Okay, so a celebrated scientist.

And then in 2019, Chu and her husband are essentially marched out of that laboratory, right? And they're stripped of their security clearance, and they were later fired. And I know that you originally broke this story, and you've been looking into it for years. I remember very well when you did this podcast with us in 2021. And so what did we know at that point? Sure. So one month after that first story, Sure. So one month after that first story, I broke the news about the Canadian lab's shipment of live Ebola and Hennepin viruses to China. Now, it took another year and many, many ATIP requests to confirm that it was actually Chu who coordinated that shipment. We reported that first.

shipment. We reported that first. And then through travel documents and tips, I discovered that Chu made at least five trips to China between 2017-18, including one to train scientists and technicians at the Wuhan lab. And then later on, after the scientists had been fired, we followed that up with a couple of stories about how security experts were concerned about access by Chinese military scientists to and ways that scientists were getting around them so they could bring in visitors to get into the lab faster and help them with their research. I've worked at NML long enough that you see people wandering around where they shouldn't be. Generally, you'll send them to the lab,

they'll do their work, you'll be in your office, and then they can walk around and do what they want. Turns out both of those things are true. Yeah. And just to be clear, back in 2021, did we know exactly why she was fired? We didn't. We had suspicions. We had all these pieces of information, but not a full picture. So you mentioned the Wuhan Institute of Virology. So this is a lab that people will recognize the name probably. It has a lot of significance for both scientists and conspiracy theorists. And I just think if we could address the lab and what it is, why it's such a big deal and what we already knew about how it connected to the story a little bit more.

Sure. Well, so the Wuhan lab actually opened as a level four lab, the first one on the Chinese mainland on January 4th, 2018. This is all around the same time as we now know CSIS was looking at these two scientists. Now, the opening was a big status symbol globally. It was built to focus on the control of emerging diseases and work as a WHO reference lab like others around the world. Scientists were excited about the opportunities for international collaboration, but there was also some concern from the beginning about security. Now, as you noted, the Wuhan lab is familiar to some listeners about the origins of the coronavirus.

And there's been speculation for years that the virus escaped from that lab and caused the COVID-19 pandemic. And there have been and continue to be a lot of conspiracy theories about the connections between our lab, that shipment of viruses, the Wuhan lab, the pandemic. And while there still are a lot of questions, we can say categorically that that shipment of viruses that we know about did not contain coronavirus. It did not. Right. And the shipment of viruses, I think you mentioned it was Ebola, right? Ebola and Hennepa. Okay, and I just want to be clear that we also don't have any evidence that COVID originated in that Okay, so lots of speculation around why Chu and her husband were fired in 2019, including, as we've talked about, some really wild speculation around the coronavirus. And we finally do have a large cache of intelligence documents that have just been released.

And they do give us some answers, right? But Kat, I'll bring you in here because before we get to those documents, it's been a really long road to get here, hey? And tell me about the fight to get these documents and the accusations lobbed at the liberal government that they have resisted attempts that would help people really understand what actually happened here in this lab. Yeah, I mean, the opposition fought really hard to figure out what was going on at this lab and throughout this process lobbed complaints that the Liberal government was trying to cover something up. When is the government going to start being accountable to this House of Commons and answer the questions?

Now, originally, the government argued that releasing these documents would hurt national security. And that felt that a special intelligence oversight committee that Canada has would be better suited to look at these documents. You know, there was a vote to declare the Liberal government in contempt. You know, the Liberal government brought the Speaker of the House of Commons to court, which was wild and basically unheard of. And basically what resulted was an ad hoc committee with MPs from multiple parties was put together, looked at the documents, looked at the redactions, and helped get these documents out the door, albeit years later. Okay. And I think we'll come back to later these accusations that they've been kind of thwarting answers here. But now that we're at these documents, what do they say?

Walk us through some of the big points, the things that we didn't know before now. Well, it turns out that, you know, some of the concerns about the couple were warranted. And, you know, to be clear, what we have access to is part of a CSIS security assessment. So this is not evidence in a court. This is basically a test to see if someone is trustworthy and loyal to have security clearance to work in this lab. And the documents show that that PHAC, the public health agency, was alerted in 2018 that Chu's name was on a patent in China. And that kind of started to set off alarms. So, you know, PHAC knock, knock, knocks on CSIS's door to let them know, you know, we have concerns. So CSIS looks into it, and at first they have perhaps a more charitable assessment of the

couple, especially of Chu. You know, they write that they don't think that she would willingly cooperate with a foreign power, but, you know, that she believes so strongly that, you know, they write that they don't think that she would willingly cooperate with a foreign power, but, you know, that she believes so strongly that, you know, that science can help humanity, that maybe she would be susceptible to foreign influence. But boy, did that change, because he just kept digging and kept talking to the couple and found out that she outright lied to them. outright lied to them. You know, they did some digging and found that she had ties to PRC institutions, including an institution with links to China's military that CSIS, as we can see in this doc, is clearly concerned about. They go on to write that, you know, she was using the Winnipeg lab as a base to assist China and that she was intentionally transferring scientific knowledge and materials to China. Now, I do want to stress that something that is clear in these docs, there's a lot of talk about like a potential threat, the danger of a threat, you know, what could happen if China's

military got its hands on certain things. It's not clear what actually China has done with any of this information. It's not even clear that CSIS knows what is happening in China with Canadian materials and scientific knowledge. But it is very clear that they felt that she and her husband should not enter that lab ever again, and that they should be stripped of their security clearance. Maybe to state the obvious here, I just wonder if you could give me some examples of what they might be so concerned about here when they're talking about how this could be potentially a threat to the security of Canada. Yeah, well, it seems to kind of whittle down to her work and her knowledge of, you know, these dangerous pathogens and those ties to China and

her deceit and her lying about those ties to China. These documents are peppered with the unknown, as I say, like not really exactly knowing what could happen or what has happened, but it's the fear about what could happen. And CSIS has increasingly over the years become concerned about Canadian research kind of walking out the back door and in the hands of countries like China that Canada does clearly not see eye to eye on on many things, including human rights, and does not trust China with that information and now it's concerned about how it would use that information. Now, I think it does jump to a hyperbolic place. I think, you know, you can think of a zombie spy movie scenario.

And I'm not sure that's totally helpful because that's not really borne out in the document. But we know that the RCMP is investigating and it's been investigating for years. And we don't know the results of that investigation. So just to put that out there as well. In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections.

Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo. 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. I wonder if we could just keep going on this Ebola thread for a second. Right. Yeah. So you talked earlier about the fact that she shipped the live Ebola virus to China. And that does sound quite scary. And it sounds like maybe she didn't follow the rules properly. But also, I wonder if you can just put its lab. It asked Canada for help.

Canada said, yes, we have the scientists, we can help. But the question is, you know, what else was shared? Labs and collaboration and sharing is, you know, seen as a good thing in science. These documents show CSIS asking to a lot of questions about that particular shipment. And she says she just acted as a messenger to help transfer viruses to the Wuhan lab. But the National Microbiology Lab bosses, the chief of special pathogens, signed off on everything. That first AATIP report that I got, there were weeks of conversations on emails between dozens of people on the lab side talking about the shipment, how they were going to do it, who are they sending it to, what kind of packaging they should put it in. It wasn't a secret. The shipment wasn't the problem.

She didn't do anything wrong there. The shipment wasn't the problem. She didn't do anything wrong there. But the interesting thing was two months after that shipment is when the public health agency referred this case to the RCMP. Right. So essentially on this particular point, on the Ebola point, it's actually not clear if she did anything wrong here? I mean, we were told she didn't fill out all the necessary paperwork and that this was a potential policy breach. Like Kat said, we see more concerns now in those CSIS documents. They were worried, you know, about other things going on. What else could have been

potentially shared that the bosses didn't know about. But this was the big headline at the time that there was this shipment. Yeah. I want to talk a little bit more about the conspiracy stuff. So earlier we talked about Chu's ties to the Wuhan lab. And we know at least some of that is totally is above board. So we've talked about the Ebola thing. We've talked about how the coronavirus was not shipped to that lab. But there are also a lot of other conspiracy theories spiraling now about the Wuhan lab and Xu's work. And can you briefly explain that to me? Sure. Well, I mean, the theory is that the coronavirus escaped from that lab and that's how it got into the human population. And eventually,

we had the pandemic. So there have been conspiracy theories from the very beginning. Right now, there's a story out by Sam Cooper, formerly of Global News, saying that she led the Wuhan lab's research on bats and coronavirus, that she was hired by the People's Liberation Army to work with their top researcher in 2019. That theory isn't new. I've been trying to nail it down for years. And I've looked again at those documents that Sam Cooper is referencing, and I don't see a smoking gun there. I can't make that direct connection. Since the release of these documents last week, the story's been really heating up in Parliament, and especially since Monday, when the Liberal and NDP MPs blocked a parliamentary investigation into the security breach. And I know that the Conservatives had called for this investigation, right?

The Liberals and the NDP are both taking a lot of flack for this. And Kat, talk to me about some of the criticisms that they're facing. Yeah, I mean, they're being accused of shutting down debate on, you know, a very sensitive file and being accused of covering up with, I think, you know, the subtext conservatives are making is that perhaps they're covering it up because it's embarrassing to the liberal government. And I quote, the information appears to be mostly about protecting the organization from embarrassment for failures in policy and implementation, not legitimate national security concerns, and its release is essential

to hold the government to account. In other words, there was no national security reason why we couldn't have had this before. These Winnipeg lab breaches are part of a broader pattern by this government of neglecting Canada's national security. Michael Chong, the Conservative MP and the party's foreign affairs critic, said, you know, the release of these documents shouldn't be the end of the conversation. This is really just the beginning and they want to find out more information about some of those lax security policies, for example. security policies, for example. Now, the NDP did vote along with the Liberals to adjourn that committee and to shut down that debate. But they followed up afterwards saying that they do support

a study into this. They just feel like that the Ethics Committee was not the place to do it and that they hope it pops up at the Canada-China Committee. So it's not over yet. And we know just talking just a few minutes ago, actually, to the Conservatives that while we are on a break right now, which is why, you know, you're not seeing it being raised in question period, for example, the Conservatives do in our planning to go hard on this when everything is back. Right. Because I guess there is this sense that just the fact that they blocked this parliamentary investigation or instead making

this procedural argument that would essentially kick the can down the road, that it just like raises more suspicions, right? Yeah, the optics are not good. And while I respect that there is, you know, policies and procedures that have to be followed, and we have different committees to look at different things, it's not, I think, a great moment for the Liberals when you have MPs saying, you know, that this isn't the place to do it and that it's not necessary to do it. So it's not the best look. And we'll have to see if the Liberals will, at a different committee, vote to have this study, which is asking for witnesses from the public health agency, is asking for the head of public health agency, is asking for

the head of CSIS to come as a witness and to take more questions on this. Karen, you know, Kat mentioned that this could be embarrassing for the liberal government if more details came out about lack security. It's such an important and potentially dangerous lab, right? And if more details came out showing that this scientist was working with the Chinese government for a long time, kind of under their noses. government for a long time, kind of under their noses. But have you heard any other insights from anyone else about why the Liberals, and I suppose maybe by extension the NDP, would want to shut down this investigation? Well, I mean, that for sure. There's concerns our own allies may trust us less with their cutting edge research. But also, Chu did not do any of this really in a vacuum. Some insiders have said she was kind of like an NHL star who's brilliant on the ice,

and the coaches may turn a blind eye to any bad behavior off the ice. So if there's a big investigation, there may be questions pointed at some of her bosses. What did they know, and when when and why didn't they do anything about it? We've already lost a couple of really good scientists like Matthew Gilmore, who was the former head of the lab. He resigned to work with a bio research institute in the UK. We probably can't afford to lose too many more brilliant minds. Right. So essentially what you're saying is that the lab itself might be on the line here, you know, in one way or another. Yeah. There's still so many questions I have about this story. Just briefly before we go, Karen, you know, you've been looking into this

for so many years. And at this point, what are the biggest questions that you want answered now? Well, you know, at the heart of the story is Jian Gouqiu. Is she a spy, a double agent, someone with a plan to infiltrate a secure lab and share research and samples with the government that might use that information for dark purposes? Or is she a science nerd, her nose in a book, not paying attention to the world around her, offering to help her scientist friends back home. Or is it something in between?

Only she knows the answer to that. And that's why I still really want to talk to her. And just I remember you talking about this back in 2021. But have you tried to talk to her? And, you know, why can you not talk to her now? We don't know where she is. She still owns two homes in Winnipeg. And I visited them last week again, left some notes for her. But we don't know where she is. She's been seen around town throughout the years. But the belief is that she's working in China.

All right. Karen, Kat, thank you so much for this. Some answers, lots of mysteries still, and a lot more questions, which I don't think sound like they're dying down anytime soon. So I actually have a feeling that we might be talking about this again. Maybe. We'll talk then. Bye-bye. All right. That's all for today.

I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening. Talk to you tomorrow. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.