Evidence of meeting #11 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was point.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Frank Plummer  Scientific Director General, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada
David Butler-Jones  Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada
Steven Sternthal  Acting Director, HIV/AIDS Policy, Coordination and Programs Division, Centre for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Population and Public Health Branch, Department of Health

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to Dr. Butler-Jones and Dr. Plummer.

A question.... If you look at the Gates study, it does begin with a disclaimer, and it's surprising to say that it uses secondary sources and that they're not verified.

Also, we've been very careful to talk about capacity, which is quantity, and we want to assure that there was quality. I think that's been a concern, but I'm going to move on, and it pertains to one of the questions I asked on the order paper.

I'm wondering if you could discuss the history of L5L, as much as you're able to share. What is its current status? Will it be going forward?

10:35 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

Basically, we're very, very early. As you know, we've been looking at the capacity in the Winnipeg laboratory for some time and recognizing the value of some additional high-level capacity. While we were looking at that, the concept of a different kind of facility, in addition to that, that would allow clinical and other research that would answer some very important questions.... For example, now we have a fair bit of evidence that would suggest that N95 masks, with influenza, are no better at protecting health care workers than surgical masks in their practical use. So you could actually test some of these things. You could test surfaces, you could do a range of things, and you could also have appropriate containment for the highest risk, the most dangerous diseases.

So that's a very intriguing concept. As far as we know, at least in any non-military establishment, nothing like that exists so far in the world, and it is something we're very interested in looking at. So we will be doing some studying around that and what the implications are, what the need is, what the reality is, and then, based on that, we'll see where we go from there.

But right now we're really in an early assessment phase, moving forward. At the time now, as far as we can tell, it is novel and unique. We think it would continue to be so. As opposed to multiple facilities around the world, which we now have for vaccine production, something like this would be unlikely, given the nature of the containment, given the high expertise that's required. But we do need to do a lot more research and work before anything is committed to, beyond studying it.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Thank you, Dr. Butler-Jones.

How far has it moved along in the process? When was the idea first put forward, and how much movement has occurred?

10:35 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

There's been a lot of talk. Frank and I.... And you can correct me, Frank. It was a number of years ago when we first started talking about the concept and talking with people in terms of what the potential added value of something like that might be. There's obviously been a lot of talk in the community. There are different organizations that are interested, should something go forward in the future, in being involved with it. But beyond that, we really have a lot of due diligence to do, a lot of work to do, in terms of the cost, the utility, what kinds of models are appropriate, etc.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Dr. Butler-Jones, who would have experience in the world to construct this, and who would be the architects? That's a tremendous design.

10:35 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

In terms of any of those decisions, obviously those decisions would be part of following all the other pieces to engage, and it would certainly be usual government process in terms of transparency, opportunity to bid, etc. Smith Carter is one company that clearly has experience, and they're building lab facilities around the world, including our own level-four facility in Winnipeg, where they got their start. But they're not the only ones out there.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Who else? It takes extraordinary engineering and design to do this, so if you're thinking about this, I'm guessing you've looked at other potential groups that are able to do this work.

10:35 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

That's one of the things we have to assess, as to what is actually out there. There are a number of steps. We're far away from deciding on any design team or whatever. I know Smith Carter is obviously interested and different organizations in Winnipeg have been talking about it, looking at conceptual ideas, etc., but we're still basically at first base.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Thank you, Dr. Butler-Jones.

Mr. Uppal.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Tim Uppal Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, witnesses, for coming to our committee again and giving your expert opinions.

Dr. Plummer, we've already established that you're an esteemed scientist, physician, and researcher who has conducted in-depth studies and research related to HIV/AIDS. You're well versed in the existing climate related to HIV clinical trials and have likely listened to the witness testimony from experts such as Dr. Gerson, who disavows the government's thinking on the cancellation of this project.

Given your experience, do you agree with Dr. Gerson's assessment of manufacturing capacity and the notion that has been asserted by opposition members that there was greater emphasis on the quantity of manufacturing facilities, as opposed to measuring the quality of such facilities?

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Dr. Plummer, do you want to start?

10:40 a.m.

Scientific Director General, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Frank Plummer

Yes, Madam Chair.

In terms of the experience of the National Microbiology Laboratory, my own experience, and that of my scientists, who I consulted on this yesterday, we have had no difficulty accessing manufacturing capacity for high-quality clinical-grade material for vaccine in clinical trials. The biggest obstacle has been cost rather than finding a facility to do that. So I would not agree with the assessment of the witness. In my own experience, that's not the case. There are other obstacles, certainly, for an academic-based researcher to get trial lots manufactured, but having the facilities to manufacture them is not one, in my experience.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Tim Uppal Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB

Very good. Thank you.

Dr. Butler-Jones, you've graciously appeared before this committee several times in response to the study, and your testimony has been consistent all along. The issue here is that opposition members don't want to believe the truth, that there was no political interference whatsoever in the assessment of applicants for the CHVI manufacturing facility, or the decision that was inevitably and sadly made to cancel this facility.

Presumably, given your role, you would have discussed this issue with the minister, and you alone would have been privy to the minister or members of her staff trying to interfere in changing or modifying the results of the assessment, or worse yet, cancelling the project for sheer political reasons. So I'm going to ask you flat out, did the minister or her staff ever interfere with you or other officials of the Public Health Agency by suggesting that ICID or any other applicant should not be given the bid for political reasons?

10:40 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

No politician of any stripe interfered with this process, in terms of how we managed the process. The Gates Foundation is very clear in its mandate that political interference is off the table, and they would walk away. If I were not successful in thwarting political interference in what is supposed to be a fair process, then I would probably be off the table.

In terms of whatever else is going on, whatever the innuendoes, comments, and rumours out there, our process, everything I've looked at, all the people within the agency who have been involved, other departments, in terms of actually managing this process it has been upfront and clear. I sympathize with those who put in proposals and worked very hard. There's no question about it, these are all good people, good institutions, and good partnerships, but they didn't cross the bar. Sometimes I haven't crossed the bar; it is the nature of the business. But no politician from any party, or their staff, came to me or to the process to say you will do this or you will do that.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Tim Uppal Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB

Or their staff.

10:40 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

Or their staff. And that would have been resisted.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Dr. Plummer, did you want to make a comment on that?

10:40 a.m.

Scientific Director General, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. Frank Plummer

Certainly, Madam Chair.

I was recused from the process. I had no knowledge of what was happening in the review and no knowledge of the outcomes of the review. I don't even know who the members of the review committee were. I certainly know of no political interference in any stage of this process.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Thank you.

Mr. Uppal, you have a little bit more time.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Tim Uppal Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB

Dr. Butler-Jones, this government takes the safety of Canadians very seriously and we don't play politics with public health. I'm disappointed that the members of the opposition have decided to turn this issue into political gain and have used the privilege given to parliamentarians to slander the excellent officials at the Public Health Agency in a transparent attempt to gain political points.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

I'm sorry, your time is up now.

Dr. Butler, did you want to make comment on that at all?

10:40 a.m.

Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. David Butler-Jones

Not really.

As I've said before, the committee needs to pursue its processes in the most effective way possible. I've been very clear with the committee, in terms of what is known, the process, the facts of the process, and whatever else. It's been very frustrating for us in terms of the innuendo and claims of certain people saying certain things to certain other people. If someone did that in the agency it's totally inappropriate, and I would have to deal with that.

Secondly, the suggestion that any of the bidders actually crossed the bar was just wrong. Whoever said that, wherever they said it, was ill-informed and had no business saying that. And if it's somebody related to the agency or in the agency, then I'd appreciate it if someone would let me know so I can deal with that, because it is a matter of inappropriateness in my organization. If it's someone else, then let us get on with our business.

Thank you.

10:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Ms. Wasylycia-Leis.

10:45 a.m.

NDP

Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB

Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

Although the Conservative members would like to cast a certain light on this process and put it in the context of political gain, they are dead wrong. We are all here trying to in fact understand why Canada has lost and why this opportunity for incredible breakthroughs in terms of HIV and AIDS vaccine is lost, at least on a short-term basis. That's what every scientist who came before this committee told us. We're talking about a lost opportunity.

Of course I'm going to stand up for Winnipeg. I come from Winnipeg. I'm surprised there aren't others standing up for Winnipeg, like you, Madam Chair, or like the minister--

10:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Joy Smith

Excuse me, Ms. Wasylycia-Leis, that is out of order. Winnipeg is my home.