Was one bid on top?
Evidence of meeting #8 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was facility.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #8 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was facility.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
There was no ranking in the external process.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
We heard from Dr. Butler-Jones that there was a ranking.
Was one applicant recommended by the technical committee?
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
No, there was no recommendation from the technical process.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Okay.
It's my understanding that a $3 million allocation was discussed, which would be provided to an applicant with potential to move forward to implementation. Yes or no?
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
No, I am not aware of anything of that nature.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Okay.
Was one of the applicants allowed to resubmit parts of their application as late as October 2009? Yes or no?
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
Yes, there was one applicant who did submit additional information in the fall.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
If this was closed in March, how was this allowed to happen?
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
This information was submitted at a time when the review was in its final stages of completion. There was an indication that a partner had changed for one of the applicants. It was not a substantive change to the application.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
On what date did the government and the Gates Foundation officially decide it was cancelling the project?
9:45 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
That decision to cancel the project--in other words, the overall facility--was communicated in February of 2010, this year.
9:45 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
That's correct.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Thank you.
This project was an $88 million vaccine plant. As you know, it was originally announced by the Prime Minister and Bill Gates in February of 2007 and was cancelled as an administrative error on a Health Canada website. When exactly did this administrative error occur?
9:45 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
It wasn't cancelled, if I may say so, as the result of an administrative error. There was literally a human error made in preparation of material on the website, which inadvertently became public.
9:45 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
I don't know right now what that date was, but it was prior to February.
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
That was identified around January 20 as being posted on our website. We were not aware of that until that time.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
If the Gates study was dated July 2009--and this goes back to an earlier question--why was an applicant allowed to make changes in October, which would suggest that the process was ongoing?
9:45 a.m.
Head, Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative Secretariat, Director, Office of HIV Vaccines, Public Health Agency of Canada
The review process was completed, as Dr. Engelhardt said, only earlier this calendar year. We received the information from the single applicant, identifying that a partner on the application had changed, but the final decision was communicated publicly to the applicants on January 22 and then on our website on February 19.
9:50 a.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Okay, so the study for the Gates Foundation is dated from July 2009. Why did it take so long for the government to tell applicants that the project was dead?
9:50 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
That study, which was provided, was relatively detailed and was one of the factors that related to the very large project. That required interpretation. It required, first of all, assessment of the technical review that was carried out. The technical review was completed only shortly prior to that and hadn't really been evaluated. Then the whole question of the risk assessment and what it meant to the risk to the federal moneys and Gates' moneys to have a--
