Finance Committee on Oct. 7th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I call to order meeting number 47 of the Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to standing order 83.1, we are continuing our pre-budget consultations 2014.

I want to welcome all our guests here on our first panel this afternoon. Thank you so much for being with us here today. We have in order of presentation, first of all, from Canada's Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies, Mr. Mark Fleming and Mr. Walter Robinson; from the Canadian Rare Earth Element Network, the chair, Mr. Ian London; from the Mental Health Commission of Canada, the vice-president, Ms. Jennifer Vornbrock; from Polytechnics Canada, the CEO, Nobina Robinson; and from TRIUMF we have the director, Jonathan Bagger.

Welcome to all of you. Thank you so much for being with us. You have five minutes maximum for your opening statement per organization.

We will begin with Mr. Fleming.

[Walter Robinson, Vice-President, Government Affairs, Canada's Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies (Rx & D)]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Walter Robinson, and I'm the vice-president of government affairs for Rx and D. I'm joined by Mark Fleming, the director of federal affairs and health policy at Janssen, the pharmaceutical companies of Johnson and Johnson, who also serves as vice-chair of our national affairs committee.

Rx&D represent 55 international and Canadian research-based pharmaceutical companies who discover, develop and deliver new medicine and vaccines to Canadians.

The appropriate prescribing and use of innovative medicines and vaccines can be a key enabler of health system sustainability, as they can reduce the number of unnecessary visits to the doctor, avoid lengthy stays in hospital and, in some cases, eliminate the need for invasive and costly surgical procedures.

Our members also partner with governments on the front lines of public health and seasonal influenza and other vaccination campaigns. Through this work our industry supports close to 46,000 direct and indirect high value, high skill, and high wage jobs across the country. Our members contributed over $3 billion to the Canadian economy last year, with more than $1 billion into R and D investments and approximately $322 million devoted to patient assistance and community contributions. Indeed, over 75% of this amount was devoted to more than 3,000 industry-funded clinical trials, which provide hope to patients who have not responded well to other therapies and further the frontiers of medical knowledge.

[Mark Fleming, Director, Federal Affairs and Health Policy, Janssen Inc., Canada's Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies (Rx & D)]

Earlier this summer we provided the committee with a series of recommendations to help drive further investment into research, development, innovation, and commercialization. These recommendations support the economic action plan, Advantage Canada economic framework, and the global markets action plan. Stability and predictability are the focus of our comments this afternoon.

To start we congratulate the government on signing the comprehensive economic and trade agreement, CETA, with the European Union. Swift implementation of the IP provisions within CETA, including the right of appeal for innovators, patent term restoration, and enshrining eight years of data protection will send an important signal that says Canada is serious about harmonizing its IP regime to global levels.

Last month my company, Janssen, announced an agreement with the University of Toronto's Centre for Collaborative Drug Research to form an open source collaboration focused on new therapeutic approaches to the treatment and management of mood disorders and Alzheimer's disease. This project called neuroscience catalyst is a unique collaboration between government, industry, and the research community. This important global Johnson and Johnson investment was strongly influenced as a result of the successful IP negotiations within CETA. IP improvements will better arm companies like mine and our other members to compete globally within our own organizations to attract investment mandates into our country.

While CETA addresses some important IP issues, there is still more work to do. For example, a series of judicial cases has resulted in a test for patent utility that is higher than the bar applied in other countries. Fortunately, this issue will be considered by the Supreme Court shortly. We sincerely hope that their decision will align Canadian standards with those applied to our major trading partners.

[Walter Robinson]

Another area of focus critical for business stability and confidence is safeguarding confidential business information. In June this House passed Bill C-17, which modernizes Canada's Food and Drugs Act. To be clear, we support the principles, objectives, and direction of Bill C-17, as it essentially codifies the manner in which our members already work with Health Canada to ensure and promote patient safety. However, we are concerned about last minute amendments made to the bill prior to its passage by the House, which deal with the standard for disclosing confidential business information or CBI.

As currently written, CBI in the bill is understood broadly to include business information that is not publicly available. It is information that has economic value to a business or its competitors but may not be related to patient safety. Rx and D is strongly supportive of providing the Minister of Health with specific powers to respond to the threats to the health of Canadians, which may include circumstances where it is essential to disclose CBI to address an imminent and serious risk to human health without notice or consent. Indeed, this is the approach in the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act and the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act. The threshold in both of these acts permits disclosure only when the risk is serious and imminent. Using these acts as benchmarks, we think the language in Bill C-17 is problematic and imprecise. It is also inconsistent with the benchmark used by the FDA and the EMA. We have amendments that we can talk to you about during our closing our remarks.

[Mark Fleming]

Although we've focused our remarks around business stability, we trust that you'll review all nine recommendations in our summer submission, which address, among other things, improved clinical trials, environment, regulatory modernization at Health Canada, and more accurate reporting of R and D by our industry in Canada by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board.

Thank you for your attention today. Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

Now we go to Mr. London, please.

[Ian London, Chair, Canadian Rare Earth Element Network]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members.

On behalf of the Canadian Rare Earth Element Network, known as CREEN, please accept our sincere thanks for the invitation to appear this afternoon. We appreciate being able to inform you about this compelling opportunity for the strategic and economic benefit of Canada.

CREEN wants to deliver three main points today.

First, Canada has the real opportunity of securing a leadership position and its commensurate economic benefits in the global rare earth supply chain outside China. Canada has the best undeveloped rare earth resources and some of the most advanced development projects in the world.

Second, there are challenges unique to rare earth projects that must and can be resolved to enable industry to bring them into production. The Canadian rare earth sector is a collection of junior or small cap mining companies without the individual financial or technical resources to address these challenges alone.

Third, government support through research, innovation, and demonstration is necessary if Canada is to capitalize on this unique and time-sensitive opportunity to leverage Canadian rare earth resources into an engine of economic growth. Someone outside China is going to seize the opportunity. We believe it should be Canada.

Rare earths are a group of 17 elements with unique properties that are essential to many modern technologies, including advanced transportation, national defence, renewable energy, computer and network communications, lighting, health care, and consumer electronics. The current global market for rare earths is valued in the order of $4 billion annually, a number that is expected to roughly double in the next five years. Growth over the last 10 to 15 years has been 8% to 12% per annum, growth which most experts agree will continue.

Developing the five most advanced projects in Canada would create about 1,400 direct jobs with $4.3 billion in estimated capital construction costs and $1.2 billion net present value in estimated future taxes. These figures do not include Canadian downstream value-adding industries that will be developed if the rare earths are mined and processed in Canada. The small cap miners have already invested $200 million in Canadian projects.

As you and many know, China has a virtual monopoly on rare earth production and processing and controls about 85% of the overall global production. China has managed to exert further control of important downstream manufacturing and technology value chains. These actions have created a real supply risk of critical materials to the rest of the world, including Canada.

An economic development model, similar to the China model, could be considered by Canada and its trade partners if we had the local production. Manufacturers and technology innovators are undeniably looking for secure, sustainable, alternative supplies of rare earths. There are clearly national strategies among our key trading partners and allies in Europe, the U.S., Korea, Japan, and Australia, to obtain secure critical rare earth supply chains, and they are looking to Canada for leadership. For example, the European Commission, in its report on critical raw materials for the EU, deemed heavy rare earths to be critical with the highest supply risk relative to economic importance. The EU created the European Rare Earths Competency Network or ERECON, a group of government, industry, and academic partners that will be presenting its final policy recommendations later this month. Canada, through CREEN, is a permanent observer of this group. CREEN has also been invited to address NATO next week on critical material supply in electric power systems.

Canada and EU cooperation in this area would be a great step forward in the context of the historic CETA agreement and Canada-EU strategic partnership agreement. The U.S. Department of Energy deemed rare earths as critical for energy and advanced green technologies and provides funding support to the Critical Materials Institute in the order of $125 million over five years. The U.S. Department of Defense has also allocated funds for stockpiling specific rare earth materials. Korea and Japan have also launched initiatives to address both government and corporate interest.

What is Canada's position? A January 2014 article by Postmedia reported that the Government of Canada has deemed rare earth elements to be critical to the country's economy. Nine of the 28 most advanced rare earth projects in the world are located in Canada. Canada is uniquely positioned with its world-leading expertise in mining and metallurgy to capitalize on production and develop new industries.

There is a global competition and as such Canada's window of opportunity is narrow. The Canadian players recognize there is a need to work together and collaborate as an industry and as a country. CREEN was formally launched following two workshops hosted by Natural Resources Canada and the round table in October 2013 with then Minister of Natural Resources, the Honourable Joe Oliver. CREEN, with its current 25 members and growing, is a member-led, multi-stakeholder network. It provides a platform for industry, academia, commercial and national labs, and experts who deliver collaborative solutions that will enable Canada's rare earth sector to produce.

CREEN is also focused on acting as the face of the industry to engage international governments and institutions, and on working with universities to develop the highly qualified personnel needed to support the industry.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. London, could you wrap up, please?

[Ian London]

Yes.

Basically, CREEN is requesting funding support of $25 million over five years. The estimate will leverage Canada's leading rare earth resource position and technical reputation, cement Canada's position in global rare earth product supply chains and international trade, develop highly qualified personnel, and create and sustain jobs and economic growth in an emerging industry.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to the Mental Health Commission of Canada, please.

[Jennifer Vornbrock, Vice-President, Knowledge and Innovation, Mental Health Commission of Canada]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

My name is Jennifer Vornbrock, and I'm the vice-president of knowledge and innovation with the Mental Health Commission of Canada. I'd like to speak with you about the work the commission has accomplished in the last seven years and about our desire to move forward with a mental health action plan to improve mental health for all Canadians.

The Mental Health Commission was created in 2007, with the support of all parties in the House of Commons. Here I would be remiss not to acknowledge the support of the late Jim Flaherty. He was a champion for mental health and encouraged our work, both publicly and privately, over a number of years.

Today I am asking to continue our work together to help all Canadians from coast to coast to coast. The commission has completed all of its goals in its current mandate three years ahead of time and on budget. In seven short years, we have worked with national stakeholders across the country to create a national mental health strategy for Canada. We have trained over 110,000 Canadians to deliver mental health first aid in 2,640 communities across this country. We have launched the world's first national standard for psychological health and safety in the workplace. We have led a national youth anti-stigma campaign, evaluating anti-stigma programs in over 50 schools, and are currently working with 20 schools to implement the most effective programs. We have created an internationally recognized knowledge exchange centre to help mental health professionals share research and best practices across Canada and around the world. This summer, we started conversations in the community on suicide in collaboration with members of Parliament from all political parties. We continue to work closely with the Government of Canada to develop a federal framework on suicide prevention. Finally, the commission oversaw a major five city homelessness research project, delivering results that showed that for every $10 spent on housing first, $20 was saved.

Throughout our work, the commission has leveraged the government's investment, dollar for dollar, with over 350 partnerships that provide funding, resources, and expertise in kind. I sincerely hope there will come a day when the Mental Health Commission is out of business, but today there is still much more work to be done.

The commission's actions to date have drawn international acclaim for made-in-Canada best practice. The mental health strategy for Canada is considered one of the best in the world. We now have a road map that was created by Canadians. A renewed mandate will allow us to put those plans into action, working with the provinces and territories, stakeholders across the country, and people living with mental illness, to implement a mental health action plan with concrete goals and measurable outcomes.

Our original mandate allowed us to move the needle on workplace mental health stigma and homelessness. This new mandate will allow us to confront even more mental health issues that Canadians are seeking solutions to, such as suicide, PTSD, and support for seniors, children, youth, aboriginal, and new Canadians.

I am pleased to say that consultations on the mental health action plan are already under way. We have begun this work quickly and effectively due to the strong relationships we have built over the last seven years. With the provinces and territories, the commission has become a coordinating agent that can gather input and build consensus across all levels of government. We have also collaborated extensively with the Canadian mental health community because we know how critical it is that mental health issues are not addressed in a manner that includes silos.

To this end, I am pleased to say that Dave Gallson, co-chair of the Canadian Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health, known as CAMIMH, an organization that represents 18 national mental health care organizations, has joined me here today in support.

The commission is already a hub of research and development, and our organization is a natural investment point to fund mental health innovation. Working with community stakeholders, we can address critical issues in mental health and encourage collaborative efforts between mental health stakeholders and government research bodies.

The Mental Health Commission has proven that it can deliver results faster and for less money. We have budgeted responsibly, and we can continue our current funding until 2017. It is in the next federal budget that we are seeking a strong signal to our stakeholders across Canada that our work would be able to continue until 2025.

Mental health reaches virtually into every Canadian household in this country. In any given year, one in five Canadians will experience a mental health problem, with a cost to the economy of more than $50 billion. Without action, these challenges will only intensify.

However, we believe that by working together and investing in a concrete action plan, we have the opportunity to improve the lives of Canadians living with mental illness and to position Canada as a global leader on mental health innovation.

Thank you. Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Ms. Robinson, please.

[Nobina Robinson, Chief Executive Officer, Polytechnics Canada]

Thank you.

Our thanks to you for including us in your important annual hearings.

I'm Nobina Robinson and I'd like to recognize Dr. David Ross, president and CEO of SAIT Polytechnic in Calgary, one of my board members and someone whose support is critical to our advocacy success.

Polytechnics Canada's 10 recommendations for next year's federal budget encompass two of your themes: increasing competitiveness through R and D, and maximizing job opportunities for Canadians.

In fact, innovation and jobs are vitally linked in our view. It is people who innovate, not institutions. So we need a 21st century workforce that knows how to innovate, and you know that I will continue to advocate that college and polytechnic advanced applied education build the much sought-after innovation skills for all Canadian workers. I will provide concrete examples today that underpin our recommendations, but I hope you will ask me more about our substantive ideas to improve innovation, labour market, and trades training outcomes in Canada.

Our 11 members are publicly funded, research-intensive colleges and institutes. We are demand-driven and industry-responsive in all that we do. Your committee's focus on competitiveness is absolutely correct. So let me share a small example of how our members are enabling a whole industry sector to compete.

In 2012 the college and community innovation program, CCIP, awarded Sheridan College in Oakville a five-year grant to establish the Screen Industry's Research and Training Centre. A year later, 36 local regional companies and organizations from Ontario's digital media industry have partnered with over 180 Sheridan students and faculty on industry-led applied research. If you want an example of how colleges and polytechnics spur commercialization, then consider how Red River College in Winnipeg is using another CCIP award to purchase tools and equipment to serve the needs of an industry consortium involved in an all-electric transit bus project designed to test lithium battery life in Manitoba's extreme winter weather.

If you want more such success, then we recommend an increase to CCIP, the sole NSERC program supporting college-applied research, and now stalled because demand for our R and D collaborations is outstripping supply. Worse, thousands of small Canadian firms are now forced to put innovation on hold.

And then consider how neither Sheridan nor Red River nor any of our other members nor other colleges can access the same supports for their indirect costs of research as their university counterparts. This leads me to our second research-related recommendation, namely to increase the funds for the indirect costs of research programs and to allow the CCIP I just mentioned to be eligible. We can find no policy rationale for this exclusion. Stable, predictable funding helps to build our industry liaison capacity and to increase our industry-driven research projects.

Your other concern for maximizing job opportunities requires that we as a country and more importantly, that the federal government once and for all recognize the consensus that now exists, after a year or more of skills debate and labour market turmoil, that Canada needs to invest in reliable accurate and timely labour market information. Your own committee's hearings this spring on youth employment recognized the need for action on this important issue. This is why we recommend the creation of a labour market information council that will make both demand and supply side data available to all Canadians, learners, workers, educators, and parents alike.

With the persistent threat of not enough certified journeypersons in high demand trades professions, the same labour market information council could modernize how we track Canada's 400,000 apprentices. Through the creation of a national registered apprenticeship number, we could gain crucial information about progress, mobility, and barriers faced by apprentices. And if demand is outstripping supply of talent for the skilled trades profession, consider our recommendation on high-demand training capacity needs. Each of our members has examples to give you of the numbers of qualified applicants we are turning away due to lack of space, lack of instructors, lack of equipment.

Above all, we need to de-risk investment in trades training if we're to grow the number of certified people. This is why we have recommended an employer tax credit for employers of record who see a Red Seal apprentice through to certification.

The modern innovation process is far more collaborative than ever before, involving teams of researchers, technicians, specialists, and even tradespeople. Connecting talent to polytechnics should be a high priority for your committee's deliberations.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much for your presentation. We're going to Dr. Bagger, please.

[Dr. Jonathan Bagger, Director, TRIUMF]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committee today.

I am here representing TRIUMF, Canada's national laboratory for particle and nuclear physics research.

For this year's pre-budget consultations, TRIUMF submitted a proposal recommending the creation of an initiative to strengthen Canada's innovation in science, medicine, and business. Dubbed CAPTURE, Canada's Accelerator Platform To Unleash Research Excellence, the proposal seeks to unlock TRIUMF's capacity to produce scientific, economic, and societal benefits for all Canadians.

Before I describe CAPTURE, however, I'd like to speak briefly about TRIUMF. Owned and operated by a consortium of 18 Canadian universities, TRIUMF is a national hub for leading edge research in nuclear and particle physics, fields in which Canada ranks as a global leader, according to the Council of Canadian Academies, and fields in which TRIUMF plays a significant role in sustaining Canada's global research excellence.

In recent years, TRIUMF has expanded its mission to include materials science and nuclear medicine, new fields, I will argue, in which TRIUMF's expertise can add to the prosperity and well-being of Canadians.

In line with the theme of this session, I would also like to highlight TRIUMF's long history of translating its scientific expertise into competitive advantage for Canadian industry. Amongst its peers in the international subatomic physics community, TRIUMF stands out for its record of exceptional collaboration with industry. Starting 36 years ago, through its partnership with Nordion for the production of medical isotopes, TRIUMF has fostered the growth and competitiveness of domestic companies, such as ACSI and PAVAC Industries. In addition, the laboratories also generated economic benefit through its work with large multinational firms, including CISCO, Intel, and Toyota.

In 2008, to increase its commercial engagement, TRIUMF created its own non-profit company, Advanced Applied Physics Solutions, or AAPS. During the past five years, AAPS has spun off five new businesses, each of which is adapting TRIUMF technologies to industrial needs, providing new capabilities in sectors ranging from mining to medical imaging, for the benefit of Canada.

Now let me return to CAPTURE, the laboratory's proposal to the pre-budget consultation. With CAPTURE, TRIUMF seeks to build on success and secure Canada's world leadership position in isotope science. The most critical element of CAPTURE is to strengthen TRIUMF's core capabilities, allowing the timely completion of ARIEL, the laboratory's newest and most advanced facility. Under construction since 2010, this $100 million facility, currently two-thirds complete, represents the future of TRIUMF. ARIEL is on time and on budget. When complete, it will nearly triple TRIUMF's output. It will keep the laboratory on the cutting edge of research excellence, and increase opportunities for engagement with industrial partners.

CAPTURE also seeks to transform TRIUMF into a true multidisciplinary laboratory by augmenting its programs in nuclear medicine and materials science. These are strategic moves that will unleash the full value of past investments in the laboratory.

Medicine and materials are promising areas with great economic relevance, both of which will leverage ARIEL. Strengthening them will help Canada make breakthroughs in commercially relevant sectors, ranging from the treatment of cancer to the development of advanced batteries.

Triumph has been a tremendous success for Canada. It is remarkable what TRIUMF has achieved with a base operating budget that is set to be frozen from 2005 through 2020. The proposal we are making for Budget 2015 is that with CAPTURE, an additional investment in this remarkable facility, Canada can truly benefit from TRIUMF's untapped potential in isotope research, nuclear medicine, and materials science.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you for your presentation.

Starting off our round of questions will be Mr. Caron, who will have seven minutes.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you kindly, Mr. Chair.

I will begin with the pharmaceutical representative.

I could go through all of your recommendations, but the fourth one, in particular, caught my attention. It calls on the Government of Canada to "amend Health Canada's mission, vision, core values and objectives to incorporate the promotion and acceptance of innovation into its culture, mandate, processes and procedures."

Health Canada did that in other areas. For instance, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency more or less did it by including that new mission in its public protection mandate.

And in that connection, the environment commissioner indicated that "the agency's mandate [was] dual and often incompatible", its mandate being to serve the industry and protect Canadians' health. Following your recommendation would lead to a similar situation.

Could we run into problems around a dual mandate if we were to amend Health Canada's mandate, as you recommend?

[Walter Robinson]

Merci, monsieur le président.

Through you to Mr. Caron. Very quickly, as we pointed out in our submission, the promotion of health and patient safety is not incompatible with innovation for the FDA. It is not incompatible with the role of innovation for the European Medicines Agency. Indeed, the Government of Canada, through the leadership of federal health minister, Rona Ambrose, has embarked on a health innovation panel to drive the sustainability of the health system, the thing that federal government is working toward, and which includes the provincial and territorial partners in that regard. They all see health innovation and medical science innovation as a key enabler of driving health system sustainability.

To your specific question with respect to the PMRA, in a former life, as some of you know, I've testified before this committee wearing various hats. By way of disclosure I worked for a corporation that had an interest in some of the products that the PMRA regulated. The pursuit of innovation and science was to ensure that you had a science and evidence-based risk management framework through the PMRA. Again, I didn't find at the time that those objectives were incompatible. I appreciate the environment commissioner's report, but as long as human health and safety is paramount and driven in an evidence-based way, science and health care can co-exist. We think that making human health sciences a priority as you move into budget 2015 and the asks that we have made don't involve any money or any disclosure, or disbursements of the forthcoming federal surplus, but a lot of policy and regulatory-based change.

So in short we think it can be done and that Health Canada in that respect should mirror what other leading jurisdictions have done in ensuring that there's a health and innovation mandate and, indeed, we are encouraged by the health innovation panel that the federal Minister of Health has appointed. We'll be making submissions to them in short order with this recommendation.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

You can appreciate that concerns may linger around a dual mandate and the problems it could give rise to. You would agree that special oversight would be required to ensure that both mandates could be carried out without interference, would you not?

[Walter Robinson]

At the end of the day, the protection and promotion of the safety of Canadian patients is the top priority, for us as well as for Health Canada. And as long as that takes precedence over all other priorities, no dual mandate exists.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you very much.

Now, I would like to speak with you, Mr. London.

I would imagine you followed the debate around the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement, known as FIPA, quite closely.

We know that China has a virtual global monopoly over the world's rare earths. And we are trying to break that monopoly using Canadian investment, and the exploration and development of rare earths on Canadian soil.

Are you currently aware of any Canadian companies active in the rare earths industry in China?

[Ian London]

Those are very good questions. As for whether it is easy to break a monopoly, the world and major manufacturers are looking for and seeking alternative sources of supply. It's not just a monopoly issue, but one of security of supply and new innovation, including by the Chinese. The Chinese are also looking for alternative sources of supply and protecting their own resources. So regarding the traditional model that they are monopolistic, that is not as big a threat because the Chinese themselves are also looking for alternative sources of supply.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Do you know of any Canadian companies or operators that are actually operating right now in China in the rare earth industry?

[Ian London]

The one company that was Canadian and has since been bought over by Molycorp was Neo Material Technologies. It was Toronto-based and had about 1,000 employees, and 900 are in China. In effect, it is not a Canadian solution, but a Chinese solution. This is not to batter the Chinese. It was a very effective strategy by them.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

But does FIPA pose a risk to Canada's growing industry, which is precisely trying to provide an alternative to the virtual monopoly China currently has? Could the agreement enable Chinese firms to seize a larger share of that global market?