Foreign Affairs Committee on March 21st, 2022

[Stephen de Boer]

I'm not sure who you—

[Mark Schaan, Acting Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Innovation Policy, Department of Industry]

I'm happy to start on that, Ambassador.

With respect to the questions of Canada's access to medicines regime, there is a process, as you outlined, that needs to be followed to be able to move it through. Canada continues to work in international fora with respect to this and follows those dialogues and discussions. At this stage, Canada has not received a formal proposal through the CAMR process and is looking at the possibilities of how the regime would be engaged in this regard.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Wouldn't this indicate that the CAMR process is broken if they are not able to put that process forward? I understand that you're saying there is a process that needs to be undertaken, but it does seem like we are now two years into a pandemic and that process should probably be expedited.

[Mark Schaan]

I think it's very important to come back to the comments that were made by my colleagues in Geneva with respect to the fact that right now the problem is not one of supply—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It really was.

[Mark Schaan]

CAMR is a process by which additional supply can be brought to bear from a Canadian perspective in those countries that potentially have need. It is worth noting that that would need to be a demonstrable capacity to move that through, and as we saw, there was a significant effort from the players at the forefront of the vaccine effort to be able to tech transfer and grow capacity, which ultimately then came to bear, which is why we are now in a position where there is actually significant supply across the world.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Ms. McPherson, that's six minutes spot on. You'll have a chance to follow up in subsequent rounds.

We will go to round two.

Leading us off will be Mr. Morantz, please, for five minutes.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm curious about a recent news story that said it's very likely that the WHO won't approve Medicago's COVID vaccine due to ties to the tobacco industry. As you're probably aware, the Government of Canada invested $173 million of taxpayers' dollars into Medicago for the production of the Covifenz vaccine. When they applied to the WHO for approval, the WHO did its due diligence and found out that Philip Morris, the tobacco company, owns a roughly 20% stake in Medicago, and they have a strict policy of not partnering with tobacco companies.

I'm wondering whether or not you're aware of the situation and what due diligence was done before the government parted with $173 million for a vaccine company whose vaccines can't be used outside of our borders.

[Joshua Tabah]

Go ahead, Mr. Patterson, I can come back on the WHO side if necessary.

[Darryl Patterson, Director General, Department of Industry]

With respect to the investments made in the facility in Quebec for Medicago, as with all projects that are ultimately supported through our colleagues at the strategic innovation fund within the Department of Industry—or ISED—rigorous due diligence is performed, as well as expert advice in the context of vaccine and biomanufacturing projects through the vaccine task force, which provides advice on all projects moving forward. There was a process followed and a decision made to fund in accordance with the policies and procedures that are followed for all investments made.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you.

During that due diligence, did the Government of Canada look into the ownership of Medicago? Was it aware prior to the giving of the $173 million grant that Medicago was substantially owned by a tobacco company?

[Darryl Patterson]

I can't comment on the specific due diligence, having not been part of it, other than to say that financial due diligence is conducted, as well as corporate due diligence, on all transactions that are supported through the SIF.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Who could answer that question?

[Darryl Patterson]

I can take that back and report back if that's [Inaudible—Editor].

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

I would like to know whether or not the Government of Canada was aware, before it issued $173 million of taxpayers' dollars to Medicago, that the WHO had a rule that it wouldn't deal with tobacco companies. If you could respond to that question in writing, I would really appreciate it.

The article goes on to say that given this rejection of the Covifenz vaccine by the WHO, these vaccines will be excluded from contribution to COVAX. Will that hamper the Canadian government's ability to meet its obligations to supply the 200 million doses equivalents or actual doses to COVAX? Was it relying on the vaccines from Medicago to meet that goal?

[Joshua Tabah]

Thank you for the question. I can take that one.

No, Canada has not been relying on that specific vaccine candidate to meet the target of donating the equivalent of 200 million vaccines to COVAX by the end of 2022. As I mentioned, a key, necessary step for COVAX to add a vaccine to its portfolio is WHO EUL recognition, which, as you've noted, is likely not to be the case for Medicago.

I would simply add that countries are free to make whatever procurement and regulatory decisions they deem appropriate. The WHO's emergency use listing is an important step for COVAX, but other countries globally have their own regulator approaches and may make similar decisions to Canada in terms of providing regulatory approval for a vaccine candidate.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Have you had any discussions with any other countries that may simply wish to ignore the WHO rejection and actually acquire vaccines on a bilateral basis?

[Joshua Tabah]

We have regular discussions with countries. Many countries, including, for example, the United States, Mexico or others rely primarily on their own national regulator as opposed to decisions from the World Health Organization. The WHO's regulatory function is an important scientific and evidence base in particular for developing countries that lack stringent regulator authority themselves.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

You found out that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thanks very much. In interest of time we'll have to leave it there. You'll have a chance to follow up in a subsequent round.

We now go to Ms. Bendayan for five minutes.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ambassador, and to all the witnesses who are here before us today.

I would like to begin, however, by acknowledging where we are at.

Russia issued an ultimatum to surrender the city of Mariupol. Approximately 12 hours ago, Ukraine time, that deadline expired. The citizens of Mariupol continue to be bombed, continue to be shelled, continue to die; and they do so in the name of freedom and democracy. I think we should acknowledge that at the beginning of our meeting.

I would also like to acknowledge the leadership of my colleague, Ali Ehsassi, who returned only a few days ago from the Ukraine-Poland border.

Mr. Ambassador, I'm very familiar with the discussions about the TRIPS waiver you referred to earlier in your exchange with my colleague, Ms. McPherson. I would like to come back to that for a moment. My understanding is that the United States, India, South Africa and the European Union have held discussions, as you mentioned last week, and that there is no proposed text before WTO members, which includes Canada. Is that the current state of affairs as you see it, Ambassador?

[Stephen de Boer]

Yes, that is correct.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

It is impossible for members, including Canada, to provide a clear position one way or the other.

[Stephen de Boer]

Yes, but I would say that Canada has signalled all along that we are ready to join a consensus on the waiver issue. We will actively engage in discussions should a text come forward, for example, with a view to reaching a compromise and reaching a solution on this issue.