Health Committee on April 15th, 2010

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

I'm going to ask again, and you went in a very different course, did Minister Toews or anyone working with him or for him threaten ICID that their vaccine bid was in jeopardy?

[Heather Medwick]

I was not directly told that.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

How were you told that?

[Heather Medwick]

I was told that a board member had been contacted by a minister's office suggesting that the recommended application would not move forward due to our former CEO.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

What minister's office was that?

I'm sorry, I know this is so difficult.

[Heather Medwick]

The problem is, it's not my experience. It's the former CEO's experience. So I can say third-hand or fourth-hand, but it's not my direct knowledge. That's what I'm struggling with.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Chair, wouldn't that be hearsay? It's not a court, but it's third-party...

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

We'll continue on.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm going to hand this over to Dr. Bennett now.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

I am concerned also in terms of what is theoretical capacity and what is actual capacity. I think what I've heard is that it's pretty difficult for any commercial enterprise to justify stopping its regular lines of vaccine production when asked to do so in order to provide a short run of enough for a clinical trial.

So I come back to the concerns that are swirling around the methodology of the Gates report. I would like to know more about that, but I'd also like to know more about what happens to the money from the Gates Foundation and to the money that was to be used to build this facility, and where it will be redirected or reapplied in terms of the commitment this government has had to fight against this pandemic. What happens to the money the Gates Foundation had previously allocated to this facility? Is there a consultation among the experts, such as those at this table, in terms of where the Canadian government money would go if this project doesn't go forward, in that we have had a commitment it will go in a fight against AIDS?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Dr. Bertozzi.

[Dr. Stefano Bertozzi]

The commitment stands. The ground rules say that it's a 3:1 contribution, the Canadian government to the foundation. The discussions and negotiations involved lots of parties--CIHR, the Public Health Agency of Canada, Industry Canada, Health Canada, ourselves, and their associated scientists, so there's a lot of consultation input. Some people might say it's too much because it takes longer to have so much consultation input.

The commitment is clearly to continue to work on the original goal--what Alan Bernstein said--consistent with the overall plan, and to accelerate development of a vaccine. That's the number one goal.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you so much.

We'll now go to Ms. Davidson.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

Thanks very much to our presenters this morning. I think we're hearing some extremely useful information as we move forward with this issue.

I have a couple of questions.

Dr. Bertozzi, when I looked at your presentation, and as I listened to it, I was pleased with the comments you made about your number one priority being the development and delivery of vaccines for infectious disease, and the HIV vaccine in particular being the top personal priority for Mr. and Mrs. Gates.

You went on to talk about the priorities in global health today and how the plan also included the potential to make changes to the existing strategies. I think that's extremely important as we talk about the changing world we're in today and how rapidly things change. Thankfully, things are changing for the more positive when it comes to HIV. I think it's extremely important that we recognize that fact, as well as the fact that the government and the Gates Foundation were able to address some of those changes.

You said we're talking about a new strategic plan. The HIV vaccine partnership that was announced was one of six priorities in the global HIV vaccine enterprise. What were the other five? Are those five other priorities things you're working on as the building blocks for the new strategic plan?

[Dr. Stefano Bertozzi]

I'm going to let Dr. Bernstein respond, because the priorities you mentioned are in the enterprise plan.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Okay.

[Dr. Stefano Bertozzi]

The foundation is also developing a broader strategic plan, but I'll let him respond to your question, if that's okay.

[Dr. Alan Bernstein]

Thank you.

The 2005 plan had six priorities, as you've indicated, one of which was manufacturing capacity. The other five--and I won't list all of them--included things like research, a clinical trials capacity, community engagement, intellectual property issues, and industrial engagement. That may have been all six now--I've lost track. Those were on the list in the first plan.

When we embarked upon developing the new 2010 plan, we didn't quite wipe the slate clean, but we almost did, recognizing, as you said, that there had been many changes, mostly scientific, over the last few years, which would require an update to this living plan. If the science isn't going to change, where has all that money gone? So indeed the science really has advanced the field. There is a new momentum and a real sense of optimism amongst the scientific community and the funders that we've made real progress and we need to build on it.

Back in 2009 we started a very broad engagement and consultation with members of the scientific community and with community groups around the world, to hear their perspectives on what the priorities were going forward.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

Dr. Hewitt, I believe you had made a comment regarding the funding process. Knowing first-hand the great work that your facility or institution does, I would like you to elaborate a little bit further on that, please.

[Dr. Ted Hewitt]

These are made in the spirit of developing a more robust process around these types of projects.

Universities are used to applying for large sums of money, often in the tens of millions of dollars. They are used to working with processes that are clearly laid out, with timelines that are clearly demarcated, and with expectations around comments and evaluations that will be returned to the university and to the researchers.

I think I can say in this case that all those things were obtained. But to say that things moved smoothly and in a timely way and that all the information that could have been provided was provided would be inaccurate. I think in terms of the timelines, there was a fairly frequent shifting of timelines and delays for reasons that were not explained clearly. Certainly in terms of the findings of the expert panel and the reviews, we did receive some fairly cursory remarks that were a summation from the experts who had reviewed the process. Normally we would see the full set of comments from the external panel or the reviewers, and those are very helpful to us. Then we see exactly where we've gone wrong, where we need to go, how we would now move on to develop a stronger proposal or to go back in the future. I think that was really key.

I mentioned the prospect of either a site visit or a panel, and that's also an important factor.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Mr. Hewitt, I'm sorry, your time is done and I'm going to cut you off. It's more than done. Thank you for your insightful comments.

We'll go to Ms. Wasylycia-Leis.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

Just let me try to ask Heather one question about the political interference that we believe is the case in this issue. Based on everything Kirsty and Anita and others have asked you, would you now agree to table for us all documents relating to discussions held at your board involving the L5L and board appointments? Would you table all recordings of any discussions with Frank Plummer and Harry Schultz? Would you release any recordings requesting that Eric Stefanson be appointed chair of the board or leader of the L5L group? Would you table all e-mails from Jo Kennelly asking to be hired by ICID and requesting a salary of $250,000? Would you release all records indicating that her employment is also with a United States private sector company? Will you do that, Heather Medwick?

[Heather Medwick]

I would have to get advice from our legal counsel on what I'm able to release.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

We'll look forward to that. You know that this committee has some power to make these requests and to expect that the information will be forthcoming.

Let me get back to the issue at hand, which is the lost opportunity for Canada in the development of an AIDS vaccine and for health and justice around the world. In fact, I think every scientist who's come here, who knows the field, has said that the cancellation of this bid is going to set us back years in terms of development of a vaccine and in terms of Canada using its enormous research capacity and innovative discoveries here in Canada and for the benefit of the world.

Ted, you said already that you've made a breakthrough on a particular clinical trial, and you have to go to the States. Can you tell us a bit more about how much more we're going to lose? What would happen, in fact, if we had this facility, whether it's you or Winnipeg or wherever in Canada?

And I want to say again to Mr. Bertozzi and Alan Bernstein and others that this is not a production facility we're talking about. I will refer to the memorandum of understanding between Gates and this government. It is about discovery research. It is about clinical trials. It is about research. It is about making progress on the very thing, Mr. Bernstein, you identified, which is the breakthrough in Thailand and in other places. We have lost this. It's gone.

I want to know how serious this is in terms of setting us back in terms of developing such a vaccine. And why, in fact, are we letting our researchers' good work go south of the border or around the world to be exploited by private sector drug companies who have no interest, really, in developing this vaccine?

This is for Mr. Hewitt. Then I would like Mr. Fowke, in terms of your capacity in Manitoba, to answer. If, in fact, we can't get this back at the lab, if we can't get it back to the consortium, if we can't get something on the table, can you do the work, and can we fight for you to get the money?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

We have a minute and a half for those answers. Who wants to begin?