Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members, for the invitation to appear before the committee today to talk about the CHVI. I do not speak French, though I did bring copies of the opening statement in both official languages.
I am Heather Medwick. I am the acting president and CEO of the International Centre for Infectious Diseases. I became acting CEO on July 31, 2009. Prior to being CEO, I was the director of collaborative initiatives and then vice-president of the organization. To provide some context for this meeting, I will say that I was not part of the team that put together our CHVI application. That responsibility was held elsewhere in the organization. While I was an editor of the document just prior to its being submitted, I did not become more directly involved until I assumed the position of CEO in July 2009.
Let me tell you a bit about ICID, and then I'll present ICID's CHVI experience. ICID is a Canadian, not-for-profit organization that brings together people and resources to find new ways to fight infectious diseases worldwide. It was established in 2004 through the same announcement that established the Public Health Agency of Canada and was envisioned to supplement and support the mandate and work of the agency.
Since 2004 we have evolved and found that our role in catalyzing solutions to infectious diseases challenges is twofold. We bring together people and resources in collaborative efforts, and we provide the energy, the expertise, and the infrastructure to drive the efforts forward.
Currently, some key areas we work in include biosafety training, HIV prevention, pandemic preparedness for businesses, and HPV prevention. In the handout there are a number of examples. I'll focus on two of them to save some time, as per the request of the chair. I will focus on bullets 3 and 4.
We partnered with the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg and the University of Manitoba to host the first international symposium on natural immunity to HIV. We brought together researchers from around the world to discuss their research and to identify collaborations for the future. Our role was to be the administrative backbone of the event. We hope to continue this work and support the collaborations of these scientists in the future through the creation of a Gates funding consortium on natural immunity to HIV, as Dr. Fowke discussed earlier.
Working with small and medium-sized enterprises and businesses across Canada to develop their capacity to respond to the challenges they faced with the H1N1 pandemic was another example of what we do. This work, to a large extent, involved providing tools, workshops, support, and encouragement for the development of a pandemic plan. The goal was to have these businesses identify the challenges they would face in a pandemic before they were in the pandemic.
ICID has found a growing demand for our services in the past five years. Regarding ICID's involvement in CHVI, one project that we were involved with early on was the Canadian HIV Vaccine Enterprise, CHIVE. CHIVE was a consortium of public, private, and academic organizations that developed a proposal designed to support research, clinical trials, and a pilot lot vaccine manufacturing facility. The consortium approached the federal government regarding this proposal. Ultimately CHIVE evolved into the Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative.
Having invested in CHIVE and its mandate, we were very keen to bid on CHVI, and we went in it to win it. ICID created and led an international consortium able to respond to the RFP. The Serum Institute, one of our partners, is the largest vaccine manufacturer in the world. Cangene Corporation is the largest biotech company in Canada. The International AIDS Vaccine Initiative is the world's largest HIV vaccine R and D organization. The consortium also included four Canadian universities: the University of Manitoba and the Université de Montréal for their HIV research and international outreach, the University of Saskatchewan for its Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization, and the University of British Columbia for its Canadian HIV clinical trials network.
Our application was very strong. We brought in business and architectural design specialists to support the consortium's efforts and to create a vision and business model for the facility. Our business model was based on our market assessment that showed a demand for this kind of facility in the broader vaccine development community; that is, it was based on attracting HIV and non-HIV vaccine candidates for development and production of clinical trial lots, all within the context of maintaining a priority status for HIV vaccine candidates.
I have no hesitation in saying it was a tremendous effort that would have resulted in a world-class, accessible, affordable manufacturing facility for pilot lots of vaccines for HIV and other diseases.
The CHVI process for ICID was long and arduous, as I think it was for the other applicants. We started in 2007 with the announcement, and it came to a decision in January 2010, nearly three years later. It involved two steps: a response to the letter of intent; then an invitation to respond to the RFP, the request for proposals.
The demands of the RFP process were high, and ICID ensured that we met and exceeded these demands so we would be the best applicant. Notwithstanding the decision, and no disrespect to the other applicants, I believe we were. The evaluation process was difficult to understand. It was subjective, hard to determine the role of external and internal reviewers in making the decision, and it was difficult to get information on why there was a delay in the decision.
The end result was a disappointment and a loss for ICID, for Canada, and for the world. For our organization the loss related to the expense of the application, not only for ICID but also for our partner organizations in terms of their time and resources. There were also the opportunities lost that might have been pursued otherwise. Having said that, we did gain experience, profile, and strong international ties to significant organizations and partners.
The loss to Canada relates to the loss of the high-tech sector jobs and national capacity in vaccine manufacturing. As well, I believe there was a loss in Canada's international leadership and profile in HIV prevention. The loss to the international research community is in terms of providing an accessible and affordable facility to advance a solution to HIV and other diseases.
I have some concluding statements on CHVI.
ICID understood from the very beginning that the Government of Canada was under no obligation to proceed with this project. This was stated very clearly in the RFP materials.
In the end, the government chose to support the information provided by the Gates Foundation report that focused more narrowly on HIV vaccine manufacturing capacity, versus our market assessment of the broader vaccine community's manufacturing needs. It was a disappointing conclusion for ICID, but we have had to move on.
Thank you.