Health Committee on Nov. 8th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Please go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I agree with Mr. Hanley. The $300 million is misleading, because it's more than that. It's not less. It's actually more: $173 million spent on developing the vaccine and $150 million spent on not receiving a vaccine, in addition to the money invested by the Government of Canada in building the facility itself 10 years ago.

An OPQ on this issue was submitted on February 7. It asked, with regard to the government's $173-million funding for Medicago, announced in 2020, “...does the government or Mitsubishi Chemical Group own the intellectual property developed as a result of this funding?” The government's response was, “In projects supported by the strategic innovation fund”, which is what this was funded by, “the Crown does not have an ownership interest in intellectual property resulting from the project, nor will the Crown acquire new rights in existing intellectual property owned or licensed....” It goes on to explain how it works.

I would argue that the number should probably be higher in the preamble than what it is here. I think Dr. Ellis was correct and knew that when he originally drafted the motion.

I would also draw attention to the end of the motion, which says, “calls on Medicago”. I would suggest an amendment that changes that to “Mitsubishi Chemical Group”, because Medicago does not exist anymore. Mitsubishi Chemical Group is the company that owns the intellectual property.

To me, it's disappointing that it's only four hours. I don't know how you get all these witnesses you've talked about and have any adequate examination of where $300 million, $400 million or $500 million went, in four hours. I don't think that does justice to taxpayers, in terms of getting to the bottom of this. You all are much better questioners than we are in the industry committee, perhaps, if you get this information out in little five-minute jaunts.

I also believe you should leave yourselves open to examining what is needed regarding witnesses. Reserve the right to invite more witnesses and take the time you need to get to the bottom of this. Ultimately, that should be the goal of the committee: to find out what happened, not limit the number of hours this is studied. Get the appropriate witnesses. As we know, once you get witnesses and question them, in all likelihood it will lead you to more questions and perhaps other people or companies we're not aware of that were involved in this and that need to be examined.

Finally, any discussion around the contract.... As long as everybody here understands we're talking about the flow of government money, including the investment in developing the vaccine and all the terms around those contracts from the strategic innovation fund...then, the payments from the strategic innovation fund to sign the contracts, in order to purchase the actual vaccines.

I know I've said a lot there. At a minimum, I propose an amendment, making it “Mitsubishi Chemical Group” that is called on, for accuracy.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes, that's fine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Perkins, we have two problems.

One, you're an associate member, so you can't move a motion. You can participate.

Two, that amendment would be in order once we deal with the one we're dealing with, because it isn't a subamendment. It's an entirely different one. The wrong person presented the amendment at the wrong time. Otherwise, it's good.

Mr. Jowhari, go ahead, please.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

I am just acknowledging that a member who has moved an amendment cannot amend his own amendment.

What I'd like to suggest as a compromise is this: If we replace the word “lost” with the word MP Perkins used—“invested”—I'm very comfortable with this. I will move “Mitsubishi”, as well. I would suggest, if we all agree, “That given recent media reports that the Public Health Agency of Canada invested over $300 million dollars on an unfulfilled contract, the committee”, and add “Mitsubishi” to it. I'm just replacing the word “lost” with the word “invested”. That's the word MP Perkins used, and I think it's the appropriate word.

I don't know whether I have to withdraw that amendment and table another amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We would need unanimous consent for you to change the words in your own amendment.

Do we have unanimous consent to change the word “lost” to “invested”?

[An hon. member]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Davies, go ahead please.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I have a few comments.

I'm not 100% sure how important the motion is.

What's most important here is that we actually get the motion passed so that we can get the officials here to explain the issue. However, to me, the fact that it says “given recent media reports that the Public Health Agency of Canada lost over $300 million dollars” is not an assertion that it did happen. It's an assertion that the media has reported that, which is a fact.

I don't really see what the import of Mr. Jowhari's problem with it is. What we do know for sure, because it's been conceded, is that $150 million was spent and lost for new vaccines. That's been conceded publicly by the Public Health Agency of Canada. Mr. Perkins seems to have the figures quite accurately, but my understanding is that there is a further $173 million, which was invested by a different source, a different fund, to construct the facilities that Medicago was to produce the vaccines in.

My understanding of that is that it may or may not be lost. I've read recent media reports that suggest that the Mitsubishi Chemical Group is in the process of winding up the assets of Medicago. I'm not exactly sure what the legal status of Medicago is, if it's bankrupt or if it's.... I think it is shut down in a vernacular...but I don't know what its legal status is. There could be assets there to satisfy recovery of some of that. I don't know.

I'm still not exactly sure how much of that $173 million, if any, can be recouped, but that's a fair question.

I don't think that the motion is stating as a fact that that's lost, so I think the motion is fine the way it is. In any event, it still gives both the Liberals and the opposition the ability to explore that without it being categorically stated in the motion.

I also support adding the Mitsubishi Chemical Group because, depending on Medicago's status.... It could be bankrupt; it could be wound up. I'm not sure what its legal status is. If we just add “Medicago/Mitsubishi Chemical Group”, or “Medicago and Mitsubishi Chemical Group”, so that it's broad enough that we could have whoever is the operating, directing mind of those assets at this point, I think that would be prudent.

I never really did hear an answer about the Auditor General, but I did hear inside talk with Ms. Sidhu, who believes that the Auditor General.... I know the Auditor General did write a report that looked at the way the Public Health Agency of Canada dealt with vaccines. I'm not convinced that this report specifically dealt with this issue. I think that it may have gone around that, but I'm happy to have the Auditor General tell us otherwise or appear here and explain.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Dr. Powlowski.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I'm personally fine with Don's suggestion that we put “Medicago/Mitsubishi Chemical Group”.

The second thing is that, yes, I, too, would like to get on to a vote so that we can get on to more important things.

The third is just on how many sessions and on Rick's comment on having more than two sessions. I just spent a couple of meetings with OGGO, and it was really interesting. It was a real inquisition into the ArriveCAN app, into who contracted with whom, into who subcontracted and into who said what. It was very different from what we are used to at the health committee.

We have a bit of expertise on the health committee. Between those of us who worked in health care and people who have been on this committee for a long time, I think we do a good job of looking at medical questions.

Certainly, we have some big questions coming up in terms of cancer screening in women and the opioid crisis, so although this is a good question and I fully welcome the transparency on what happened in this contract, I think it's probably best left to a committee that is used to doing that kind of work. That would leave us to do what we've done in the past: look into medical issues. There is also importance in doing that, not just in looking at all the government contracts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Dr. Hanley.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm happy for this to go to a vote soon.

Just for the record, I have two things.

One is Don's question about the Auditor General. The Auditor General did review the contracts and made comments, including specifically on the Medicago contract. That's why we had suggested including the Auditor General.

The second thing, again for the record, is that the media reports were about the loss of $150 million. I recognize that there is this total spending of over $300 million, but part of that was the investment. I agree that we need to clarify the status of that. It's just the accuracy of the preamble, again. That's why I wouldn't support it as written, but it's a preamble.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

There are no further speakers on the list.

What is before the committee is this: That the motion be amended to delete the words “given recent media reports that the Public Health Agency of Canada lost over $300 million on an unfulfilled contract”.

(Amendment negatived)

Is it the will of the committee to entertain another amendment with respect to the identity of Medicago/Mitsubishi?

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I would add at the very end of the motion where it says “and Medicago”.... I don't know if you want to put “/Mitsubishi Chemical Group” or if it's better to say, “the Auditor General, Medicago and Mitsubishi Chemical Group”. It's probably better to do the latter.

I would put a comma after “Auditor General”, remove the “and”, then have it say “Medicago and Mitsubishi Chemical Group.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Is everybody clear on the amendment?

(Amendment agreed to)

We are now on the main motion as amended.

(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

All right, colleagues, the next item on our agenda is to suspend and to move in camera for consideration of a couple of committee reports.

It's Mr. Davies and then Dr. Ellis.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I'm in the committee's hands. I think it might be prudent for us to actually spend the next 20 minutes scheduling the meetings between now and Christmas. I'm hoping that's what Dr. Ellis may be suggesting.

I propose that we deal with the children's health study before we start with the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board study. We're an inch away from finishing the children's health study, and it would be a first look at the PMPRB.

I have spoken with my colleagues, and I think there's unanimous support. If we do deal with a study next, I'd move that we go to the children's health study first.

I'll cede the floor and see if Dr. Ellis wants to talk about scheduling meetings.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

That sounds great. Let's schedule some meetings and talk about the children's health study. Let's get moving.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Is it the will of the committee to talk about planning future meetings in public? It's more efficient to do it in public, but it's normally done in camera.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Let's do it the efficient way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Okay. Just let me set the stage, and then I'll hand it over to Mr. Kitchen.

In terms of the calendar we adopted, a whole bunch of things have intervened since we adopted it, which is what has necessitated this discussion. Basically, we have eight meetings—and I would suggest more likely seven meetings—scheduled before the Christmas recess.

What had previously been agreed to was that the next two meetings would be meetings held in camera to deal with three draft reports: children's health, oversight of medical devices and the PMPRB. The women's health study would commence on the 27th for four meetings, and the study on the opioid epidemic—for which, I will remind you, there has not yet been a motion adopted—would begin on the 11th.

We have Dr. Kitchen.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

There have been discussions around the table in looking at this. One of the things that we think needs to be done as quickly as possible is getting started on the women's study and using the six parameters that Mr. Davies has proposed. There is also the urgency of the Medicago issue that we're dealing with right now.

We have eight two-hour meetings after the break when we come back, on Mondays and Wednesdays. It's challenging to try to get those four hours of the Medicago study done at the same time as getting started with the women's study, and staying in it instead of going in and out, and at least getting a good solid base to it. The discussion was about adding an extra hour to the meetings, if possible. We've had that discussion around the table, recognizing that Wednesdays that go until 9:30 at night are really a challenge, but perhaps we could add the extra hour on the Mondays.

I'm proposing that we start with the first meeting of two hours with Medicago on the Monday, followed with two hours on the women's study on the Wednesday, and then, in the next week, two hours on the women's study on the Monday and on the Wednesday. Then, in the next week, we would go to the opioid study and do two hours on that, plus an extra hour at that time.

Hopefully, Chair, that would give you a chance to try to arrange for us to get that extra hour. At the same time, as it's a big challenge to get ministers to come on short notice, we would have time to maybe get the Minister of Health or the Minister of Innovation and Science.

Next, then, the Wednesday study would be two hours with the women's study, and then on the final Monday we would go back to the opioid study, plus the one hour with, hopefully, a minister, etc., in that extra hour. We would then finish on the Wednesday with the women's study.

We would need, in the new year, to be coming back to focus on the women and opioid studies, but at least we'd have a good foundation on the women's study as well as the opioid study, as well as getting to Medicago as quickly as possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

If I understand correctly, you are proposing that we shelve the three draft reports until the new year.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I hadn't factored that in.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Thériault, you have the floor.