Mr. Konecsni.
Evidence of meeting #41 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was funding.
Evidence of meeting #41 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was funding.
3 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Genome Prairie
The only comment I would like to add is that one way we can improve in this and keep the jobs here and create a better position for Canada is to focus. When we pick areas that we think we can win in and in which we have an advantage, then we need to sustain that investment, and we have to make sure that our capabilities are the world's best.
If you're not prepared to be the world's best at something, don't get started at it. I think that's what we need to do. You see countries that have been successful. Australia created six national priorities in their science and technology infrastructure, and all of their funds flow to those six priorities. It can make a huge difference.
3 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
You mentioned something as well, and I was wondering if you could explain it in 30 seconds, about a plant accelerator, I think. Could you explain that a little bit more?
3 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Genome Prairie
This is a facility that basically helps the development. Plant breeding and developing new crop varieties is a very long process. It takes 10, 15, or 20 years to develop new crop varieties. That's where genomics can help. They can identify markers that will accelerate and help screen out the plants that you don't want. That's really what plant breeding is about—selecting the plants that you want.
A plant accelerator enables you, through automation and computer technologies, to identify the phenotypes or the physical properties that you want in a trait in a plant early on, through the use of automation and technology, so you can get to the targeted plants and the traits you want more quickly.
That's what Australia is doing. They're building a $25 million facility in Adelaide, Australia, that will accelerate the analysis of these crop varieties. So they'll more quickly develop varieties that are going to grow in Canada, and guess what? The big companies are going to say, “Hey, I can grow my new exciting varieties that have improved traits in Australia.” And Australia is developing plants that are going to grow in Australia, not in Canada. So if we don't do that in Canada, we're at a disadvantage.
3 p.m.
Conservative
3 p.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Mr. Chair, in the interest of getting in as many questions as I can, I'm probably going to take about a minute and a half and you can then pass to other members. We'll try to work at this cooperatively.
Thank you all for being here. It's been a fascinating and eye-opening experience, and I think I speak fairly safely for all members of the committee.
I have one simple question, which may take us off on the issue of commercialization. The concerns that have been raised very quietly by some of you and others have been with respect to facilitating and expediting Canada's immigration policy with respect to accreditation. Would anyone like to comment?
That's my only question, Mr. Chair.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Perhaps they could send some comments later in writing.
3 p.m.
Conservative
May 28th, 2008 / 3 p.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a couple of questions.
First of all, thank you to those of you who in some way participated in this morning's breakfast. Thank you for that. It's great to be here in Saskatchewan.
One of the recurring themes we've come across, not just on this trip but also in committee prior to this week, is the ability to bridge the gap. There's the recognition that the Government of Canada is investing significant dollars in the front end of the research lineage, particularly with its own in-house research, the granting councils and so on, and universities. But then we begin to lose a bit of effectiveness as we get into the early stage of the technology and the development of moving those discoveries closer to commercialization.
I suppose I would direct this to Mr. Hodgson or Mr. Lidster: in what way can we do a better job mobilizing that early-stage investment? Yesterday someone made a comment that more needs to be done at that early stage so that angel investors and venture capital companies would have the comfort level to take on some of these projects. But there's a gap at the front end, and I wonder if you might have some specific comments and recommendations on what we could do to help that initial stage.
It sounds like both of your organizations are involved at that level.
3:05 p.m.
Director of Business Development, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization / International Vaccine Centre (InterVac), University of Saskatchewan
I guess from VIDO's perspective we're in a somewhat enviable position of having interacted with companies for approximately 35 years. That's created a reputation for us with these companies. I mentioned we had 80 patents. Patents by themselves are nothing but a money sink. When you license those patents that's when it becomes valuable. So the enviable position we're in is that when I work with companies now, especially the big pharmaceutical companies, most of the applied research VIDO does--because we tend to be very applied--is already licensed before a discovery is made. As we move that forward, not only are the pharmaceutical companies paying for the research or granting them an option to take over that research at the same time, but we're passing the patent cost to them. So that's one strategy VIDO has used.
We've also remained very focused. I think that's key. VIDO knows what it's good at, and tends not to drift from that strategy or strategic focus.
From a company perspective I think one of the things I mentioned was that the new NCE, or the Networks of Centres of Excellence, has changed its approach somewhat in recognizing that there seems to be this funding gap and the whole purpose of the Pan-Provincial Vaccine Enterprise is to take the later-stage vaccine research and add value to that. By adding value we're moving it along the value chain and reducing the risk to pharmaceutical companies. Vaccines are a little bit different from traditional drugs because the only population you're concerned with is healthy. At this point there is no therapeutic vaccine. It's all prophylactic or disease-preventing vaccine.
So that's very challenging for a pharmaceutical company to look at. Until recently it's been a relatively unattractive market because the only purchasers are governments, which, especially in Canada, have been very effective in reducing their costs. Until recently Prevnar and the HPV vaccine have come forward, and they tend to be at a much higher cost. I think the HPV vaccine from Merck is about $380.
The other thing Canada could do to potentially enhance that commercialization for vaccines that are of public health importance is something New Zealand did. Again, I think Canada sits back too much and says we're not big enough. Why not? New Zealand had a problem with meningococcal infections in their children, and the government did an advance market commitment with Novartis. They had a vaccine developed for that specific population relatively rapidly.
With respect to commercialization, I think that can happen if the government's willing to support initiatives for new vaccines with some sort of advance market commitment that would encourage the companies to come in a little bit earlier.
3:05 p.m.
Conservative
3:05 p.m.
Director of Business Development, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization / International Vaccine Centre (InterVac), University of Saskatchewan
We will buy 50 million doses of this vaccine over the next 10 years.
3:05 p.m.
Conservative
3:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Ag-West Biotech Inc.
The three things you can manage are time, money, and people, and that applies to commercialization of a technology. It's time-sensitive; it's money-sensitive. If you have unencumbered capital and unencumbered organizations that can invest in a good business case on a sound business proposal, those are the things that are going to facilitate the efficiencies of using money and time.
What we find within university-industrial liaison offices is that they operate within a bureaucracy. I spent time within the government, and we tried to do a business development office for Agriculture Canada. We were all operating within bureaucracies, which doesn't facilitate good and timely business decisions.
You need somebody on the outside, in the business sector, looking in and taking the technologies out and doing a very good business case and a proposal for commercialization.
3:10 p.m.
Conservative
3:10 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I feel quite inadequate sitting opposite all the experts before me. I have a hard time making plants grow in my house; they all die. The only thing I have grown successfully is dandelions.
We have been talking about canola and flax for two days. Farmers often say that they have to rotate their crops. With biofuel and all the products derived from canola and flax, what is going to happen given that crops need to be rotated? Are there going to be shortages? Will people want to change? What will happen to the soil? Has something been done, have studies been done on that?
3:10 p.m.
Acting Director General, Plant Biotechnology Institute, National Research Council Canada
Indeed, as crops become popular, there may be a desire to see increased acreage or cultivation of these, but in Canada, where we have some 68 million hectares of land, we have a very large base for crop rotation. All crop systems in eastern and western Canada are rotated. Soybean alternates with corn, canola alternates with wheat and barley and oats and flax. We also grow many pulse crops, nitrogen-fixing crops: soybeans, lentils, peas, chick peas, and various types of beans.
So there is a very active rotation, and I think it's important that our research emphasis on our key crops keeps developing, using genomic sciences and genetic sciences to develop the best and most competitive varieties so that the producers have a very good choice of which crops they want to use.
So we do not have a monoculture now; we have a good mix.
For example, canola is not grown on the same land consistently; only once every third year is it grown. Even with biofuel demand, the potential canola acreage is such that we can supply oil for edible use as well as for biofuel. The biofuels needs, according to the government's mandate for 2% biodiesel by the year 2012, would require about 15% of the canola acreage. Because we have such a large land resource, we have the capability of meeting these different markets.
3:10 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
This morning, I think I gathered that 45% of Canada's production is done here in Saskatchewan. If the most profitable product is grown once every three years and all your technology here is concentrated on one crop, canola, will there be other crops that are equally profitable for farmers? Biofuel may be the most profitable process, but you tell me that it is once every three years. What happens in the other two years? Do people make less money? Will the land be less productive for farmers? What is going to happen?
3:10 p.m.
Acting Director General, Plant Biotechnology Institute, National Research Council Canada
I should clarify that while an individual producer only grows canola on a given field every third year, within the country as a whole on the order of 14 million to 15 million acres are grown on a consistent basis, because there is such a large land base. We have about 150 million acres of land, and 10% of it is used in any one year for canola. It moves around.
Secondly, I should mention that we have given canola only as an example. There are very good advances in cereal crops. We have very high-quality durum wheat; we're the largest producer of wheat for pasta. We're the world's largest producer of mustard seed, for condiment mustard. We're a very large exporter of flax. We have an excellent reputation for producing lentils and chick peas; we are a major exporter of these to India, for example. So there is diversity.
But I would emphasize that we must continue to do research on these key crops so that we remain competitive and have a market base and can diversify and rotate.
3:15 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
You say that you are having difficulty finding new investors so that you can develop new discoveries. What about intellectual property? Are you going to keep a part of the intellectual property after your discoveries, or are you going to give it directly to the new companies that want to get into the market with the new technologies that you develop?
3:15 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Genome Prairie
I think this is clearly one of the areas that the research community here, the cluster, is talking about: finding ways to more effectively manage intellectual property and work with industry.
We talked earlier in my presentation about genomic networks. These networks include scientists like Dr. Keller. They include canola producers, flax producers, wheat producers, and they also include companies that are involved in the processing. When we put together projects and priorities, all of them participate in brainstorming, developing the project ideas, and prioritizing them, so the ideas that are brought forward include a full market perspective--science as well as the business perspective.
When we put together these research project teams, part of the discussion is how we manage the intellectual property, how we do it in such a way that it enables the optimization of the research so the biggest return is received from our public investment in that research. There are ways to do that. At the precompetitive stage the research can be accessible to all. Then, when individual companies invest in their own particular discoveries, they own that right. There are many different models, ways to bundle the ITs. That's done in the context of project ideas and teamwork. One of the solutions we have to managing the commercialization process and getting more private investment is having them involved from the beginning, while these project ideas are being developed.
You have the whole value chain represented in those networks. The farmers won't grow a crop if it's not going to get anywhere. They have to be able to make money. This industry has to make money.
3:15 p.m.
Conservative