Industry Committee on Feb. 18th, 2021

[Dr. Joanne Langley]

The criteria are the scientific and technical merit, which are standard for each case. I don't want to take the member's time, but they're the aspects that I mentioned, the subcategories of safety, efficacy, animal data, good manufacturing practice, and so on.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

In terms of the financial aspect, meaning the money that taxpayers have to pay, was that considered in your recommendations? Are they based solely on the science?

[Dr. Joanne Langley]

Technical merit, the ability of the teams to bring their projects through to completion, was considered. The actual due diligence on each proponent was done by ISED.

Roger, would that be correct?

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

Yes. It's a combination of scientific and technical advice being provided by the vaccine task force and then appropriate and thorough due diligence on financial management aspects of the firms that was carried out further by ISED, explaining in some cases the delay between advice to proceed and the announcement of it having happened. When millions of dollars are being spent, careful and thorough financial advice and due diligence needs to be done.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Are you satisfied with the way in which the government implemented all your recommendations? Are there factors that the government did not consider? How do you assess the government's work?

Furthermore, what do you think about the way in which the expenditures and investments in this process have evolved?

[Dr. Joanne Langley]

I would say it is very much an iterative process. As we get new information, we will re-evaluate our advice and are continuing to do so. New knowledge is becoming available from all these aspects continuously and we will consider it and the merits of it as time goes on.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Did you make recommendations that the government did not implement?

[Dr. Joanne Langley]

On the scientific advice with regard to procurements, the advice has been taken in a very timely manner. That's what I would say.

Mark, would you have anything to add to that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Be very quick. You're out of time.

[Mark Lievonen]

I would add only that the advice we give is confidential, so what the government has done or not done with that advice is up to them. I would leave it at that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

But it's also about the public, after all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Mr. Lemire, that is your time.

Our next round of questions goes to MP Masse.

You have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I don't want my questions to be interpreted as a lack of appreciation for the volunteering and the work that the task force is doing. They do, however, centre around the transparency aspect because the conflict of interest potential is a landmine field that is huge and vast, and you're making decisions and giving advice.

The previous answer to the question exchange shows the vulnerability we have. We can't even get commentary as to when advice wasn't taken.

When you actually do send something to the minister, do you actually get an official response about that? Is there a document produced that goes back to the task force, explaining why the government did or did not take action?

[Dr. Joanne Langley]

We provide advice to ministers, but we don't get a document back.

Roger, do you want to explain the process?

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

The advice goes to the ministers from the task force co-chairs. There's not a formal letter back or direct acknowledgement of that advice by ministers. There have been a great number of announcements on the advice given and the decisions taken by the government to fund proposals recommended.

I think, Madam Chair, that it is very important to draw the distinction between decision-making and advice-giving. The task force makes no decisions. It simply provides advice to ministers; they make all the decisions.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Without saying a particular one, have there been decisions made that partially took your advice?

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

Madam Chair, these questions would be better answered directly by the minister, but I think I can say, generally speaking, that both the advice given and the action taken by the government have been extremely.... The task force has worked flat out. Advice has been given very quickly. Due diligence is done as quickly as possible, and the government has acted on the recommendations of the task force with alacrity.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Here's the problem, though, for us—and I think for the general public—as we continue to go down this road without the vaccination. There still is just a lack of clarity in terms of public accountability.

I thank you for your volunteerism. It's not a criticism of you or your actions or the time you are spending; it's about the process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much, MP Masse.

We're going to finish this round, and I want to thank the witnesses for staying a little longer so that we can finish this round.

The next round of questions goes to MP Epp.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Being new to this committee and subbing in, I've listened and done a bit of work, but I will admit that I am new to this file. Maybe my questions have been covered, so please bear with me.

I'm going to go back to a response that Mr. Scott-Douglas gave to our colleague, Mr. Lemire.

With the CanSino relationship predating this task force, I understood you to say that this task force did not recommend that. However, when I look at the briefing notes that I've received from the Library of Parliament, I see that the Honourable Minister of Health stated that the decision to go with CanSino was guided by the advice of the task force experts. Can you clarify that for me? It's seems to be conflicting information that's in front of me.

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

Perhaps the distinction is the following: The relationship that the National Research Council struck with CanSino Biologics was to support clinical trial work and then potentially to produce, under emergency pandemic conditions, vaccines that might be made available if those clinical trials proved to be successful. The vaccine task force was not part of those discussions because they predate the existence of the task force.

However, subsequently, CanSino was look for funding for clinical trials, and it was also a candidate among many international candidates because, at that point, it was among world leaders for advance purchase agreements. In that case, initially, the minister is quite right; there were recommendations given by the task force to support CanSino.

Subsequently, though, it became clear that the performance of CanSino was not what was initially expected, and the relationship and the delivery of the seed for production in Canada changed, and the task force changed its advice.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Thank you.

I'll go to another earlier response at this meeting, Ms. Langley. You mentioned that the outcomes, the deliberations and the process that this task force went under were very similar to other task forces around the world. Yet Canada lags behind: So where's the difference? If the outcomes, the process and the recommendations coming from this task force mirror the outcomes and task forces in other countries and other settings, why do we as Canadians seem to be lagging behind—or are we not lagging behind?

[Dr. Joanne Langley]

As Mark said, the procurements are in place. The timelines are really quarterly rather than day by day. I know that the media cycle is every 24 hours, but I as a citizen and as a physician am very assured that vaccines will be coming within the quarterly requirements that the government has made with the vaccine providers.

I think we all have to help Canadians understand that: They are coming. you are going to get your vaccine; and in the meantime, just do your best to not get infected and to keep your family safe.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Am I hearing correctly, then, that other countries that perhaps are ahead of us in the short term negotiated monthly delivery routines, or weekly? We don't know, because we don't have access to the contracts. Is that what you're saying, that Canada negotiated quarterly returns and the manufacturers are back-loading this, whereas other countries negotiated contracts that provided for a sooner delivery point within that quarterly time frame?