Industry Committee on April 8th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I believe you're on mute for some reason, Mr. Quinn. Can you try again?

[Daniel Quinn]

Can you hear me now? I'm sorry about that. I'll try to be brief.

Under budget 2021, there were significant investments for science and research, investments in both the talent pipeline infrastructure and applied research. That includes the laboratories themselves. The strategy was released in the summer shortly thereafter. The Canada Foundation for Innovation released the biosciences research infrastructure fund, and that was done quite quickly after the release of the strategy, in September. The containment level three and four laboratories that are funded from that competition are really the critical pieces necessary to support infectious disease research for pandemic readiness under the strategy.

Further to that, there will be a larger investment on the equipment and research side to follow. Just last week, the Canada biomedical research fund and the biosciences research infrastructure fund competition was also launched.

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

Under the budget introduced yesterday, only $20 million will be allocated to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research over five years starting in 2022‑2023. However, it seems to me we agreed that we need to have bigger ambitions, more particularly, that we need to rebuild the entire vaccine production ecosystem. I don't think that amount is enough to realize our ambitions, particularly those Mr. Quinn just cited.

I'd like to hear what you have to say about that.

[Eric Costen]

If we look back to last year's budget and the commitment to $2.2 billion, which is in addition to the $1.6 billion that has been spent to date, that's the marker for funding the strategy. Of the $2.2 billion, approximately $1 billion is dedicated to various research undertakings, whether it's through supporting building out research infrastructure or through the Canada biomedical research fund or the clinical trials support.

Our strategy, executing on the strategy and rebuilding the sector are in many ways fuelled by the funding that was allocated in last spring's budget. We have lots or work ahead of us.

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

The NRC's Human Health Therapeutics Research Centre could produce a vaccine developed by the American company Novavax once it has received the necessary regulatory approval.

Would you please tell us a little more about that?

Could you also tell us how the NRC manages its cooperative arrangement with its private-sector partners?

[Eric Costen]

Go ahead, Maria.

[Maria Aubrey]

There are two portions to that. The first one, with regard to the engagement with Novavax, is progressing very well. As you are aware, the construction of the facility is complete, as I indicated. We're now focusing on the technology transfer through all the different phases and ensuring that it is done in accordance with good manufacturing practices to ensure that there's sustainability of the facility and that we not only end up with the ability to produce the Novavax vaccine but that we have demonstrated the capability of the centre for ongoing support.

In regard to collaboration and managing our partnership, I would like to pass it over to Dr. Krishnan, as the NRC not only has the biologics manufacturing centre but the engagement starts right from research and development through to supporting clinical trials and then on to, now with the biologics manufacturing centre, being able to do the production.

[Dr. Lakshmi Krishnan, Vice-President, Life Sciences, National Research Council of Canada]

Thank you to my colleague Maria for the opportunity to intervene and present the way NRC collaborates with the industry.

NRC has a long history of collaboration in the area of vaccines and biologics development with Canadian industry and, where appropriate, with others. We continually do this by partnering and identifying opportunities across the continuum of what we need to do to support the pipeline development and movement of R and D from early-stage, preclinical work to the later stages. With the new production facilities we will have in the biologics manufacturing centre and, in the future, the ability to make clinical trial material, we will be able to provide end-to-end support to the Canadian industry for advancing the pipeline.

During the pandemic, we demonstrated that. Very early on in the pandemic, we worked with a number of Canadian industries, for example, supporting the preclinical work necessary to advance to clinical trial for VIDO's COVID-19 vaccine candidate, as well as working with VBI Vaccines Inc., another Canada-based R and D unit and company, to advance its COVID-19 vaccine to clinical trials. As well, our industrial research assistance program has supported many.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Dr. Krishnan.

We'll have to move now to Mr. Masse for six minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for being here.

There is no doubt that the pandemic has highlighted the decline of Canada's manufacturing sector, not only with regard to vaccines but a number of different industries. The remnants have had to transition to doing everything from medical equipment to hand sanitizer made by breweries, a whole series of things that were identified as weaknesses before, while we have signed serious trade agreements that allowed environmental or labour and working conditions to be be used as subsidies against our own manufacturing base.

This is no different, in many respects, from the promises by the large Rx and D and other pharmaceutical industries to reinvest in Canada with tax reductions and the extension of patents. Those were supposed to bring a panacea of investment, which never took place.

As we try to build our sector back here—and I'd like to ask Mr. Costen this—Canada is one of 182 countries that signed on to the tobacco issues with regard to the WTO. How much has this damaged our reputation? In this process, what is being done to build that back? We're still waiting for a decision. This is not an unknown thing. Philip Morris has a very clear history. Now we're caught in this situation. We're one of 182 signatories. What can we do at this point to bring in an internal process so it doesn't happen again?

[Eric Costen]

Thank you so much for the question.

Your question raises a number of really important issues, the first of which is that Medicago is, first and foremost, a vaccine manufacturing firm that is not controlled by PMI. It is completely independent. It operates in and around Quebec City. It has a site in North Carolina. It is a company that has gone from very much a start-up to prerevenue. It has shown exceptional quality in its science. The technology platform for the vaccine it has brought forward is unique insofar as it offers a safe and effective alternative to mRNA vaccines. Views of the promise of the science, the promise of the technology, the quality of the company and the asset it represents to Canada are very widely held amongst experts throughout Canada.

With respect to the issue of its ownership structure and the legacy of PMI, there's no question there. Canada's position on tobacco control and its commitment to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, as you indicated in your question, are very long standing. When it came time to review the application for investment by the company, there was very careful consideration given to the implications of PMI having a minority stake in the ownership structure. Those considerations were weighed against the reality that we were a few months into a global pandemic when there was a race to get a vaccine developed and into the arms of people. In that situation and faced with those choices and understanding that there might be challenges associated with that down the road, the unanimous view of experts was that this was a company worth investing in and that this was a base of science that showed promise. In October of 2020, when there wasn't a COVID vaccine to be seen, that was very much the decision that was made.

My final point—not to repeat myself or to be too long-winded, and I apologize for that—is that the ownership questions that are being raised today and the problem that PMI ownership presents to the company and its long-term viability, in answer to the member's first question, are very much on the mind of the company right now. We expect them to take action.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I appreciate that. I have to cut you off, and I'm going to leave it at that. I have a little bit of extra time left, and I want to use it for another question. I appreciate your answer. It's a difficult situation we're all involved in here, but we have to fix it really quickly.

Thank you for that.

Really quickly, then, to move to my second question, with the investments we're making in partnerships and the original Bill C-52, which allowed for the generic production of vaccines for malaria, tuberculosis, AIDS/HIV and enterovirus...the Canadian access to medicines regime is what it has actually come to be. Do the products we're actually producing and putting public money into allow for the entrance into that automatically? This is known formally as the Jean Chrétien Pledge to Africa bill. We've only seen it used once because it is such disastrous legislation. However, will all of the medicines we are actually cofunding through the public purse to help the general public be compliant so that we will be allowed to produce them generically if the developer or the country does not do it at a low cost?

[Eric Costen]

Thank you for the question.

I will say off the top that you're asking a question that is not really in my area of expertise, nor in my colleagues'.

If we have time, I might turn to my colleague Darryl Patterson, who could offer a few views. You're asking a very big question about IP and patents. We'll certainly do our best, but it may be something we need to return to you on.

Darryl, do you want to try this?

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I'm afraid, Mr. Costen, we're out of time for that. If you want to submit anything in writing, that's always possible via the clerk of the committee.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That would be appreciated. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, MP Masse.

We will move to Madam Gray for five minutes.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all of the witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Costen, what are the opportunities to reduce red tape in the domestic vaccine manufacturing space? What easy fix can the government make right now to help manufacturers produce them here in Canada?

[Eric Costen]

In terms of red tape reduction, it's an interesting question. I have a few thoughts in response.

I think there are opportunities that probably exist on multiple levels. Some of these have proven themselves over the past 18 months, where you've seen a level of agility and speediness in decision-making that was brought to bear because of the necessity of the crisis that we are in.

In terms of ISED's responsibilities and the industrial program that we operate—the strategic innovation fund—if we look back, we've seen several examples of a streamlined process that allows for decisions to be made efficiently and quickly. Reflecting on the discussion of some of the questions by other members, they don't necessarily sacrifice important questions of the due diligence and scrutiny that are required prior to the decisions associated with investing public money.

There are probably continued opportunities to ensure that we're balancing the need to have thorough due diligence, while at the same time moving quickly and with agility, as you say, reducing red tape, in order to be able to support businesses, especially in times of crisis.

I would also note, if I can, that there's likely a very important question around the regulatory regimes that exist to safeguard the public health of Canadians but also to create the framework in which businesses operate in this space in Canada. We saw lots of very significant efforts made on the part of Health Canada to be agile and quick in a regulatory decision-making process, without sacrificing, ultimately, their responsibility to safeguard health.

These are two areas where there has been a mindful attempt to balance the need for speediness and avoiding unnecessary processes with not sacrificing the integrity of the decision-making process.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

That's great. Thank you very much.

Would you be able to give a couple of examples of what that red tape reduction might have been?

Are there specific recommendations that have now been made to the minister?

[Eric Costen]

In terms of examples, I may turn to Rodrigo.

In the early stage of the pandemic, there were a number of significant funding decisions that were made, early on and in a very compressed time frame, that have proven to be highly advantageous.

Rodrigo, could you provide a couple of quick examples?

[Rodrigo Arancibia, Senior Director, Life Sciences and Biomanufacturing Branch, Department of Industry]

I would like to highlight that, for the first time, there was a problem with the funding mechanisms to support high-risk, high-potential projects related to the development of vaccines or therapeutics and to support the science and the companies working on those projects for the COVID-19 therapeutics or vaccines. There was a funding mechanism, an instrument, that was needed to de-risk the investment of the private sector or support the research at a university or academia.

At the same time, it was important for the regulator to have an agile mechanism and to very tightly work with other international regulators in the U.S. or Europe to make sure that the standards were maintained, the quality and safety were in place and protected, and that whatever came out in terms of authorization would be safe and effective.

There were some instruments from the regulatory side that Canada led internationally by allowing clinical trial data to be available to the regulator as it became available, as opposed to waiting for the whole phase to end. It was the speediness in regulatory approval and funding.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Great. Thank you.

We know that there were a number of processes that might have been expedited at some point. What I'm looking for is whether there's some permanent red tape reduction, processes that have been streamlined or different recommendations out of this learning, moving forward.

[Eric Costen]

There's a period of reflection that's happening right now. We're still in the pandemic. We're all hopeful that it's in the rear-view mirror soon enough. I think across government, you're going to see many of us reflecting on the experience of what worked and what didn't, or what could have worked better.

I don't know that I have a specific example that I can point to right now, other than to say that the process of reflection, advice.... Where can things be optimized and made more efficient and quicker, without sacrificing quality and safety? Those were guiding principles from the very get-go. I suspect, to your point about how these measures can become part of the permanent landscape, that period of reflection is under way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Costen.

We'll move to Mr. Erskine-Smith for five minutes.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thanks, Joël.

I want to start with the international obligation we have to help peer countries and developing countries that don't have access to the same vaccines we do. It's really important that we have a vaccine manufacturing capacity in this country for future pandemics and future crises. It's nice to see the investments that have been made to ensure that we have a greater degree of preparedness.

You, Mr. Costen, just mentioned the pandemic, that we are still in this pandemic and we hope it's in the rear-view mirror sometime in the near future, but it won't be in the rear-view mirror in the near future for all countries because they don't have the vaccine coverage that we do. I wonder, given the investments we've made today in vaccine manufacturing related to COVID, when we can expect the first shipment of vaccines from a Canadian manufacturer to a country in need, and what the ramp-up of that production looks like going forward.