International Trade Committee on Feb. 4th, 2014

[Steve Anderson]

I think first and foremost it's making the document, the negotiating text, public. We saw that with the FTA. It's not new. We've seen it with WIPO as well, so that's just a starting point.

I would like to see the consultations that countries have. I'd like to see a pipeline from that to the actual decisions and the policies that are proposed. For example, in Canada we had a consultation. The government also had one. They were required to join the TPP. From what documents I have here, from access to information, 65 industry lobbyists wrote in—the consultation—largely in favour of the TPP. About 47,000 citizens wrote in mostly with concerns, a copyright chief among them. That consultation as far as I can tell was not considered. People were not notified. It seems like it was shelved. When I actually spoke with the TPP negotiator when I went to a TPP round in Auckland, he seemed to have very little knowledge of that consultation at all, which I found frustrating.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thanks.

I'll move on to Ms. Es Sabar. We had a chance to chat a little bit last night, and we met before. I appreciate the great work that you and the folks at the Centre for Drug Research and Development have done and continue to do.

We all agree supporting innovation and nurturing innovation has accelerated Okanagan in my riding, and we work with the university, UBC Okanagan, Okanagan College, and the private sector—and all of us across the country work with our constituents. According to the Jenkins report, Canada has a good record of research and development, but not of commercializing and taking it over the goal line. I was looking at the Seahawks' victory on the weekend and we need to get more touchdowns.

From your perspective, how do we balance this agreement? Or do you think this agreement will provide opportunities for Canada to get more victories?

[Karimah Es Sabar]

Let me again start from just the CETA one and move on to this one. I'm hoping this will do the same thing for us. It will create an even playing field around, first of all, the IP policy. Frankly, for any knowledge-based industry, and ours in particular, that's the asset we have. If we don't create those assets, nobody is going to invest in them. There's been a lot of talk about open innovation and all those things, and at very early stages certainly there's an opportunity to do that. But as you advance technologies you have to have the right kind of IP policy.

I think it will bring us in line. I don't believe we're still going to be where the U.S. is, but we're in a much better place and we're moving in the right direction, and I think that's what many of us are hoping for in our sector.

I would encourage us to just get better and better at it because the innovation is supported where there's good IP policy. So all I would say is that we get better and better. It definitely helps, and we're moving in the right direction.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you.

Mr. Pacetti.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming today. I guess I'll start with you, Ms. Es Sabar. When you started your speech you said you were afraid that some of the industries that you represent or supported may move.

[Karimah Es Sabar]

The technologies.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

But if they receive government support why would they move?

[Karimah Es Sabar]

Let me just explain. The government support goes mostly into basic research and the academic environment, which is very important because that's the watering hole for discovery. We then have to translate that discovery and make it investable. In other words, we have to validate the data that comes out of that. We have to add value and get proof of concept. We do it as far as animal studies are concerned. We sometimes take it into the clinic, but we need investment and partnership to do that.

In drug development that life cycle is a 10- or 15-year life cycle, $1 billion to $1.5 billion, so partnership is everything. We have to be partnered and de-risked. People will only invest where there's an ability to protect the IP, where there's an environment where these technologies can be nurtured.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

But Canada does have that environment.

[Karimah Es Sabar]

Canada does not have that environment. If we just look at B.C.'s track record, we've had a plethora of companies mushrooming, we've had many successful technologies. They very rarely anchor here. We were lucky with two companies, Angiotech and QLT, that anchored for some length of time.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

But is that because of IP or is it because of lack of funding?

[Karimah Es Sabar]

No, the early stage issues are IP-related. We would have had additional investment if there was better IP protection, there is no question. The difference is that we would have had industry investment, private sector investment. You just want government to be the catalyst to kick-start things. The government shouldn't be funding this all the way. We need to leverage that with private sector investment.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

So if you have better IP protection, you'll be—

[Karimah Es Sabar]

Absolutely. We're then competitive with Germany or England, or anywhere else.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Then how does that affect the TPP?

[Karimah Es Sabar]

With the TPP, I think we have to have competitive IP policies with those 12 countries. In other words, the U.S. has a very strong IP policy. We are still not where the U.S. is, but if we're at least close to that, then we are in good stead.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

So your ask is for us to increase—

[Karimah Es Sabar]

To improve the regime.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Okay. That's what I was trying to understand. Great. Thank you.

Mr. Anderson, I have one quick question for you. In your presentation you were saying that you don't have enough details, but in parts of your presentation you went on to say quite a few times that there's this in TPP and there's this in TPP. Can you just clarify whether you have the information or you don't have the information? Because it was a bit contradictory from what I understood. I wasn't sure if you had knowledge that you didn't have knowledge on, or if you were just speculating.

[Steve Anderson]

Yes, I can clarify that.

WikiLeaks leaked the IP chapter in the fall. So I have access to that and I have looked at it, as have many experts. There is detailed analysis of that, so I know what the positions were at a certain point, and that's what I was speaking to, in particular with the U.S.

I don't know the most recent round and where things went.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Was Canada part of that discussion?

[Steve Anderson]

Yes.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

They were already in there. So this is discussions after 2012?

[Steve Anderson]

Yes.