TORONTO -- The Canadian government is considering whether or not to lend its support to a World Trade Organization鈥檚 (WTO) proposal to waive intellectual property (IP) rights and patents on COVID-19 vaccines, as pressure mounts to follow the example set by the U.S.
Dozens of Canadian MPs across all parties asking him to 鈥渆liminate all potential barriers to the timely access of affordable COVID-19 medical products, including vaccines and medicines, and scale up the manufacturing and supply of essential medical products.鈥
On Friday, Minister of Small Business, Export and International Trade Mary Ng said in a statement that 鈥淐anada is ready to discuss proposals on a waiver for intellectual property protection鈥e understand that the pandemic isn鈥檛 over anywhere until it is over everywhere.鈥
Trudeau later echoed Ng鈥檚 statement at a Friday briefing, saying the government 鈥渞emains committed to finding solutions and reaching an agreement that accelerates global vaccine production and does not negatively impact public health.鈥
U.S. President Joe Biden announced on Wednesday that he supports the WTO's proposal to hammer out an agreement to lift COVID-19 vaccine patent protections.
Here鈥檚 everything you need to know about the proposal, vaccine patents and how IP rights work:
WHAT鈥橲 THE ISSUE?
The WTO has urged member nations to collaborate on an agreement to temporarily ease the rules protecting intellectual property behind coronavirus vaccines.
The proposal to waive some patents and technology in an effort to boost vaccine production in developing countries was first put forth at the WTO by South Africa and India last October, but was blocked by the U.S. and other member nations at the time. As the WTO is a consensus ruling body 鈥 all 164 member states must vote yes.
Now, more than 100 countries have publically expressed support for the move.
The negotiations hinge on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, known as the TRIPS Agreement. After the HIV/AIDS crisis of the 1990s - when drug companies fought with health officials to produce generic treatments and only relinquished their argument when they were accused of profiting off the crisis - the WTO added the modern-day precedent for relaxing patent restrictions to TRIPS: the 2001 Doha Declaration.
Ananya Banerjee, an assistant professor at McGill University鈥檚 School of Population and Public Health, says the pharmaceutical companies behind the COVID-19 vaccines have had their 鈥減rofits protected by a fortress of patents for decades.鈥
鈥淲hat鈥檚 happening now is no different from what happened during the HIV and AIDS crisis,鈥 she said in a telephone interview with CTVNews.ca Friday. 鈥淚 think it really comes back to capitalism鈥hese patents are guaranteeing drug makers a stream of income.鈥
鈥淣ow is not the time to think of profits over people,鈥 Banerjee said.
However, critics of the waiver argue that patents and intellectual property rights are not the central obstacle to producing more vaccines for countries that need them most, while others say that lifting the lid on vaccine patents could damper companies鈥 incentives to innovate during future pandemics.
Dr. Michelle McMurry-Heath, CEO of industry trade group BIO, that her organization was 鈥渆xtremely disappointed鈥 with the Biden administrations decision to support waiving the intellectual property protections, calling it a 鈥渄angerous precedent.鈥
鈥淗anding needy countries a recipe book without the ingredients, safeguards, and sizable workforce needed will not help people waiting for the vaccine. Handing them the blueprint to construct a kitchen that - in optimal conditions - can take a year to build will not help us stop the emergence of dangerous new COVID variants,鈥 Mcmurry-Heath said, adding that the better alternative was to the make the U.S. a vaccine super power instead.
She went on to say that her organization has warned 鈥渙n several occasions鈥 that a TRIPS agreement waiver 鈥渉as the potential to drastically hinder existing efforts to scale up global manufacturing, disrupt efforts to equitably distribute the vaccines to every corner of the globe through COVAX, and further strain the global supply chain.鈥
Moderna voluntarily waived its patent in October, with .
WHY ARE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS SO IMPORTANT?
Richard C. Owens, lawyer and senior Munk fellow at the MacDonald-Laurier Institute, says the world relies 鈥渆normously鈥 on new pharmaceuticals for advances in health care.
鈥淭he way we as a society developed those pharmaceuticals is to have the private sector bring together unbelievable quantities of money and expertise and to take enormous risks trying to pick a needle in the haystack to find the drug that will work,鈥 Owens said in a telephone interview with CTVNews.ca Friday.
鈥淭hat system doesn't work if the people who invest their time and expertise and care and money in building those drugs can鈥檛 recoup their investment because next time, nobody's going to invest. Why bother?鈥
Owens said the only way for companies to recoup their investment is through intellectual property protection, as drugs are 鈥渟o easily copied鈥 and once they鈥檙e on the market, others 鈥渃an just start stealing the process.鈥
鈥淲e rely on patents to tell the people who give us their expertise and investment that, 鈥楬ey, you're going to have 20 years to recoup that investment at a time when only you can or the people you authorize can make or sell that particular drug,鈥欌 he said.
鈥淪o, you've got a guarantee of at least an opportunity to make money. The pharmaceutical industry isn't that profitable, but to the extent that it's profitable, it depends on intellectual property.鈥
WHY ARE VACCINE PATENTS SO COMPLICATED?
Rohinton P. Medhora, president of the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) agreed that intellectual property is 鈥渢he motor of the modern economy,鈥 and when it comes to vaccines, the stakes are very high.
鈥淰accines are awfully high tech and they involve years and years of research at different levels and鈥nvestments by labs and pharmaceutical companies,鈥 Medhora said in a telephone interview with CTVNews.ca Thursday. 鈥淔or example, the mRNA vaccines we have on the market have something like 260 or so different steps to actually get it from into the bottle and into your arm. It's a complex process and each of those steps does include proprietary knowledge.鈥
Vaccines often contain several ingredients that may be under their own separate patents from contributing manufacturers, meaning lifting vaccine patent waivers may not a simple process.
鈥淥ne of the characteristics of the vaccine economy, particularly for COVID, has been a tremendous amount of energy that's gone into licencing patterns, often royalty free,鈥 Owens said.
鈥淪haring of information is actually facilitated by knowing that you can control the information that you share鈥eople don't need to rely on secrecy so much to make their products available safely. They can disclose and share information amongst researchers and amongst manufacturers knowing that it's somewhat protected [by patents].鈥
WHY IS CANADA DELAYING ITS DECISION?
Canada, which in the past has moved in lockstep with the U.S. over matters of trade and diplomacy, has not immediately followed Biden鈥檚 example to express support in looking at a WTO COVID-19 vaccine patent waiver agreement.
Owens believes it is the correct choice.
鈥淐anada, by at least delaying, is doing the right thing, the more principled thing that the U.S. for some reason has decided not to do,鈥 he said. 鈥淚 wouldn't be at all surprised if we did follow along. It's a popular move. It's still a wrong one.鈥
Medhora, however, said he is 鈥減uzzled鈥 by Canada鈥檚 hesitancy.
鈥淵es, there are technical issues to be sorted out, but we don't have a big pharma industry to protect,鈥 he said. 鈥淚 thought that Canada was holding back until it knew what the U.S. was doing because the U.S. is such a major partner for us. Well, now that issue's no longer the case. So what's holding us back?鈥
Medhora said 鈥済iven the gravity of this problem,鈥 the signal of having a historically open country like Canada come on board with the proposal is an important one.
Banerjee said that the WTO proposal could be an 鈥渙pportunity鈥 for Canada to help 鈥渞amp up production and [vaccine] access for lower to middle- income countries.鈥
鈥淚t's a win-win situation,鈥 she said. 鈥淕iven that Canada is well on track to vaccinate our entire population and we have secured an extremely high number of [vaccine] doses, I'm not sure it's a question that we should be struggling with right now.鈥
WHY HAS THERE BEEN PUSHBACK?
The proposal before the WTO has been met with considerable pushback from groups ranging from pharmaceutical companies to politicians from member states.
Medhora said the resistance to the vaccine patent waivers tend to fall into two broad categories.
鈥淚鈥檇 say one is genuine concern amongst experts is a TRIP's waiver is not a silver bullet,鈥 Medhora said. 鈥淚f we waived it today, it's not as if vaccine production would ramp up next week or even next month or maybe even six months from now, because the constraints to vaccine availability are infrastructure and raw materials, transport, storage, all of these other things.鈥
Owens agrees.
鈥淭he first question to ask is, is intellectual property in the way of a vaccine availability for anybody? And the answer is no. Intellectual property firstly has in many respects been waived by the companies who are making the vaccines and many of them are also offering the vaccines at cost,鈥 he said. 鈥淭he problems with availability have a lot more to do with scale and production.鈥
Owens said the reason why intellectual property is 鈥渙n the table鈥 in this case is because 鈥渢he enemy of intellectual property want to use this opportunity to try to change the system by which drugs are made, mostly for the benefit of people who can take the patents and then make money making the drugs rather than engaging with a system which is more constructive in the long run.鈥
Medhora said with that in mind, the proposal by South Africa and India first brought to the WTO last October to lift the patents could have been seen by some as 鈥渟elf serving.鈥
鈥淭hese are two countries that have reasonably significant pharma industries themselves,鈥 he said. 鈥淎nd I think the feeling was that these countries were promoting a global policy that would disproportionately benefit their budding pharma sector.鈥
Medhora said the second reason for pushback to the idea of the waivers centres around the precedent of intellectual property.
鈥淚ntellectual property is a right and true global practice, we effectively give holders of IP 20 years of exclusivity, of monopoly use of their technology because they've taken risks and invested in developing it so that they can reap rates of return to make up for their risk and high investment,鈥 he explained.
鈥淪o, big pharma and big tech, more generally, is fighting this on the grounds that their business model of incentivizing risky investment is at stake, and some governments have bought into that, especially in countries where big pharma is present, like Europe and the U.S. Canada is not in that position.鈥
But while Banerjee and Medhora both acknowledged the sensitivities and difficulties surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine patent waivers, both support the proposal.
鈥淲e always write in exceptions to everything, especially for exceptional circumstances,鈥 Medhora said. 鈥淚f this is not an exceptional circumstance鈥hat would be?鈥
Owens does not.
鈥淎 really simple principle at the core of this is it's wrong to steal stuff, and if you make a habit of stealing stuff, people are going to stop producing it, unfortunately,鈥 he said.
鈥淲hen you start talking about intellectual property, it results in a set of rules which are admittedly commendably abstract and nuanced and very, very complicated. Not for bad reasons, but just because that's the way they have to be.鈥
-----
With files from 麻豆影视' Ottawa bureau producer SarahTurnbull
