Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 46-60 of 108
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Industry committee  The reality, if you like, of the business we're in is that we're now in a mode really of constant assessment. Originally we thought we would be able to repurpose people, although their skills obviously were connected to MRIs. What we determined was that actually we couldn't. That's why the decision changed.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  Yes. In Halifax—

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  Yes. It's actually a very academic unit, if I can put it that way. Our hope, frankly, is that it doesn't go away but that it remains viable in an academic setting. That was really the—

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  How's this? Is it better now?

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  I'll give you a little bit of an example of the sorts of things. Part of our business is what we would call engineering work, which is quite close to market, things related to aerospace, automotive, and so on. In those areas, most of the work that is done is quite short term in nature, in terms of its application, so it's going to be developed and applied within maybe two, three, or perhaps five years.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  The strategy of how you go about protecting is very important. Gradually the global patent system is becoming more uniform. Historically, there were first-to-file or first-to-invent processes, and they were different in different countries.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  Okay. Sorry about that. As I was saying, the patent system in the world is gradually becoming more uniform. There used to be two significant differences—a first-to-file process versus first-to-invent—and those of course had very serious implications. They are becoming more uniform, but it still begs the question, where is the place that you want to start?

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  That's a very good question, actually. If a customer of the NRC is a fully paying customer, they own the IP, and they do today. If we are collaborative, then there's a discussion, because the “benefit to Canada” issue becomes, obviously, more important. One of the things that we don't want to see is companies simply using the NRC as a mechanism to do something perhaps on a joint basis, which reduces the cost, that they simply take elsewhere.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  The guidelines are very broad principles because they are things like “benefit to Canada”. The challenge is we tend to work fairly close to the marketplace, and usually every deal has a wrinkle in it that makes it a little bit different. We could easily share with you some of the broad principles that we apply in making those decisions, if you wish.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  In the new arrangement one of the things we're looking for is more industrial financial involvement. With more industrial financial involvement, there will inevitably be more that will be paid for, and thereby owned, by industry as a proportion.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  Yes, that's exactly what we're trying to preclude, actually. If the NRC has an investment in the process, then the Government of Canada, obviously, and the Canadian people, have an investment in the outcome too, and have to share somehow in that return.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  Sure. The key test of industrial and economic relevance is actually whether industry is willing to participate, and to participate not just not just in “good words” but in real monetary terms. One of the things, for example, that we would look at in terms of a few years ago is that the industrial participation in real terms at NRC was actually quite small, in the order of, perhaps, 5%.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  Thank you for the question. As most people probably know, I think, the NRC for the last couple of years has been undergoing a transformation really to align itself better with the existing act. The existing act, as I've described, requires us to undertake economic development essentially on behalf of Canada through technology and innovation.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  That's correct. Essentially, as I say, it's really a realignment to the existing act. We've had a lot of conversations with many people, including members of your caucus, for example, about some of the things we're doing. But it's more of a reorganization than it is a change of any mandate or whatever.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall

Industry committee  That is really specific to some of the things that are going on within IRAP. I might take a moment here just to outline the nature of IRAP, and how it works, as a preamble to answering that question. The industrial research assistance program is a grants and contribution program that's delivered in, I guess I would say, probably several hundred communities around Canada through industrial technology advisers.

October 30th, 2012Committee meeting

John McDougall