Evidence of meeting #18 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was scientific.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:25 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
I must say that I have not looked in detail, but I do believe a number of them are still outstanding.
1:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you.
That raises further questions. It appears you are asked to find sources of science to provide information and advice. Is part of your role to follow up to make sure that science was efficient or it answered the questions that were actually asked in the first place? Is that part of your role, or your office's role?
1:25 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
Again it's not part of my role and mandate to follow up on what's been implemented in the various departments. Of course, should the minister wish that my office looks into this, we would do so.
1:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you.
When you were first appointed chief science adviser in 2018, the federal government put out a news release and stated that you will provide impartial advice to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Science. Two years later, the Prime Minister issued a campaign promise to develop a plan to transition open-net pen salmon farms in B.C. to closed containment by 2025. Did you provide or are you aware whether science advice was provided, either formally or informally, as you indicated earlier today that's how you provide information?
Did you provide advice or was other scientific advice provided to the Prime Minister for his decision to make this commitment?
1:25 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
I believe the departments are also tasked with providing science advice to their ministers and to the Prime Minister, certainly, in areas that are of their jurisdiction. Of course, it's not my role to look into whether this advice has been provided or not.
1:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Okay, thank you for that.
It came out in testimony earlier today that the CSAS process is a peer review process and that the participants participate as objective experts to complete the peer review of science under consideration.
Could you provide in writing—I think we'd need to do it in writing because of time constraints—what level of science expertise participants in the CSAS process actually possess? How many of them have a science background? How many of them have a management background that does not include science training? Would you be able to provide that to us?
1:25 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
I certainly would be able to provide this after this appearance, because I would need of course to look at the biographies of the members of the CSAS committee.
1:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you. That would be appreciated, because we have heard anecdotally that there may not be a true science background in some of the people who are involved in the process and that would certainly seem contradictory to the point of its being a peer review process.
I think my time is up. Thank you.
1:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Arnold.
We'll now go to Mr. Hardie for five minutes or less, please, to close out.
1:25 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Dr. Nemer, is it safe to say that your mandate is to see that good science is conducted and reported objectively and free of undue influence? Is that really the core of what you're there to do?
1:25 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
It is my mandate to make recommendations so that science quality is there, and enhanced and increased, and that proper science advice is provided.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Listening especially to Dr. Miller-Saunders talk about work she did that was basically suppressed for a period of time, it could have better informed the decisions regarding the Discovery Islands, but it required a consensus with industry. It would appear that the scientists at the DFO are captive both to the DFO and to industry. Does that trouble you?
1:30 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
Perhaps it would be of benefit for me to explain how science publications and manuscripts come about. Usually there are a number of the researchers who have done the work who are the authors and the co-authors who would write the results of their study. This is when it's submitted to a scientific journal. It goes out for peer review and it's either accepted as is or requires additional changes, information, etc. This is the usual process. In many institutions, universities, the private sector—
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I'm sorry, but I'll have to ask you to keep your answer fairly short or to follow up maybe with something in writing on that. That would be most useful to us, because this is the important.
Are you empowered when you're giving advice to cabinet and to the Prime Minister to recommend changes to the regime being used for science at the DFO?
1:30 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
I am certainly empowered to provide recommendations, and I suppose that the government departments can then use the recommendations as they see fit.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
You were complimentary of the creation of a position of science adviser, but again, going back to Dr. Miller-Saunders' experience, do we also need a science ombudsman?
1:30 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
The science integrity policy is meant to put in place the proper frameworks for the responsible conduct of research, including the ability of the scientists to publish their work without undue influence. In many ways, this has now existed for the past couple of years, but it did not before.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
You were talking about science “adapted to the realities”. Is that really the job of scientists to adapt whatever they find to whatever reality there is, or is that an interpretation that's best left to the people further down the food chain, if you will, in the policy-making and decision process?
1:30 p.m.
Chief Science Advisor, Office of the Chief Science Advisor
I don't believe I have used the words, “science adapted to reality”. If I did, I apologize for it because it's not that science adapts to reality. Perhaps if we talk about the models, they need to take into consideration the various elements that are relevant to the question or the subject at hand. It's certainly not the role of science to adapt to a reality. Science needs to examine the state of what's happening around us, including in an adaptive manner, taking into account changes in science and changes in the inputs into that particular science.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
No, not really. I'm going to cut you off right here, Mr. Hardie.
I want to say a big thank you to you, Dr. Nemer, for appearing today and for your patience for sticking around when we were having technical difficulties during the first hour of our session, which delayed our getting to you. We appreciate your doing this and your appearance here today.
With that, I'll say meeting adjourned.