Dr. Voyer, go ahead.
Evidence of meeting #68 for Health in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was nanotechnology.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #68 for Health in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was nanotechnology.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Professor, Department of Chemistry, Université Laval, As an Individual
Thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to comment on that. I think one of the dangers right now is that we're lagging behind many countries in many parts of the world. Europe and the U.S., and even Singapore and Asia, are really cracking down on nanotechnology, especially for medicine.
The danger I see right now is that all the money that has been invested in Canada for fundamental research, that is bringing new devices, new developments, will end up in companies abroad. If we are dedicated to taking as much as we can from the investment we’ve already made in nanotechnology, we definitely need to get together, talk together, develop a network of scientists and companies in Canada that will be able to translate fundamental research into practical applications for the health and well-being of Canadians.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
You mentioned the need to bring together industry and the researchers, companies, to start this sort of partnership. How would you advise we do that?
12:20 p.m.
Professor, University of Toronto, As an Individual
Here's the first challenge. There isn't really an industry in Canada in nanotechnology. Even if you want to bring industry in, there's not that much nanotechnology going on, necessarily, in bigger companies—maybe a small startup company of five people, three people—but the global players are not here as much.
The first thing is that if you want that model, how do you do it? How do you get companies interested in setting up and actually being successful, not just by name? That's a challenge. I work with companies in the U.S. at this point because they have more infrastructure, and they have the patents, and have some of the capacity to translate some of these things. We're trying to set up our own thing in Canada, but again, it's a challenge.
You can't do academic, industry, and then other things—so really the first thing is, how do you actually build an industry in these emerging technologies? That requires more thought, in terms of translation as well.
12:20 p.m.
Professor, Department of Chemistry, Université Laval, As an Individual
I also think there are opportunities in Canada, even though the industrial sector is not developed as well. You probably know that the pharmaceutical sector and biopharmaceutical sector is completely changing in Canada, with all these big pharmas moving out of fundamental research. There's a task force of amazing scientists who can contribute and be a part, and startup companies we should subsidize differently, as well. There's a new model that needs to operate with this high-risk research that can lead to potentially great discoveries and new technologies for treating cancers, and resistant bacteria, and so on.
Diagnostics is one of the areas coming very quickly in the nanotechnology agenda. It's already there.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
Dr. Chan, I want to ask you a question specifically about your timeline. Within the context of the previous questions, how do these factors, these realities, impact on your timeline?
12:25 p.m.
Professor, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I'm building. It's almost like I'm a scientific architect. I started 10 years ago. I know that commercialization is important, and that's why we started this company in Burlington. Last year, we started selling materials. We don't need to do high-end stuff. We sell materials. Last year, we were at about $500,000 in revenue already, after year two. We've set up global networks. We just got a distribution hub in China, and one in Australia. I'm using that part to build that scenario, to build the expertise, so that when we're ready academically, I have a place to translate it.
This is just my own strategy, but again, not everybody has those kinds of strategies. The thing is, because we don't have a network in Canada, that's what the seven cancer nanocentres are doing. They're focusing on getting collaborators, industrial partners, and clinical trials. I'm also related to a couple of those centres, in terms of collaborations, where they need expertise from us.
Again, it's like you either, as a academic, build it because the expertise is not there or you let industry do it, but sometimes industry doesn't really understand emerging technologies. You also have to train people so that they're able to translate. Because these are newer areas, some people who might want to start a company may not understand why nano is important. It's experience; they read it, but sometimes they need practical experience associated with it.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Thank you very much, Dr. Chan and Ms. Block—very good question, very good answer.
We're now going to go into our five-minute round. I can't believe that the bells haven't rung yet. This is wonderful.
12:25 p.m.
A voice
There's no vote.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Okay, it's been changed. Thank you.
We'll go to Dr. Sellah for five minutes.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Djaouida Sellah NDP Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to thank the witnesses for joining us here in person or through videoconference. Unfortunately, they will not be able to hear me.
As a Canadian, I am very proud of new technologies being developed in public health, including nanotechnology and genotechnology, if we can call it that. However, I am disappointed to see that, although we have the potential to be a leader in those two technologies, there are obstacles, from what I understood from your presentations.
My first question is for Dr. Voyer.
Based on the list I have before me, your work is mainly on basic research. In your view, how will the current government cuts affect tomorrow’s applied research? I think that there will probably be economic consequences. My fear is that the current cuts to fundamental research will have an impact on applied research, which in turn will have an impact on the access of Canadians to modern technologies.
The second part of my question has to do with funding. How do you see the balance between public and private funding, given that the purpose of private funding is to obtain dividends from applied research?
Thank you.
12:25 p.m.
Professor, Department of Chemistry, Université Laval, As an Individual
Thank you. Since you asked me the question in French, I am going to answer in French.
In all the countries around the world where research is conducted, we are seeing a strong tendency to reduce public funding for basic research in order to support targeted research. There is really no harm in doing targeted research; it is even desirable when it comes to development. But the fact remains that great scientific discoveries that have a real impact on the quality of everyday life stem from basic research. For instance, just think about the discovery of nylon or Teflon. It started with basic research in a lab. So basic research must be funded.
However, the basic research of today is not what it used to be. It is now much more transdisciplinary. We no longer work in silos. We are using a horizontal approach. For basic research to lead to practical discoveries, we have to work with scientists from various sectors. As a result, grant programs need to reflect this reality.
I have been with NSREC for a number of years. For the time being, grant programs are affecting a number of areas. We are trying to adapt, but we need more flexible programs that will allow us to conduct basic research in the preliminary stages, to be able to make great discoveries and then work with the industry and benefit from
bridging money.
What was your second question?
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Djaouida Sellah NDP Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
I was talking about public funding versus private funding.
12:30 p.m.
Professor, Department of Chemistry, Université Laval, As an Individual
Researchers always need more money. As Dr. Chan said, the development stage is more and more expensive. The only way to be able to continue with development is to make sure that companies with capital invest in basic research and continue to support industrial research. Research is what will allow nanotechnology and nanomedicine to generate real practical applications that will serve Canadians.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Any time that I start thinking I'm pretty smart, I'm going to take a look back at the minutes of this meeting and just get grounded right back down again.
My first question is for Dr. Chan. How did you get interested in this line of work?
12:30 p.m.
Professor, University of Toronto, As an Individual
By training, I am actually a chemist. My Ph.D is from 1996 to 2001. I was doing chemistry. Nano was not a national agenda in the U.S. What ended up happening was that in 2000 or 2001 they started doing the cancer nano program. My training is in chemistry. I know how to make materials. Then I did my post-doctoral training in biomedical engineering, where we are now actually learning to work with tumours, and learning to work with what it means to create a new diagnostic to create new therapeutics. That was two more years of training. Then I moved to the University of Toronto.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
Professor, University of Toronto, As an Individual
It's kind of interesting. I like the city. I visited the city a long time ago and I quite enjoyed the city. I grew up in Chicago. When I was looking for a faculty position, I wanted to move back to a city because going to grad school in a small town for my undergraduate degree, I kind of missed the city flavour. That is how I ended up moving to Toronto.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Prior to an hour and half ago, I didn't know anything about this. Maybe that's my own fault. You are talking about building the industry. You are talking about building capacity. Part of that is building human resources, developing here at home, but then also attracting talented people such as yourself. Give us an idea of what would the next five to ten years look like? Your path took about 10 years. How do you do it domestically, and then how do you attract the people who are already doing it?
12:30 p.m.
Professor, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I think one of the good ways to do it is to offer competitive start-up packages. In the U.S. right now, for a new faculty it's usually around $600,000 to $700,000 simply to start to build your lab area. Sometimes it may be difficult to do that at the universities in Canada, because start-up packages are not that high. The way you do it is to offer a good strategic network, people who attract other people.
Scientists are interesting. When you have one research lab that is very good, you attract other people who want to work in that particular area because people want to combine and solve things. That's why we do what we do. We like to solve things.
Going back to the U.S. again, the reason they build those cancer-nano networks and sensors is to have a conglomeration of people from different areas to try to solve a problem. Again, Genome Canada has done a very good job encouraging genomic research, but with the nano and so on I would like to go to the broader picture of the emerging technologies, not only nano. Nano is one area of emerging technology. We don't have those particular hubs, so that's where one of the challenges is.
Again, if you want to recruit people to Canada, you have to give competitive packages. That's first. Then you have a little bit of capacity at this point. Then have these guys go out and sell, and also encourage publications in good journals. That's the other thing. When I am looking for someone to collaborate with, I like people who are at the top of the game. In academia, the way you tell is from the level of journals. There are 6,300 journals. In nano, there are three or four top journals that are nano-focused. I know who those players are globally, and that's what attracted me.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
If you look at the business you have started, I am guessing you have generated this through your own university income plus the income that you created through the revenue you mentioned. Your business would be similar to many other small start-ups. What are some of the issues you see down the road? Whether it's access to capital, venture capital, or partners, where do you see that going?