Industry Committee on Feb. 27th, 2007

[Prof. Daniel Krewski]

We are a fairly large research centre. There are over 100 full-time investigators in the Institute of Population Health, which was started by the university just about six years ago, so it's quite a success story to grow to that level.

In my program, which focuses on risks to health, we're funded from a wide variety of sources: all three federal granting agencies here in Canada, the federal government, international agencies, granting agencies in the U.S., and private foundations.

About 10% of our funding comes from the private sector, and it's all administered in accordance with conflict of interest guidelines that ensure there's no influence of private sector sponsors on the research results. The most common mechanism we use is the university-industry partnerships program of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, which allows industry to contribute to the funding of research in a hands-off way. We would prepare a grant for CIHR in the same way as we would if there were no industry involvement--have it peer reviewed and then execute the research independently--and we do utilize that mechanism for some of our work on radio frequency fields.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Who instituted--or initiated, I should say--this particular study that will be coming forth? Whose effort was it to bring forth this study?

[Prof. Daniel Krewski]

It was actually the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is part of the World Health Organization. Canada is one of 16 member countries that support IARC. I had the pleasure of serving on the scientific council for four years, representing Canada between 1992 and 1996. It's considered the most authoritative body on cancer risk issues in the world. They invited representatives from 14 countries to participate in the study; each country had to raise the funding for the research internally. The only country that didn't manage to participate was the United States. They could not get funding internally.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you for your comments. I would suggest that we keep an eye on when the study is ready, so that it can be circulated to the committee, whether we're here or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Yes. That would be great.

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Temelkovski.

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to both presenters.

Monsieur Vanier, your network is very private, I would say, from hearing your testimony. It's only shared among educational organizations and government.

Is there any chance of its being in the hands of privately owned companies or individuals?

[Michel Vanier]

No. I cannot foresee that. We have been subsidized by the Government of Quebec.

According to an agreement we have with the Government of Quebec, we cannot resell our assets without the express permission of the Quebec Department of Education.

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Most of the telecommunication gadgets that we're using nowadays stem from very close work with large companies or governments in the past. Examples are telephones, which were used during the war and only for military purposes and so on, and they've come on board now.

Do you see your industry going that way any time in the future?

[Michel Vanier]

RISQ is not involved in research. We are rather a research infrastructure. I do not know if that answers your question. Could you repeat it please?

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Many industries in the past, or communication devices, have been strictly for a prescribed number of users. Subsequently they've become of mass appeal and have moved into the realm of public intent and use.

Do you see that within your industry or your group of work?

[Michel Vanier]

Thank you for clarifying your question. I now understand what you are getting at.

That has already happened. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, RISQ was in the beginning created with the intention of using a communication protocol called TCP/IP. This protocol was not available on commercial networks in the 1980s. Today, however, it is the most widespread protocol on the planet, including in the telecommunications industry. RISQ however continued to manage its network and will continue to use and promote new protocols of this type over the course of time.

We are not necessarily linked. We play the role of early adopter and we can even test new technologies. Take, for example, universities whose engineering departments include telecommunications researchers. Once these protocols have been tested, their adoption by the industry represents a second phase. But this does not threaten the existence of our network per se.

As long as we are the owners of an optical fibre infrastructure, we are free to use the equipment and the protocols that we want, including to test new protocols.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Temelkovski, you have one minute.

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Krewski.

I remember using cellphones that weighed a tonne. The battery was included; you remember the package in the eighties. They weighed a tonne and they were abnormal compared to today's standards. Are there cellphones now that maybe have more risk attached to them than other phones?

[Prof. Daniel Krewski]

As we've moved to smaller and smaller phones, the general trend has been less power output, particularly with the switch from analog to digital. I would think the concerns would be lessening with the level of exposure decreasing from the hand-held mobile devices over time.

We can expect that trend to continue. The power output, power consumption, will continue to decline with engineering advances.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I'm sorry, we're over time here, Mr. Temelkovski.

We'll go now to Mr. Shipley.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you. I have a couple of quick ones.

First of all, to Mr. Vanier, the policy report that is out.... Other than that there may be some concern of what it might do to some costs, how does this policy affect you?

[Michel Vanier]

As I have already mentioned, RISQ does not compete against the industry. The very purpose of the act is to deregulate the telecommunications industry. Our sole objective is to ensure that, despite all of these bills and laws, aimed at the telecommunications industry, people will not forget that there are non-profit organizations such as ours, that these organizations do not come under the act and that no undesirable side effects should threaten our existence nation- wide.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Okay. I guess yours is set up for research and education.

A question to Mr. Krewski, and I apologize, I had to step out. You mentioned earlier there was no clear indication in your comment that radio--I don't know, is it radio signals or waves?--didn't pose a health risk in any of the research you've done. But then you went on to say WHO, the World Health Organization, has some major studies on cancer.

There hasn't been any indication there is a health risk, except the WHO is still continuing to do studies that may suggest there is, or is it...? I'm just going to leave that, because I'm not sure what the next part of the question would be.

[Prof. Daniel Krewski]

Could I ask if the intent of the question is why is the WHO undertaking such a massive investigation when most of the evidence is pointing to no risk?

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you. That's a good question.

[Prof. Daniel Krewski]

There are several reasons for pursuing that investigation. One is the existing scientific literature. Science is not absolutely certain on all aspects of research, and there are some uncertainties.

I mentioned that there were some biological effects that require clarification. Many of the epidemiologic studies have been of moderate size. If there is a risk, it's probably very small. You'd need a large-scale study to clarify that, and that's what's being conducted.

We benefit either way from the results of this study. If in fact there is no risk, we'll have assurances of safety through the conduct of this very large study, and if in fact there is a small risk that has gone previously undetected in more limited studies, we have a chance to step in and intervene and address it as quickly as possible.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thanks.

That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Shipley.

We'll go now to Monsieur Vincent.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I have no further questions to ask. Those of Mr. Shipley pretty much covered mine.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

I don't have any other members on the list.

Mr. Masse.