Evidence of meeting #45 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Graham Carr  Vice-President, Research and Graduate Studies, Concordia University
Hossein Rahnama  Director, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University
Xavier-Henri Hervé  Director, District 3 Innovation Centre, Concordia University
Vincent Martin  Professor , Canada Research Chair in Microbial Genomics and Engineering, Biology, Concordia University
Sylvie Bourassa  Executive Director, Government Relations, Concordia University

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Sweet

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Bonjour à tous. Welcome to the 45th meeting of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, where we're continuing our study on the state of disruptive technologies.

Thankfully, with just a couple of minutes of getting to know each other, everybody has arrived, so we're grateful for that.

From Ryerson University we have Hossein Rahnama, who is the director of research and innovation. Then we have a small cavalcade of folks from Concordia University: Graham Carr, who is vice-president, research and graduate studies; Vincent Martin, Canada research chair in microbial genomics and engineering, department of biology. I understand there are two areas of focus for you, and I suspect you'll differentiate that in your own remarks. We have Xavier-Henri Hervé, director, District 3 Innovation Centre, and Sylvie Bourassa, executive director, government relations.

I take it the two groups with Concordia will have separate remarks. Is that correct, Mr. Carr?

11:05 a.m.

Dr. Graham Carr Vice-President, Research and Graduate Studies, Concordia University

I'm going to give opening remarks for 10 minutes, and then I think Vincent and Xavier are best placed to answer the questions.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Sweet

Okay, there's just one opening remark from you.

Mr. Rahnama, please begin.

11:05 a.m.

Dr. Hossein Rahnama Director, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University

Mr. Chair and committee members, thank you for inviting me.

I'm Hossein Rahnama. I'm the director of research and innovation at the Digital Media Zone, which is a start-up incubator based in Toronto that we started about five years ago. The vision we had behind the Digital Media Zone was to support young researchers and innovators to be able to work in non-siloed environments to bring their innovation and research to market very effectively.

What we noticed back then in our university was that we tended to silo people, with electrical engineering in one building, fashion in another building, and biotech in a separate building. With the Digital Media Zone, when we brought these researchers together and got rid of those walls, we immediately saw disruptive technologies emerging, whether from our research groups or young entrepreneurs, and they quickly commercialized that research and turned it into start-ups. We built a framework and now, after four years, have created more than 1,700 jobs and about 172 start-ups, and we have developed more than 20 patents that we are trying to move from the research lab to the market.

In observing how young entrepreneurs work, we have made some key observations. They are trying to learn more from each other rather than from professors. They like to go to their classroom, but they are also looking for settings where they can learn from each other. They want to have that freedom so they can go there in their jeans and T-shirts, work around their ideas, and bring them to the market.

What we learned was that the university had to value discovery-based research as much as research commercialization. Maybe a professor didn't want to commercialize the research on her own, but we wanted to give that IP to a group of entrepreneurial students to take to market, especially when we considered disruptive technologies.

The other thing we observed was that our IP policies needed to change. The way we looked at IP from a pharmaceutical lab, let's say, was not necessarily the IP policy that we needed in an ICT or a computer science setting, because the same student could invent the next big thing with just an iPhone and a laptop, so the investment the university had to put in place was very different from the investment for a pharmaceutical lab. We started to favour moving IP towards our students so that they are motivated to bring these disruptive technologies to the market.

There was another challenge that we faced. I spun off a research company from our university, a company called Flybits, which was back then, about three years ago, a research program, and now it's a growing start-up funded by Vodafone, one of the largest carriers in Europe. They brought that funding to Canada. The challenge we saw with Flybits, which is a spinoff from our research lab, was that in Canada we did not have good disruptive technology adopters. We did fantastically in terms of protecting that research, but we couldn't find organizations to say that they were willing to be the first one, that they were willing to be the first adopter in Canada so that we could validate our technology and then export it to the rest of the world.

If you look at Flybits, you'll see that the first technology we deployed was in France for the Paris Métro. Then Metrolinx became interested. We had to bring in Vodafone to invest in the company before we could have Canadian VCs helping us bring that forward.

In identifying those challenges, we are now developing policies at Ryerson in order to be able to help these entrepreneurs and young innovators to bring their disruptive technologies to the market.

I can talk more about the ICT sector especially, because that's my background, but I really appreciate your invitation and am looking forward to answering any questions you may have.

Thank you.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Sweet

Thank you very much, Mr. Rahnama.

Now we'll go on to Concordia University and Mr. Carr.

11:10 a.m.

Vice-President, Research and Graduate Studies, Concordia University

Dr. Graham Carr

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen of the committee, it is a great pleasure for me to be here with you today.

We've already done the introductions so I won't repeat them.

For some of you who aren't entirely familiar with Concordia University, I'll take a moment to provide a high-level description of who we are.

Concordia is one of Canada's largest comprehensive universities with over 46,000 students, of whom about 6,500 are graduate students. Our main campus is right in the heart of downtown Montreal, with a second, the Loyola campus, in the NDG neighbourhood just a few kilometres away from the city centre. Our student body is one of the most culturally diverse in Canada, and this diversity is one of our great strengths, because diversity is an active ingredient in innovation.

Concordia is truly a 21st century university. We have a strong tradition of public and community service, but we are also steadfastly turned towards the future, with our researchers who may well be defining the future of humankind.

Through research, teaching, and experiential learning, we provide our students with global skills to meet next-generation challenges. We're also a young university, 40 years old, with the flexibility and nimbleness to foster transdisciplinary convergence and think outside the box. Times Higher Education ranks us as one of the top 100 universities in the world under the age of 50. We're proud of that world-class ranking. We think we're a university on the move.

We thank you for providing us with the opportunity today to express our point of view on the so-called disruptive technologies, using specific examples of what we are doing at Concordia.

As a starting point, let us propose that instead of focusing on the term “disruptive technologies”, which can have some negative connotations, we think about exponential technologies, because the changes we want to tell you about involve new processes and new products with boundless potential and opportunity for public good.

As Dr. Martin and Monsieur Hervé can explain in more detail during questions, these exponential technologies are emerging at a dramatic speed with social and economic impacts almost unimaginable to those of us raised in an earlier generation.

Our research in synthetic biology and our commitment to innovation, represented by District 3, are eloquent examples of the way in which we breathe life into exponential technologies at Concordia.

Let me start with synthetic biology. What is synthetic biology? Put simply, synthetic biology applies engineering principles to biology to build biological systems that can benefit humankind. It takes the biological information encoded in DNA from one system and renders it functional through its transition and manipulation to another system. The World Economic Forum's “Outlook on the Global Agenda 2015” identified synthetic biology as one of its five top emerging issues that will shape our future, and the U.K. government has identified it as one of eight great technologies.

Some of you may remember an opinion piece from December 2014 entitled, “Power, promise of synthetic biology: time is now to invent our future”, that appeared in The Hill Times. We have copies. It was co-authored by Dr. Martin; Pierre Meulien, the head of Genome Canada; Marc LePage, the CEO of Génome Québec; Rémi Quirion, the chief scientist of Quebec; and Graham Bell, the president of the Royal Society of Canada. The gist of the article is that synthetic biology has enormous potential for Canada and the world, but we need to move fast to capitalize on our talent and resources to establish our global positioning.

At Concordia, synthetic biology is the natural extension of our expertise in genomic research.

We have benefited enormously from federal, provincial, and industrial funding to support our research in this area. The capacity to sequence human and plant genomes is foundational to the biologically inspired engineering that's happening at our centre for applied synthetic biology, the first facility of its kind in Canada.

Dr. Martin, who's the scientific director of the centre, has been a leading exponent of synthetic biology since its inception, both as a researcher and as an entrepreneur. When he was doing post-doctoral studies at the University of California, Berkeley before returning to Canada, Dr. Martin co-founded Amyris, which is now the world's leading synthetic biology start-up.

Drawing on his lab-to-market experience, Dr. Martin's research group at Concordia has built important research partnerships with major companies and institutions across Canada and internationally, such as FPInnovations and Lallemand Bio-Ingredients group. Canada's emerging bioeconomy will be one of our most important national investments in the coming years, and synthetic biology is uniquely poised to foster talent development, industrial productivity, and social gain in this important sector

For example, synthetic biology is instrumental to the development of cellulosic biofuels, fuels produced from what would normally be wastage from wood, grasses, or the inedible parts of plants. Breakthrough uses of synthetic biology are not only crucial from an environmental sustainability standpoint, but offer new ways for established Canadian industries in the resource sector and health care to be internationally productive, competitive, and innovative.

For Canada, which is blessed with vast natural resources and an educated and experienced workforce, this area of economic activity is of paramount importance.

The societal and economic impacts of synthetic biology are also felt globally, beyond Canada's borders. For example, in 2013, Dr. Martin was part of an international research group that successfully engineered the synthetic production of artemisinin, a breakthrough, low-cost, anti-malarial drug that has the potential to save hundreds and thousands of lives every year. Synthetic biology is also used to develop new forms of antibiotic medications, as many traditional antibiotics have been rendered ineffective because of resistence.

One of the most exciting things about synthetic biology is its capacity to spur innovation, excite next-generation scientists, and nurture a start-up culture of entrepreneurship that seeds new businesses and inspires established industries from forestry to pharmaceuticals to rethink key elements of their business model.

Let me build on that training and entrepreneurship piece to tell you a little bit about District 3, Concordia's incubator of innovation and entrepreneurship, which is a runaway success for us. An engineer by training, District 3's executive director Xavier-Henri Hervé was also involved in the development and marketing of a major innovative technology when he co-founded Mechtronix, a leading developer of aircraft simulators in Montreal.

District 3 provides a unique space where young inventors and entrepreneurs can reach their full potential in a constantly evolving business ecosystem.

As those who have visited can tell you, District 3 is essentially an open ideation and maker space, a place where young innovators and entrepreneurs can experiment with outside-the-box ideas. They come with tutelage and mentoring from entrepreneurs and residents. The students work on teams with multiple disciplinary formations, skills, and perspectives. They come from all sorts of backgrounds, from mechanical engineering to business and marketing, from math and computer science to computer art and design.

Diversity is an impetus to innovation, so District 3 is open to all of our students, undergraduate and graduate, as well as students from other universities and recent alumni. They don't come to D3 for academic credit. Instead, they come for the opportunity to create and invent a product, either through a mandate from an existing SME or perhaps to form a company of their own. As Monsieur Hervé can explain in more detail during questions, the essence of District 3 is to foster new forms of collaboration that can help drive great ideas closer to market and provide an open sphere for students where there's absolute freedom to create, innovate, and become start-up entrepreneurs.

One of the things District 3 captures is the agility of SMEs and their capacity to be nimble and agile, to see outside the box, to see exponential possibility where others just worry about disruption. Our experience is that students now want more and more to add this experiential profile to their formation at university, but the shift in student demand also coincides with and reflects a larger economic trend in Canada and internationally, where value is increasingly created by smaller, more nimble and agile businesses and industries.

By virtue of the very fact that they are completely shaking up normal ways of working, exponential technologies are certainly providing not only enormous economic possibilities, but also unexpected solutions to social problems.

I cannot stress enough the huge opportunity that the emerging bioeconomy offers to a country like ours, blessed with a fantastic resource sector and a well-educated, highly skilled workforce.

Because of their paradigm-shifting nature, exponential technologies have enormous potential not only for industrial growth and product diversification in the marketplace, but also for the health and well-being of society. Therefore, their efficient development and implementation requires constructive engagement with public health experts, scientists, government regulators, and law enforcement agencies.

These technologies are making business move and change at speeds we have never seen before. Without a well-defined regulatory framework for innovators to work in, we run the risk of missing out on opportunities. With speed and agility comes increased mobility. We all have an interest in keeping the best and brightest minds in Canada, building businesses and industries that create wealth across the value chain for all Canadians.

The good news is that Canada does not lag behind in regulating and legislating disruptive and exponential technologies. On a recent visit to the U.K., Dr. Martin and I learned that many of our research colleagues in the field of synthetic biology are envious of the fact that Canada's regulatory model focuses on regulating processes and not products. This allows for a more unified, coherent regulatory environment for innovators, industry, and government partners.

As a leader in synthetic biology, Concordia has been very proactive in discussions with Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, Environment Canada on the Environmental Protection Act, Industry Canada, Canada Border Services Agency, and the RCMP. The exponential pace and scope of change unleashed by innovative new technologies creates the challenge of how to develop a regulatory regime that simultaneously ensures public safety, while reducing the lag time from research to market.

As we move forward with our innovations in synthetic biology and beyond at District 3, we'll continue to engage our industry and government partners to find solutions to emerging public policy challenges.

Thank you for your attention.

and we look forward to continuing the conversation with you now.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Sweet

Thank you very much, Dr. Carr.

We'll say seven and a half minutes across the board for everyone, and we'll begin with Mr. Lake.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

Thank you to the witnesses for coming.

In the last few weeks I have had the benefit of visiting both the Digital Media Zone at Ryerson and District 3 at Concordia. I had a chance to see some of the practical applications of what you're talking about, and the disruptive technology was pretty astounding.

We saw people who were developing clothes that track the patterns and movements of athletes who are trying to become as efficient and as strong as they can be and get instant feedback on what's efficient and what's not in what they're doing. I saw toys that teach six-year-olds how to build circuitry. There are some incredible innovations there.

At the Digital Media Zone I see what you're talking about in low-cost developments. I met a couple of app designers who are designing apps to run your home from wherever you are, and a receipt management app that was so practical. It was pretty amazing stuff.

I have a couple of questions and a couple of lines of thought.

First, as we try to put someone on a path to the next Google or BlackBerry or whatever their goal might be, as they're developing something, where do you fit in that mix? How far along that path are you looking to take folks? At what point would you pass them off, and where would they wind up moving on to from your areas?

11:20 a.m.

Director, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University

Dr. Hossein Rahnama

That's a great question.

At Ryerson we are looking at it as a spectrum of innovation. We start in the classroom, probably from the second year of undergrad studies, and we introduce the curricular model that we call the super course. We bring students from different disciplines together, from fashion, media, computer science, mechanical engineering, and put them all in one very big lecture hall. The professor is teaching them about the process of innovation and entrepreneurship. At the end of that course they are going to develop their first prototype, and they are going to get an academic credit. They start early.

Then we pass them to an area at Ryerson that we call the launch zone. This is still in the ideation phase, but they need mentorship to be able to bring it to the functional prototype stage. During about one or two semesters in the launch zone, they will figure out the business models. They will figure out the disruptive and high-impact factors of their innovation.

Then we prepare them to bring them to the Digital Media Zone. The Digital Media Zone has about five floors now. They start on the fifth floor, as if it's a school; they practise and validate their technology.

With the help of the FedDev program from the federal government, we also built a centre called the centre for cloud computing, which is more focused on research commercialization. It has access to a large IP pool. These groups of students have preferred access to these IP portfolios so that they can create some sort of science behind what they are working on.

When their business model is more mature, we have connections to seed investments and to government funds through our office of research services. We prepare them to bring their innovation forward and we move it to the acceleration phase. That is an entity that we call the Ryerson Futures, which helps them with seed funds and connections to VCs.

After they pass that phase, then they are basically graduating from that program. We try to connect students from very early undergraduate years, and also connect them in the master's, Ph.D., and post-doctoral levels, irrespective of who they are, and what discipline, and what level of studies they are in. We look at it from the spectrum point of view. The earlier they start the better, because they have more time to focus on their innovation and not worry too much about the complexities of building the business from day one.

A mistake we have seen a lot is that they think they need to have a company right away. When they do that, they need to worry about tax, employment law, about everything, so they cannot focus on that disruptive factor of their innovation. If we help them in the fail-safe environment of the university, they are going to be more prepared when they graduate from the DMZ program, and then they can enter the market in a stronger way.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

Right.

Mr. Hervé.

11:25 a.m.

Xavier-Henri Hervé Director, District 3 Innovation Centre, Concordia University

I think the description that you were given is a great one. I think that system works well.

Essentially what I'd like to bring to it are two core concepts. One of them is that, as Graham was saying before, some of us are in generations and there are things that we have no clue can happen. As CEO of my company until two years ago, when I saw what these young people could do and at the speed at which they could do it, it was unbelievable for me. There were things that I would call complex weapon systems that were literally being developed in kitchens. That's something that most people can't grasp, and trying to pretend that doesn't exist is both a loss of wealth and loss of an opportunity to manage it as a society.

I would bring a second level to what was just explained. Think of the economic world as a pyramid—I think of it that way—and at the top there's Bill Gates, CGI, Bombardier, and all of these people and then you get all these SMEs. The people who innovate are the people who think of a different way and then they enter the system.

It's like you have to create these sphere environments, little planets that you create where you allow them the freedom to do what they need to do. That gives you both a controlled test environment, if you want to think of A/B-testing, and an environment where they're allowed to transform it into economic value.

The other thing that I think DMZ is working really hard at, and Concordia has the same challenge, is our researchers are not inherently imprinted to turn their research into economic value, and the numbers show it. I read a recent article that showed technology transfer offices across Canada have a net gain of $10 million per year in different licensing fees and stuff like that. You have to think of the numbers. We have a huge challenge. We're one of the biggest investors on the planet in research per capita and we have one of the lowest returns when it comes to money from that research.

Creating these spheres allows our people, our population, to develop that wealth. I completely agree with what was just explained. There is tons of risk, tons of things to manage, but if we don't create those spheres to learn how to manage them and experiment with them, which I have had the fortune to do in the last year and a half.... That really was a discovery for me. At my age, I couldn't have known this. Without sticking my hands in it, I wouldn't have known it.

I hope that answers your question

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

Yes.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Sweet

Thank you very much. We have to deal with something as innovation-killing as time. That's all the time Mr. Lake has.

We now go to Ms. Nash.

11:30 a.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you so much for being here. Your presentations are very interesting.

I've not been to D3 but I have been to the Digital Media Zone. It's fascinating and it's really quite exceptional to see the ideas that come out of this kind of facility.

Something we were discussing in our last meeting with our previous groups of witnesses was that connection between the resources that we as a country invest in our educational system and in research. We are very lucky to have not only natural resources but also this investment in science and technology along with all of the research capacity.

If I'm hearing you correctly, the kind of thing you are trying to do is in fact to translate that public investment and private investment into creating wealth, creating jobs, creating innovation, and taking us forward. As you quite rightly say, we are not doing a good job of that now.

We're always looking for recommendations. Do you just recommend we replicate the kinds of things you are doing across the country or is there another level that the kind of work you are doing should go to? Can you tell us a bit about the kinds of things the government should be doing in a perfect world to assist in this tremendous creative process?

11:30 a.m.

Vincent Martin Professor , Canada Research Chair in Microbial Genomics and Engineering, Biology, Concordia University

Maybe I could speak to that.

As researchers, we often find ourselves having to partner with existing industries. A lot of our granting programs and our research funds come from partnerships with industry, so you realize that what you are ending up doing, which is not a negative thing, is doing a lot for research to support, as Xavier was saying, the guys at the peak of the pyramid, but very little research effort and money go to that bottom level.

If I could make a recommendation, it would be to not stop supporting the existing people and the ones who are out there, but to focus a little bit more attention and energy, using whatever mechanism you choose to come up with, on supporting the smaller companies and ideas and entrepreneurs and helping them move through the process so they can become the bigger companies. As a researcher, I have no mechanism to do that now. I have to find a big company that is willing to give me a big amount of money to support a short-term project within that.

11:30 a.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

I assume you take the risk that within any initiative, and especially with something that is very groundbreaking and innovative, there are going to be failures and that's part of the risk process. I think what I heard some of you say is that what your centres are doing is providing a safer environment for this to happen at the beginning stages, but we don't seem to be providing enough support to follow through to take it to the next level. Is that the kind of thing we need to do more of?

11:30 a.m.

Professor , Canada Research Chair in Microbial Genomics and Engineering, Biology, Concordia University

Vincent Martin

Risk is definitely very important.

It's funny, we were discussing this in the car on the way over. A lot of our granting programs in university, and we're really talking about university systems here, are geared towards moving away from risk. Not only that, but some of us who are applying for these grants get to a certain age, as Xavier has already mentioned, where we are averse to risk. With the younger guys, that's all they want. That's the time to take risks, when you don't have a family or a mortgage or anything else and you want to try different things, and you should be willing and want to take those risks. That's where it has to go.

11:30 a.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you.

Professor Rahnama.

11:30 a.m.

Director, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University

Dr. Hossein Rahnama

That is a very good point you mentioned, because it's another way of looking at both our research and our educational system. If you have a bad mark in your transcript, it will stay with you forever, whereas if we create these parallel environments that if you fail your first start-up or your first ideation, it's actually a good thing, because now you know how to do it better next time.

It needs some programs in our institutions to be able to value those failures, but also build models that the entrepreneur can learn from.

The other thing I noticed is that we have fantastic research, as Xavier mentioned, in our research labs. The challenge is that we cannot translate them into economic growth metrics and commercialization. One of the key things we observed is that there are no metrics to value our professors to become entrepreneurial. It would be great if a university could say it values you if you publish a paper in a high impact journal but it also values you a lot if you can commercialize your research and turn it into a start-up. That way you could attract professors who are motivated to turn their disruptive research into a commercialized aspect.

The other thing we observed is that France has a great program that incentivizes large companies to partner with start-ups. If we could have that in Canada, because the biggest challenge that start-ups have.... With my own start-up and things we have seen in the DMZ is that big enterprises in Canada are not willing to take the risk, because they want to see that three other people have used your technology before they will use your technology. If we could incentivize them to partner with these start-ups and be the first adopter of that technology in Canada, I think it would significantly expedite the time from the lab to the market.

11:35 a.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you.

I was going to ask you why Vodafone and Paris Métro, and not Metrolinx. Initially they were waiting for someone else to try your app. Yes?

11:35 a.m.

Director, District 3 Innovation Centre, Concordia University

Xavier-Henri Hervé

I would like to support that statement 100%.

With Rector Alan Shepard we organized two innovation conferences, board meeting level and invited executives. Lawyers and consultants showed up, but not a single executive from a senior corporation showed up, so either we're not credible, or they don't care. It can be true in either case, right?

There's something that's not making any sense in our ecosystem. There's no notion of early adopters. I was in San Francisco for a full week last week, and the repeated statement was the start-ups are stealth weapons. That's how they see it.

The big corporations can't do it. It's against their short-term interest; it doesn't work. The more you go to feed those systems.... The French have got it. The Europeans have got it. SAP, which is a German company, has a fund for start-ups. I could list 50 of them that have done it, but I can't come up with a number of Canadian ones that have done it.

We have this early adopter. I completely agree, we definitely have a lack of awareness of our corporate system in early adoption of these technologies and how to do it with these fear systems, you know, these parallel planets. Everyone has to align with this. Others have. The French have. Silicon Valley has. There's no reason why we shouldn't. There's nothing stopping us from doing it.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Sweet

Thank you very much.

You reminded me of a Winston Churchill quote that the definition of success is moving from failure with great enthusiasm.

Madam Gallant, for seven and a half minutes.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

You talked about your spheres at your individual universities. What interaction is there between universities with these spheres?

May 12th, 2015 / 11:35 a.m.

Director, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University

Dr. Hossein Rahnama

Very broadly, I think what we need as a country is that these innovation centres start to work together and emphasize the areas they are strong in. We do not need to replicate exactly the same type of sphere across Canada. We can have an ecosystem of these zones or innovation centres or incubators that are complementing one particular innovation spectrum, in the sense that one can be focused on aerospace, and the other one can be focused on ICT, and one can be more focused on existing start-ups, and the other one can be focused on commercialization of research.

We need to build programs that can connect these nodes together. We have seen initiatives like that. I've had the privilege to serve on the board of NSERC. There are very good examples that we are starting to see, but they should not necessarily compete with each other in wanting to be the biggest incubator versus the other. They need to complement each other in terms of a national offering that students and entrepreneurs have access to.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

At this point in time, what type of interaction do these various innovation centres have? Are they talking to one another? Are they showing each other what they have? Do they know what each other has in terms of resources?