Industry Committee on June 7th, 2016

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Let's focus on IRAP, not NSERC. I just used that for comparative purposes.

[Mitch Davies]

If I could add, Mr. Chair, I think it might be helpful to distinguish that the NRC, in addition to providing grants for IRAP, is also a performer of research. That distinguishes it from NSERC, which grants funding to the performers of research.

In one case it's a mechanism to flow funds to meritorious projects, as you would with IRAP, in fact, in funding a business. The other side of the NRC is they actually have expertise. Their operating dollars would be their talent, their personnel, and they dedicate those people towards strategic research projects in collaboration with industry and other sectors to actually solve problems. They run labs. They have talented people. They have Ph.D.'s. They have expertise. They're actually in a different line of business than NSERC.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Yes, I understood that.

That leads me to my next question. Do we have metrics that tell us how successful they are, because an awful lot of money is going to that? For the non-granting part, but the part that's doing all that extra research, I know there have been a lot of changes in the last few years to the NRC structures. Do we have anything that tells us if that's well-spent money, in a global sense?

[Lawrence Hanson]

Yes.

The NRC is still in the midst of an overall transformation to become a much more outward-facing, business-oriented, research technology organization than in the past. They continue to work very effectively with industry on a wide range of projects.

I would note that some of their ability to perform and do some of that research and activity was affected by external events, for example, a cyber-intrusion and other kinds of activities, but yes, the NRC continues to partner very effectively with industry.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Do we have metrics for that expense? It's a simple question.

[Lawrence Hanson]

To get the actual performance metrics of the NRC and what's currently available, I'd probably suggest that our colleagues at the National Research Council could provide further information on that.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Perhaps you could provide that information on the outputs, if we could tease out the IRAP part of the NRC's budget. I have been happy to see a much better flow over the last 10 years between the operating budget versus the granting. Let's pull that out.

Then we're left with a lot of money to run these institutions. I know they've gone through a lot of changes, but I'd like to see what metrics, if any, we're getting out of that. We can say that they're helping all of our companies. That's great, but I'd like to know how many and in what manner.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

We have about 10 seconds.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

You can send it to me in writing. Send it to our clerk.

[David Enns]

We'll endeavour to get that information for you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you.

Finally, Mr. Masse, you have two minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Is the funding for AUTO21 being reviewed right now?

The minister promised this at this committee. It was sunsetted with a seven-year imposed limit on it. I'd like to hear what's being done with regard to that right now.

[Mitch Davies]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to have a specific answer, so I think I'd best take that back to the department. Our colleague who is responsible for the auto sector, the industry sector in the department, is not with us today. Given this specific question, I'd like to take it back to the department and provide a written answer, if that would be acceptable to the committee—

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's acceptable.

[Mitch Davies]

—rather than providing a general answer, which doesn't get to the specifics you asked.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

No worries.

It's a concern. With that answer, I'd also like to understand why there was a seven-year limitation and then a renewal, including the reasons for it, and why there was then no opportunity for review. A lot of the work is being done there. For every $1 put in there, $12 have gone back to the economy. We have partners that have basically paid almost the equivalent in private sector and philanthropic donations that equal the investment there.

I'd just be curious with the regard that, but also the overall programs that are successful. These research excellence centres are going to automatically die on the vine because of an ideological decision over a decade ago about them.

I'll leave it at that, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

Here's where we stand. We've gone through an entire round of questioning. We have about 35 minutes to go through the actual estimates.

Do we have unanimous consent to go right to the estimates and start discussing them, or do people still need more debate?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

There are different categories: we have a vote for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency; we have two votes for the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency; and we have one for the Canadian Tourism Commission.... We can go through each one individually or we can go through the categories.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I will be voting on division. You can group them if you want or not. I'm comfortable with either situation, as long as we're going on division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

If we are ready to proceed then we will go to the votes.

ATLANTIC CANADA OPPORTUNITIES AGENCY Vote 5a—Grants and contributions..........$8,300,000

(Vote 5a agreed to on division)

CANADIAN NORTHERN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1a—Operating expenditures..........$4,668,559 5a—Contributions..........$23,763,634

(Votes 1a and 5a agreed to on division)

CANADIAN TOURISM COMMISSION 1a—Payments to the Canadian Tourism Commission..........$25,000,000

(Vote 1a agreed to on division)

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF CANADA FOR THE REGIONS OF QUEBEC 5a—Grants and contributions..........$15,600,000

(Vote 5a agreed to on division)

FEDERAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR SOUTHERN ONTARIO 5a—Grants and contributions..........$22,200,000

(Vote 5a agreed to on division)

INDUSTRY 1a—Operating expenditures..........$7,933,481 5a—Capital expenditures..........$8,518,900 10a—Grants and contributions..........$522,431,813

(Votes 1a, 5a, and 10a agreed to on division)

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA 1a—Operating expenditures..........$924,300 5a—Capital expenditures..........$3,350,000 10a—Grants and contributions..........$50,000,000

(Votes 1a, 5a, and 10a agreed to on division)

NATURAL SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH COUNCIL 1a—Operating expenditures..........$827,500 5a—Grants..........$14,050,400

(Votes 1a and 5a agreed to on division)

SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES RESEARCH COUNCIL 1a—Operating expenditures..........$482,400 5a—Grants..........$15,459,850

(Votes 1a and 5a agreed to on division)

STANDARDS COUNCIL OF CANADA 1a—Payments to the Standards Council of Canada..........$945,000

(Vote 1a agreed to on division)

WESTERN ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION 5a—Operating expenditures..........$23,100,000

(Vote 5a agreed to on division)

Shall the chair report the supplementary estimates (A) 2016-17 to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you all very much.

Thank you to our guests for coming in.

Thank you very much.

This meeting is adjourned.