Industry Committee on Nov. 30th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

I'm going to remind everybody that we're very tight on time, so I'm going to stick to the five minutes.

Mr. Jeneroux, you have five minutes.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you, Minister, for being here today, and thank you for bringing your plethora of staff with you in tow. You have always been very generous to me, and I certainly appreciate that.

I have some questions for you. Particularly, let's start with the Naylor report. It has been 234 days now. We're still waiting on the 35 recommendations and your position on a number of them. You have highlighted some, but there are still some outstanding.

When can we expect those ones to be delivered?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

I will begin by saying that many people joining us today are interns who are here with ISED, and I know this committee would be really pleased to welcome them. I know our focus is a big part on young people.

Thank you for asking about the fundamental science review. I commissioned it. It's the first time this has been done in 40 years. I can't imagine any other system that has gone without a comprehensive review in 40 years. I undertook this review to get the evidence to be able to act.

There was concern out in the community that this report would be buried. I insisted that it be released at the public policy forum so we could begin something that has never happened in this country, which is a discussion on research and research funding. That discussion is happening.

I was very clear in the spring that I agree with the majority of the recommendations, and I plan to act on them in the short, medium, and long term.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Do you mind if I ask then, Minister, what the holdup is? What can we help you with in terms of helping to speed this along a little bit?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

I really appreciate your offer. It takes time. There are 35 recommendations. You can't change a complex ecosystem quickly overnight.

Let me tell you, on the networks of centres of excellence program, that we changed the rules for it, the term limits, so that former networks of centres of excellence could apply for funding.

On the Canada research coordinating committee, this is really important. As I go across the country, what I hear from the researchers is, “I might be able to fund my lab or my tool, but I can't get the money to operate it, so it's of no use.” By creating that coordinating committee—it's going to have the deputy minister of ISED, the deputy minister of health, the heads of our three granting agencies, and CFI—we're going to be able to better coordinate and harmonize these research programs.

I'll talk also about the Tier 1s—

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

You've been on record as saying that part of the problem with the report is you don't think that putting an unelected body over the funding model as being a hurdle for the report. If that's the hurdle, I would hope you'd just say that and let us know so that we can continue to advocate for and work with the science community on that.

Do you want to shift gears quickly to PEARL funding?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Can I—

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Let me go there first.

On the PEARL funding, the CCAR initiative that our government put in place reached its end of cycle. There was a lot of concern within the science community regarding the funding for PEARL. You swooped in at the 11th hour with the Minister of the Environment to find $1.6 million of transition funding, but it doesn't seem as if there's a transition to anything. There is no commitment past those 18 months.

Can you provide your solution to that?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Our government understands that Arctic research matters more than ever because of climate change. That's why we signed the Paris Agreement. That's why we've put a price on carbon, and that's why we've invested billions of dollars in climate change research and adaptation and mitigation and in clean technology—and I mean billions of dollars.

I sat on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I was asked by my government to serve on it. In 1995 the IPCC said that humans are having a discernible impact on climate. The former environment minister under the previous government recognized that climate change was real in 2012, so while we've invested—

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I'm sorry, Minister, I have about five seconds. Do you have a plan for after the 18 months?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

—billions, the previous government used PEARL as a one-off solution to solve a political problem.

We understand that the Arctic is far too important and we will be coming forward with a comprehensive, thoughtful program, but since you've asked about PEARL, it is unique in Canada. It is our most northern facility. It looks at the atmosphere, climate change, ozone, and the interaction among the atmosphere, ice, and ocean, so we are maintaining the operations and research of PEARL.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I'll take that as a hard no.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

We're going to move on to Mr. Stewart. You have five minutes.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Welcome, Minister.

I have hardly any time, so I'll whip through.

In a letter I sent you dated September 29, I asked, among other things, about the extent to which you are prepared to implement Naylor report recommendations. Your office has promised a response, but I haven't yet received one. I'm still hoping I might get a letter, but also, would you answer the three questions I have here?

The first two concern the Naylor report, so I'm going to group two questions here. There are 35 recommendations. I recognize that you have gone some way to implement some of them, but I would suggest those are the more minor recommendations. Two doozies in the report have not yet been addressed. The first recommendation in the Naylor report is to have a new act of Parliament to create a national advisory council on research and innovation. I am wondering whether you will draft and table such legislation.

The second question about the Naylor report concerns the really big one, which is the request to increase annual funding from $3.5 billion to $4.8 billion over a four-year phase-in period. Will you assure the scientific community that this increase will occur?

Thank you.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

I'll begin with the letter. Thank you for your letter. The reason it has been delayed is that a big change came in, which was that we appointed Canada's first chief science advisor, and we wanted the letter to reflect that. I'd be happy to talk with you about the chief science advisor.

Just so you are aware, my office offered to have a meeting with your office twice, and you know I have come over and personally offered the same—

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Yes, but everything in writing is more important in this case.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

We did offer while that's being drafted, and it is on my desk today, but two offers were made by my office as well as my personal offer on two occasions.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Thank you very much.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

When it comes to the fundamental science review, I think it's important to remember that I commissioned this report because I wanted the evidence, and it gives us a good path forward. I've talked about the action taken, the networks of centres of excellence, the Canada research coordinating committee. I haven't talked about the Tier 1s, and I'd like to—

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

I have my specific question, so—

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

—but I'm going to talk about the money, if you'll allow me to finish.

Understand that in the previous government, in 10 years we fell from third to eighth position and from 18th to 26th for higher education R and D and business R and D respectively, and now Canada is out of the top 30 in business R and D for the first time. A big hole has been dug and there is no quick fix, but we are in a budget process and we are working hard. We are building the awareness and education of how important discovery research is, and science has no greater champion than myself.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

How about NACRI, then?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you.

On the question about NACRI, what the committee suggested is that we should have an advisory committee on science and innovation. We absolutely agree.

With our new appointments process—which, as you know, is open, transparent, and merit-based—it takes time, but you will see coming forward in the next few months our launch of that new process. It's really important that this be outward-facing and open and transparent and that the committee knows what's being discussed.

I will also build on the Canada research coordinating committee. You're a former researcher and you understand some of the challenges that our researchers face—