Industry Committee on March 29th, 2022

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

The idea of using the properties of the quantum world to develop technologies is not new. The first ideas were launched in the 1970s. There was a real turning point around the 1980s and around 1994, when an American researcher realized that it was possible to factor numbers that are the product of two prime numbers. This is called “Shor's algorithm.”

This algorithm sounds very abstract, but it is what underlies all the cryptography used today.

The idea of building a quantum computer dates back some 25 to 30 years. That's why I call it a marathon, not a sprint. However, in the last five years, industry has really jumped on board and there have been efforts in several countries to translate quantum information into devices.

So the strategy is associated with a marathon.

I can't tell you when we'll be able to produce quantum computers that will be able to do things that will be interesting to you and your colleagues around the table. My colleagues in industry might be able to make a more accurate prediction than I can, but I would be surprised if it happens within 10 years. It's a long haul.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I will ask them about that.

Dr. Laflamme, you also mentioned in your remarks that support in Canada was different from that in the United States.

Are you talking about support through specific government programs and investment opportunities that include research ecosystems?

You also mentioned that there are gaps to be filled. Can you tell us more about that?

What are these gaps in terms of support for our companies and our research centres?

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

Thank you for your excellent question.

In the United States and the United Kingdom, they use a program created by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA.

This program enables collaboration between researchers and companies, who can bid together or separately on various projects, often with the government's contribution, to secure funding. It's harder to work this way in Canada. We have programs here that are really limited in that regard, but we could look at improving that.

I have heard that Minister Champagne's mandate letter would float the idea of adopting a DARPA‑style model with a distinctly Canadian approach in the coming years. I would support such a project.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

We often hear that companies in various areas work in isolation.

I'd like to hear your comments on the quantum industry and how we can promote better exchanges and better collaboration between industry and the research community. The government often tends to focus on betting on the right horse instead of focusing on a number of things, particularly in the quantum industry, and then seeing which one stands out. Your reference to a marathon may apply again in this case.

How do you see the quantum industry growing?

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

Until seven or eight years ago, very few Canadians were going into the quantum industry. In the last five or seven years, there has been a dramatic change, and the industry is growing, which is a good sign. The question I have and that I don't have an answer for—it will take a team effort—is how do we give all these start‑ups the means they need to grow and become full‑fledged companies? That's where the national quantum strategy needs to come in.

This field of expertise is still in its infancy, and there is much to experiment with. There is no guarantee that we will find the best approach the first time around, but even if we make mistakes along the way, recognizing them will lead us to correct the situation and move forward. That's the idea behind quantum error correction, which Mr. Janik talked about a little bit, but with the commercial side rather than the quantum information side.

I think quantum ecosystems are a way of supporting both academia and businesses. We must ensure that government research laboratories, as well as Defence Research and Development Canada and Natural Resources Canada, are able to join these ecosystems. It would provide a mix of ingredients for the emergence of companies that will form the Canadian quantum industry of the future.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Dr. Laflamme.

Mr. Masse, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll try to get some of our other guests involved in the conversation. I'll start with Mr. Yazdi, and then I'll invite any others to talk.

The question I have is, once you start to scale-up or get involved as a company and grow, what are the key elements that you need?

A concern I've seen in some of our other industries is that you get gobbled up once you're successful. I don't know whether that's the situation for quantum computing. I've seen that in tool and die mould-making and other types of businesses.

I'm curious about that element and whether or not there are enough supports for growing, and then getting to the next level in the private sector.

[Dr. Alireza Yazdi]

Thanks for the excellent question.

As a company grows, especially a deep tech company like ours, access to two things becomes very critical. One is funding and the other is talent. I believe we could do better on both counts here in Canada.

With respect to talent, as Professor Laflamme mentioned, there is a very competitive market out there. We are competing against the likes of Google and IBM and the salaries and job conditions they can offer. That's very hard. It doesn't help that our visa system doesn't support bringing in talent from outside.

Right now, it's very hard to hire an experimental quantum physicist. You have to go through a lot of bureaucracy to get an LMIA certificate. It would be much easier for me to hire a cook here in Montreal than to hire an experimental physicist. That has to change.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'll let our other guests intervene, if they're interested, but first, I want to make sure I have it right.

I did some work with the video game industry, and they had a hard time with immigration. They needed to hire a director, so to speak, to create the video game. We had a lot of talent for a lot of the components, but they had to bring in a director. It was turned down for years seeing there was not a Canadian interest in that, which was wrong, because we couldn't develop the rest of the infrastructure. We didn't have the captain, so to speak, or the director to put the pieces together.

Is it similar to that for where we are? Do we need that exceptional talent or skill set that's very unique and hard to get to build the other components and train people to get into those positions eventually?

[Dr. Alireza Yazdi]

That's exactly the case. I would encourage the government to create exceptions and new lines in the immigration system to allow us to hire people who have expertise in quantum computing, in particular. Of course, the access to funding is very important.

Yes, we fortunately now have the BDC deep tech venture fund. I think the two other companies here have benefited from that investment, but last time I heard, they're preallocated on their budget with respect to investing in quantum hardware companies, so that already closes the door for many other interesting start-ups that are trying to get into the industry.

These are the two things that come to mind. I believe the other guests also have some points to make.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

If there are any other guests, please....

Mr. Janik.

[Rafal Janik]

Absolutely, I would echo what has already been said.

On the talent side, we've experienced a bit of a different situation. We've been incredibly lucky that we've been able to bring over 60% of our workforce through programs like the global talent stream. In fact, between the quality of life in Canada and the relatively open immigration policy, we've been able to out-compete a lot of our peers in the United States for talent.

On the funding side, I want to add a comment about the scale of funding that we're talking about. To date, we've been incredibly lucky and we've been able to raise over $175 million Canadian for the goal of building a fault-tolerant universal quantum computer. That's probably about 20% of what is needed to deliver this truly transformative machine. There becomes a really big security and strategic question. There was a question earlier around how we keep this IP within Canada. Probably one of the biggest threats is that once companies get large enough and successful enough, they'll need that outside equity, that outside money, in order to come in and bring them over the goal line.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but definitely one problem we need to solve is how we move past the early stages, the academic side, to the true commercialization side, to be able to reap the benefits of all the investment that has already been put into quantum technologies.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Are there any other guests...? I'm not sure if I have any time left.

[Dr. Philippe St-Jean]

One point to your second question about the end game for quantum computing companies in Canada is that we've seen a bit of consolidation recently, but mostly those are companies that were doing a single component of the whole system, like control systems, for instance, and were acquired by another company. We've also seen some consolidation of quantum software companies with quantum hardware companies.

It's not so much companies being gobbled up, per se, like someone building a quantum computer and being acquired. That's not something we've seen so far. It doesn't look like it's going to be happening any time soon. To Mr. Janik's point, this will be a question of whether we have the capacity to fully fund the full story, ultimately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to MP Gray for five minutes.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all of the witnesses for being here. My questions are for Dr. Laflamme.

There is a patent box policy presently in place in Quebec. Do you think implementing a patent box policy around quantum computing would be beneficial to keep investment here in Canada and protect IP?

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

I am not sure what a patent box IP policy is, living in Waterloo, Ontario. I'll point out that the University of Waterloo has a very interesting IP policy, which is that the researcher owns the IP, so in my—

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

If I could just interject, it has to do with intellectual property assets. Looking at quantum computing, how would it perhaps fit in within that category?

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

Who would own that patent box?

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Maybe we'll move on and we'll send you a note separately. It has to do with the actual assets of a company and looking at how quantum computing might fit into that.

I'll move on, because I have limited time here.

This is another question I wanted to ask you. Concerns have been reported that the emergence of quantum computing will require a need to update standards for encryption algorithms to ensure they are secure from any potential attacks, in particular from hacking from nefarious sources by quantum computers.

Would you say this is a concern? How should the federal government approach this to ensure encryptions are secure? Specifically, are there any policies or laws that we might want to be considering around this?

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

It's a very good question. The answer is, yes, the government should be concerned.

When we have the quantum computer, the algorithms we are using for cryptography today will all be broken. We should all remind ourselves that what we are transmitting around the world today through the Internet will be broken once we have a quantum computer.

Fortunately—and it's not because I want my colleagues to slow down on their goal of building a quantum computer—I do not believe that this will happen until at least 10 to 20 years from now.

The federal government should think about moving from the algorithms they are using right now to new algorithms that are quantum-resistant. There are efforts to go in this direction at both CSEC and CSIS, and in the U.S., at the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

That's great. Thank you.

I understand that in budget 2021 the government intended to develop a national quantum strategy and held consultations.

Were you able to participate in those consultations or round tables?

[Dr. Raymond Laflamme]

Although I was not in the consultations themselves, I was part of the executive committee that made a proposal for budget 2021. I was part of a proposal that was put together, asking the federal government to fund a national strategy. I definitely had some input in that document.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you. Were there any potential pitfalls that the federal government should be aware of when developing a quantum strategy?

Just to tag onto that, are there any lessons or policies that other countries are using around quantum computing that Canada should pay attention to and look at replicating here?