Science and Research Committee on Nov. 7th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

I call this meeting to order.

I see a number of new faces around the table today and on the screen. That's great.

Welcome to meeting number 108 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. All witnesses have completed the required connection tests in advance of the meeting.

I'd like to remind all members of the following points.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

Members, please raise your hand if you wish to speak, whether participating in person or via Zoom. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can.

For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. For interpretation for those on Zoom, you have the choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English or French.

Thank you all for your co-operation.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, September 17, the committee is resuming its study of the mission, mandate, role, structure and financing of the new capstone research funding organization announced in budget 2024.

It's now my pleasure to welcome, from Northwestern Polytechnic, Dr. Vanessa Sheane, president and chief executive officer; from Polytechnics Canada, Sarah Watts-Rynard, chief executive officer; and from the Université du Québec, Christian Agbobli, vice-president of research, creation and diffusion, by video conference.

Up to five minutes will be given for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions.

Dr. Sheane, I invite you to make an opening statement of up to five minutes.

[Dr. Vanessa Sheane, President and Chief Executive Officer, Northwestern Polytechnic]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon. It's a privilege to be before you today as we gather to discuss the capstone organization.

As we navigate an era marked by rapid advancements and unprecedented challenges, the role of applied research in polytechnic institutions has never been more vital. As the largest post-secondary in northern Alberta, Northwestern Polytechnic recognizes the importance and value of applied research. Our institution works directly with small and medium-sized enterprises to address real-world challenges through applied research. When industries and communities collaborate with polytechnics, they create impactful and tangible results. The partnerships I'm speaking to today leverage both academic and industry expertise and resources, allowing for the development of practical solutions that can be swiftly implemented in the community, the marketplace and beyond.

Applied research plays a vital role in addressing the unique challenges faced by rural communities. By focusing on practical and local solutions for our industries, it helps improve quality of life, foster economic development and enhance access to essential services.

In northern Alberta, our main industry partners are from the energy, agriculture, forestry and health care sectors. In agriculture innovations, applied research helps to develop sustainable farming practices, improve crop yields and integrate technology to support local farmers. Applied research fosters economic development by exploring strategies for diversifying local economies, supporting small businesses and creating job opportunities tailored to the community's strengths.

Currently, without the capstone, the national research ecosystem is organized around academic disciplines of social sciences and humanities, natural sciences and engineering, and health sciences. The tri-agencies' roles and functions are to promote and assist post-secondary research in these areas.

The committee has already heard that only 2.9% of current research funding is awarded to colleges and polytechnics. Also, the majority of investments in applied research is in institutions situated in major urban centres. This oversight is problematic because it discounts the value and strength of the collaborations that are occurring beyond the borders of major cities and in the heart of some of our most lucrative industries. It also means that a vital perspective has been left out of the national research ecosystem.

To that end, the missing components are representation, transdisciplinarity and equality. This is where the capstone organization has a fit.

The capstone mandate needs to support mission-driven research that helps to address the urgent societal challenges where the intellectual property belongs to Canadians, not to the individual researcher or the specific post-secondary institution. This is publicly funded research for the benefit of all Canadians.

The capstone's role should be twofold. First, it should be focused on transdisciplinary research of a complex challenge that brings together knowledge from academia, experiences from those working within the challenges and the prospective benefits to Canadians. Second, the capstone's role should be focused on the integration of the Canadian innovation ecosystem where all post-secondary institutions collaborate and contribute to the research enterprise.

Not only does the capstone's structure need to be representative of all post-secondary institutions, including polytechnics, colleges and CEGEPs, it also must intentionally include rural and northern researchers, industries and communities.

The capstone should be funded through a new funding envelope. A dedicated and stable investment will allow applied research to flourish.

In closing, I want to share information with the committee about technology access centres, or TACs, as an example of how the capstone's approach can support mission-driven research on a larger scale nationally. A TAC is an advanced applied research and innovation facility. It enables companies to access state-of-the-art technology, equipment and a multidisciplinary team of experts who will help transform innovative ideas into market-ready products through prototype development, process scaling and addressing specific business challenges.

Northwestern Polytechnic's TAC, the National Bee Diagnostic Centre, is a leader in providing comprehensive diagnostic services and cutting-edge testing for the beekeeping industry with aligned processes and practices with accredited laboratories in the EU and the U.S. It works to advance testing for fraudulent honey to protect the reputation of Canadian honey worldwide.

The other TACs across the country support and benefit SMEs and communities in similar ways through innovation, technology, commercialization and employability. I encourage the capstone to leverage its mandate and role in a way that will not only build on the success of these TACs, but also amplify the strengths of our collective learnings as a collaborative research community.

Thank you very much. I await your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you very much, Dr. Sheane.

We'll now turn to Ms. Watts-Rynard.

The floor is yours for five minutes for an opening statement.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard, Chief Executive Officer, Polytechnics Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm delighted to return to the committee to participate in your study on the new capstone research organization.

It will come as no surprise that Canada struggles with innovation and productivity. Though we make considerable investments in research, the country often fails to translate those findings into economic and social impact. The nature of R and D spending does little to contribute solutions to the pragmatic challenges that we face as a country.

I believe that the capstone research funding organization has real potential to address this shortcoming. There is a opportunity to better map and exploit Canada's rich research ecosystem, better addressing topics of national interest from housing to elder care to climate change. For example, discovery research related to artificial intelligence requires implementation pathways for mainstream businesses and organizations in every corner of the country. I'm seeing this happen with little fanfare and modest investments at Canada's polytechnics in areas from mining operations to wildfire suppression.

This is why I was disappointed by the “What We Heard” report issued by the tri-council following a very brief consultation with the research community. In my view, the report focuses more on retaining the status quo than it does on establishing a framework for something new and impactful.

I know that there are many researchers who wait their entire careers to secure funding to explore their passions for science, engineering, health discoveries and social sciences, and that is commendable. Yet, if the new research organization has the ambition to be something different or something more than is currently funded by the tri-agencies, frankly, it will be a waste of time and money if it does not achieve that.

For this reason, I again tell the story of commercialization-focused research of the type under way at Canada's polytechnics. Over the years in our meetings with government stakeholders, we've often been asked to quantify the return on investment of applied research, including jobs created, export markets developed and new products launched. As you might expect, these are questions that are rarely asked of university researchers.

In response, Polytechnics Canada recently published a report on the economic impact of applied research. This was a year-long study that was funded entirely by my organization, which receives no government support. It shows that every dollar invested in polytechnic applied research generates a return on investment between $8 and $18.

The analysis found that polytechnics de-risk R and D for business, making innovation accessible. Adopting new technology or implementing new systems can be like betting the store for small and medium-sized business owners, and polytechnic applied research puts innovation within reach.

Data from the past three years shows that what polytechnics have been able to do is attract matching dollars for every dollar invested by the federal government. Projects not only respond to the challenges defined by an industry partner, but the partner retains intellectual property from the collaboration, enabling it to commercialize products without being hostage to shared IP.

The report doesn't stop there. It includes more than 30 case studies of pragmatic, impactful research partnerships that resulted in business growth and created jobs. The projects illustrate the interdisciplinary nature of challenge-driven research, drawing expertise from various parts of the institution and beyond. In addition to partner insights, we hear from some of the 28,000 polytechnic students who participate in applied research collaborations each year.

I believe that is a really useful blueprint for the capstone research funding organization, challenge-driven collaborations operating at the speed of business with partners that are looking to solve real challenges and commercialize the results, a focus on impact and results in areas of importance to Canadians, and smart people who are making good choices for Canada's future prosperity.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you, Ms. Watts-Rynard.

Now we'll turn to Christian Agbobli.

You have the floor for your opening statement of five minutes.

[Christian Agbobli, Vice-President, Research, Creation and Diffusion, Université du Québec]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for inviting me to take part in this consultation on behalf of the Université du Québec.

My name is Christian Agbobli, and I am the vice-president of research, creation and diffusion at the Université du Québec à Montréal, one of 10 institutions in the Université du Québec network. I am pleased to share our network's comments with you.

Today, I'm going to talk about four recommendations relating to the governance, funding and mission of the new capstone organization announced in the latest budget. We see these recommendations as crucial to making the changes a success.

For this capstone organization to work, it must improve the Canadian research support system in four ways.

First, it must simplify and harmonize the system.

Second, it must make the system more representative of the research ecosystem.

Third, it must provide strategic direction.

Fourth, it must support and promote support for francophone research.

First, the new capstone organization must help streamline the Canadian research funding system. It must recognize sector-specific considerations, harmonize funding programs and simplify administrative procedures. It should increase the coherence and agility of Canada's research funding system by helping to adopt consistent, integrated and user-friendly tools for research training management.

Second, governance bodies, consultation mechanisms and evaluation committees overseen by the capstone organization should reflect the diversity of Canadian academic institutions in order to support decision-making informed by diverse research contexts. To this end, the new capstone organization's mandate must explicitly support the development of research in all of Canada's university cities and regions.

The creation of this new organization is a unique opportunity to restore the equitable distribution of research funds. This will require regular and timely engagement with working groups that are representative of the research community across the country.

In governance, means matter. We wish to emphasize the importance of providing the new capstone organization with adequate resources to accomplish its mission. The government must not rob Peter to pay Paul. The operating budgets of the current granting agencies' programs absolutely must be maintained in their entirety for the investment announced in budget 2024 to materialize.

Third, the new capstone organization should make it possible to better plan research development. As a cornerstone of Canada's research funding system, the capstone organization should make it a priority to lead the development of national research and innovation strategies. The strategy must be developed without political influence, and it must take into account Canada's geography, the centre of excellence and the cardinal values of the Canadian research support system.

We consider five of these values to be crucial: accessible funding; an independent evaluation process; the importance of free and basic research; collaboration among researchers; and diverse research purposes, methods, approaches and contexts.

In addition, implementing and monitoring this strategy should involve implementing effective tools to facilitate the collection of evidence on Canada's research and innovation performance and that of institutions.

Lastly, the creation of a new research support organization in Canada must help support research in French. This is a widespread concern in Quebec and elsewhere in the Canadian francophonie. The Université du Québec welcomes the recent creation of the external advisory group on the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French by the government. This initiative is a ray of hope for the vitality of science in French.

That said, the capstone organization need not wait for the group's findings to play a role in raising the profile of French in the research ecosystem.

Of course, as we've often said, it's important to ensure that funding applications submitted in French are treated fairly within the federal research support system. In addition to this equity measure, the capstone organization must set an example with respect to the Official Languages Act by ensuring that all the services it provides to Canadians are of equal quality in Canada's two official languages.

Thank you for your attention.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you, Mr. Agbobli.

I'm now going to open the floor to questions from members. Please be sure to indicate to whom your questions are directed.

Our first questioner will be MP Tochor for six minutes.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses.

In the testimony, we heard our Quebec friend talk about the importance of being very strategic in how we spend dollars. For our friends from Alberta and the college associations, it is important to look at applied research and look at some of the research that can be done to answer the common questions, concerns or problems normal Canadians face. That's very encouraging as we go on to study the capstone and how to direct research dollars into, hopefully, the most mission-critical areas or questions Canadians have.

Here's what's been going on. I have a few studies I'll read into the record, and then if anyone has any questions or wants to comment on them, they can jump in. If not, I'd like to hear at the end of the questions some examples of what research is being done that is going to be useful.

At Carleton, we, as taxpayers, paid $50,000 for “Playing for Pleasure: The Affective Experience of Sexual and Erotic Video Games”. That's at Carleton. It cost $50,000. We spent money on that.

Would anyone like to touch on that one?

Another one is from the University of Guelph, called “Re-visioning yoga and yoga bodies: Expanding modes of embodiment with non-normative bodies”. That's at the University of Guelph. The Canadian taxpayer spent $90,000 to study the revisioning of yoga and yoga bodies. This is an area of the country—this is ripped from the GuelphToday newspaper—where residents are “'alarmed' at possible encampments in Preservation Park”. That was from October 17 this year.

We have housing hell out there. People are setting up tents in Guelph. Meanwhile, the Government of Canada is spending taxpayers' dollars to the tune of $90,000 on revisioning yoga and yoga bodies.

Would any of our witnesses like to take a stab at defending that? If not, I'll understand.

I have two more studies that I'll read into the record and then we'll get to some other questions.

From the University of Alberta, for $17,500, we have “An analysis of representations of women in bioware games and fan reactions through time”. This is the best source of dollars to be spent on research at the University of Alberta, for $17,500: “An analysis of representations of women in bioware games and fan reactions through time”.

How does this relate to what's going on in Canada?

Earlier this month, on CTV News, the title of the story was “Bullet found in wall of Edmonton school after Halloween shooting: police”. We've seen crime rates across Canada skyrocketing. Crime is out of control, and we're spending $17,500 on that research.

It doesn't stop there. Maybe our new friend from Quebec would like to comment on this one. At Concordia University in Quebec, for $46,227, we have “Class and Video Games”. This is the research they're seized with in Montreal. Meanwhile, the Gazette, the largest paper in Montreal, ran an article on October 27, entitled “Montreal unhoused encampments emblematic of issue across Canada”. This is true. It's across Canada.

This is a whole bunch of studies, which taxpayers paid for, that have very little—if we go back to the testimony from all three of you wanting it to be strategic—to do with the applied research that goes into the most critical questions that are asked by Canadians. This is what we're funding.

I have to hear, hopefully from our witnesses today, that this isn't the case and that there is, hopefully, some really good research going on at your respective institutions and members' institutions, because I think taxpayers are getting sick of this.

I have two questions for you all on this.

If your students were receiving this level of funding, what sorts of projects would you expect them to carry out? If you had a $50,000 prize dropped into your lap, what would be a typical example of the research that might be done at a polytechnic right now? Hopefully that would answer some of those questions that Canadians have.

[Dr. Vanessa Sheane]

I can speak to that piece.

At Northwestern Polytechnic, there are two that I'll speak about.

The first one is a COIL project or collaborative online international learning. This is for the health care sector and health care students. Particularly we're looking at it from a rural health care access perspective. It is collaborative, online and international, with global simulation development to enhance learning and to provide learning opportunities where these health care workers are working. It is simulation training, sonography and indigenous cultural awareness.

Health care workers in rural areas do not have to go somewhere to learn this. They can learn it right where they are practising. Our students are getting access, too. Right from their education program they can learn this while they're doing it and graduate with these skills already.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for renewing hope that there's some research being done out there that is going to hopefully help Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

We will now move to MP Kelloway for six minutes, please.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you so much for being here, witnesses. I really appreciate it.

I'm going to try to get around the horn, as they say, in terms of my questions.

I want to start with Ms. Watts-Rynard.

I particularly like your view that applied research can be the tool box of improving the country's economy. I think that's really important.

I come from a polytechnic background as well. I worked at the Nova Scotia Community College, NSCC, for 11 years. I worked at Cape Breton University, which has many aspects of applied research attached to it.

I see where you're going with that. In your opening remarks, you talked about some of the recommendations to get us to a better place. When I was in the post-secondary world, in particular in NSCC, there was often, I felt, a bit of stereotyping of applied research and the importance of it. When you talk about a capstone project, do you fear that stereotyping in terms of applied research? I totally agree with each of the panellists that applied research is a gem, but we need to invest in it and we need to have maybe slightly different criteria for it. I wonder if you could speak to that and unpack some of the recommendations.

Then I have another question or two for the other panellists.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

Thank you very much.

Less than 3% of the federal investment in research is currently going to applied research. I think that, to your point, the investment needs to be there in order for us to really be able to push this out.

When I look at the examples of the kinds of research happening on our campuses, I'm seeing interdisciplinary. I'm seeing business driven. I'm seeing looking at Canada's big challenges and how to make small steps towards the solution.

As an example, at Saskatchewan Polytechnic, they are helping Titan, a clean energy products company, manufacture urban waste wood into plastics. Creating those plastics from wood reduces GHG emissions by more than 90%. I don't see how this is not good for the company, and how this is not good for Canada.

That's the kind of research that is happening on the ground. It is not one thing. It doesn't require one researcher in one discipline. It brings in students. It's bringing in companies. It's bringing in instructors. That's what I see when I look across the college sector and something I'd like to see more of.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Ms. Sheane, what particularly interested me in your opening remarks was when you were talking about rural communities. Polytechnics can be found in major cities, but a lot of what you call polytechnics, I would call back home the community college. In Nova Scotia, for example, there are 13 campuses, and they're spread outside Halifax. There are a couple of campuses there, but it's really innovations happening there.

From your perspective, when we're looking at this capstone, how do we ensure that polytechnics have the ability to access funding? I think there's a stereotype, once again, that in rural communities there are base kinds of industries—in my area, fishing and farming are so important—however, there's also so much within that and so much outside of that, which I think the rest of Canada doesn't know.

Could you speak to that?

[Dr. Vanessa Sheane]

The example I'll give is that we have a National Bee Diagnostic Centre. When people think of northwestern Alberta, they don't often think of bees. They may think of agriculture.

We've worked with industry and have found that bee health, bee diagnostics, is a need of the agricultural sector and farmers in the region. That's a real-life example of how we have worked with industry to find its problems. We have put in research and have helped come up with solutions that increase crop yields.

In terms of representation and with regard to your question on how we do that, the capstone needs to be very intentional so that all post-secondaries are represented, so that industry is represented, and so that communities are represented. It needs to be across rural, urban and provincial boundaries and the post-secondary institutions. It shouldn't be university-centric but should have polytechnic colleges and CEGEPs represented as well.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you.

Ms. Watts-Rynard and Dr. Sheane, what are three recommendations that you want to see? When you open the report, what would be the three that you both want to see?

[Dr. Vanessa Sheane]

I would say that I think that the person leading the capstone needs to truly understand applied research.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

I'd really like to see this as multidisciplinary and mission-driven. I think that really has to be the focus, and that means something different from what currently exists within the tri-council.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

We'll go to the witness on the screen, please.

[Christian Agbobli]

In my opinion, the most important thing is to focus on contributing to the advancement of knowledge.

Another important role the capstone organization must play is to emphasize the world-renowned quality and rigour of the Canadian evaluation process.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Now we'll turn to MP Blanchette-Joncas for six minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses who are with us for our first hour.

I'll start with some questions for Christian Agbobli, from the Université du Québec network.

Good afternoon, Mr. Agbobli.

Would you please elaborate on the four recommendations you mentioned, the four focal points, in particular the second recommendation, which is about representation?

Can you give us a clear idea of your expectations in terms of representation for the 10 institutions that are members of your network?

[Christian Agbobli]

Madam Chair, I thank the member for his question.

Representation has to be ensured in various respects. First, there must be a balance between the regions and the cities, as the idea is for the capstone organization to respond to the entire research community in the country.

In terms of representativeness, I also talked about the French language. We have to make sure that French has an important place within the capstone organization so that the balance of research would be recognized.

Still regarding balance, we have to talk about research funding. That's another major issue. We know that, in 2021, U15 member institutions received 79% of all research funding in Canada, despite having 52% of the faculty and 59% of the graduate student population. It's important to ensure that balance.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Agbobli, let's go back to representativeness.

You know that the government gave a mandate to an advisory panel on the federal research support system. That panel included only universities that were members of the university network and were large. Universities like the ones in your network, which are small or medium-sized, were completely excluded, even ignored.

Do you think that setting aside universities with different research contexts is a good way to ensure that the scientific ecosystem is truly representative?