Science and Research Committee on May 5th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Dear colleagues, I call this meeting to order. We are meeting in a webcast session.

Welcome to the 11th meeting of the Standing Committee on Science and Research.

The Board of Internal Economy requires that committees adhere to the following health protocols, which are in effect until June 23, 2022. All individuals wishing to enter the parliamentary precinct must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. All those attending in person must wear a mask except for members who are at their places during proceedings. As you know, you can contact our excellent clerk for further information on preventative measures for health and safety.

As the chair, I will enforce these measures and, as always, I thank you for your co-operation.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House Order of November 25, 2021.

I would like to outline a few rules to follow. Interpretation services are available at this meeting. You may speak in the official language of your choice. At the bottom of your screen you may choose to hear floor audio, English or French. The “raise hand” feature is on the main toolbar, should you wish to speak.

I remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

The committee clerk and I will maintain a speaking list for all members.

We would like to welcome all of our witnesses tonight. We are grateful for your time and your effort, and we're looking forward to hearing from you.

We have, appearing as an individual, Andrea Wishart, a student at the University of Saskatchewan. From the Council of Canadian Innovators, we have Benjamin Bergen, who is the president, and Nicholas Schiavo, director of federal affairs. From Mohawk College, we have Ron McKerlie, president and chief executive officer.

Each of you will have five minutes to present. Again, we thank you for joining us, and we'll begin.

We'll go to Ms. Wishart for five minutes.

[Andrea Wishart, Student, University of Saskatchewan, As an Individual]

Thank you for the invitation to speak with you today. I join you from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, located within Treaty 6 territory, homeland of the Métis nation.

I'm a Ph.D. student and occasional sessional lecturer in biology at the University of Saskatchewan. I've served as president of my department's biology graduate student association, and I currently serve as the senior student post-doctoral counsellor for the Canadian Society for Ecology and Evolution. These roles have informed my experience of the incredible talent we have in Canada, as well as the challenges and hard choices that today's early career researchers face, but I come to you today just as myself—a Canadian woman highly trained in the life sciences, and hopeful for where the next step might take me.

You've heard from witnesses in the past few weeks of the typical career trajectory someone like me can be expected to follow. Even after earning my bachelor's degree more than 10 years ago, I'm still considered an early career researcher. As such, I still have many forks in the road ahead. Whether those diverging paths lead to industry, government or academia, it is critical that those those forks become opportunities for choice rather than pinch points where we lose talent.

My research seeks to understand how animals make choices about what to do with limited energetic resources. Can I thrive and invest in my future, the next generation, or am I barely hanging on just to survive for another day? I see reflected in the squirrels that I study as a biologist the trade-offs we must make with limited resources as early career researchers, but I also see what increased resources can let happen: Individuals can survive and thrive.

Canada is an incredibly educated country. That comes about because we champion our many existing strengths. They are strengths like the existence of our distinct research-based master's programs that are considered significant accomplishments in their own right. These programs help ensure a workforce equipped with research-based skill sets for individuals who do not want or need to pursue a full Ph.D., or who want to pursue a different path for their Ph.D. In my case, I completed a master's studying mouse genomics and decided to take those skills into a different arena for my Ph.D., studying ecology and evolution. Investing in master's students means investing in Canada.

The next major training stage is the Ph.D.—that's if you can secure the very competitive but low levels of funding. If you can squeak by, by the end of this apprenticeship the researcher now has years of hands-on experience in statistics, communication and creative problem-solving. That can all serve to solve the problems of today and tomorrow, and make the advancements we need in order to move society forward. The Ph.D. is long. It's oftentimes very tough. But it produces a mind keen ready to put those sharpened skills to work. Investing in Ph.D. students means investing in Canada.

But where to put them to work, and with what funding? We now come to another major fork in the road that has massive ramifications for the life and career of the individual and for the nation's workforce. You see, at this point, the researcher has spent years paying ever-rising tuition with stipends that have remained stagnant for years. Those are years of not being able to build savings that make a relatively low-paying post-doctoral position less attractive. Even the prestigious NSERC post-doctoral fellowships, which are highly competitive, are still worth only $45,000 a year. This alone can make the lure of well-funded post-docs or more competitive industrial salaries outside of Canada an undeniable option—a pinch point, after so much investment in these individuals, now threatened by limited opportunity to bridge them into the sectors where they're most needed. Investing in post-docs means investing in Canada.

Canada, by investing in education and innovation, has invested in me. I now see the next fork in the road ahead for myself. Where do I put my skills to work, and with what funding? Is having a family compatible with a career in science, or will I become another “leaky pipeline” statistic? We have mechanisms in place that have proven time and time again to work, things like Mitacs and tri-council agency funding, but like a once-strong muscle that's been left to atrophy, the dollar value and accessibility of these mechanisms will weaken over time if not regularly reinvested in.

That the committee I speak to this evening was formed through a unanimous vote speaks volumes to the value that citizens and our representatives place on the health of the science and research ecosystem in Canada. As early career researchers trained in Canada, we want to stay. We want to do the work. To commit to a career rooted in science and research is to profess our conviction that a better future is in our hands for the making. We just need the resources to survive and thrive.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you so much, Ms. Wishart. I know that the whole committee will be wishing you luck with your Ph.D. You have a really interested committee here.

We will now go to the Council of Canadian Innovators.

You have five minutes. The floor is yours.

[Nicholas Schiavo, Director, Federal Affairs, Council of Canadian Innovators]

Good evening, Chair, Vice-Chairs and members of the Standing Committee on Science and Research. Thank you for the opportunity to present today on the study of top talent, research and innovation.

As you know, my name is Nicholas Schiavo, and I'm appearing this evening as the director of federal affairs on behalf of the Council of Canadian Innovators. I am joined by CCI president, Benjamin Bergen.

We are a national business council representing 150 of Canada's fastest-growing companies. Our member companies are headquartered here in Canada, employ north of 52,000 employees across Canada and are market leaders in the sectors of health, clean and financial technologies, cybersecurity and more.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the digitization of Canada's economy and public services has increased at a rapid rate. This shift, ongoing for many years, has created innovation and prosperity in many sectors; however, it has also added increased pressure on Canadian scale-ups to find the skilled talent required to fuel a digital future where growth can be sustained.

The priorities that I will speak to today address Canadian scale-ups and their ability to train, attract and retain top talent that improves Canada's innovation outputs in development and commercialization. This goal is critical to ensuring that Canada remains competitive in today's global and intangible economy.

I would like to begin to begin by briefing you on the pressures facing domestic technology companies in Canada in their pursuit of attracting and retaining highly skilled talent.

A recent report from the Information and Communications Technology Council estimated that by 2025 Canada's digital economy will employ 2.26 million Canadians. That's 11% of all employment in the country. This will require an additional 250,000 jobs to be created over the next three years.

CCI's members and Canada's scale-up companies are committed to creating many of the new jobs required, but they face a serious talent supply issue. Unfortunately, scale-up companies can't just maintain their workforce. They need to grow rapidly, and adding the best and brightest talent remains a constant priority.

A recent survey of CCI's members found that most companies plan to increase their workforces by 20% this year alone. That's an additional 10,000 more workers added to our companies and our economy by this year's end.

It's important to note that, in addition to the private sector, the shortage of skilled labour in Canada is having an equally negative impact on the public sector. In April, a spokesperson for the Communications Security Establishment acknowledged this crisis, stating that recruitment for Canada's cybersecurity workforce remains “challenging and highly competitive.”

For years, the shortage of skilled talent has been a driving concern for CCI, but the recent shift to remote work has only exacerbated the problem. Canada's skilled workers are now part of a global labour market where geography is no longer as important. Our domestic innovators are finding themselves in fierce competition with global companies that can offer significantly higher salaries for the same crop of highly skilled workers. This is driving up wage inflation across our companies.

Earlier this year, CCI surveyed our members on this topic and found that wage expectations have increased by 20% to 25% over the past year. This is not sustainable. Acknowledging this, CCI recently released a talent and skills strategy with 13 key recommendations to meet the talent needs of our country's fastest growing companies. I look forward to discussing these recommendations with you today.

These recommendations speak to the need to increase the generation, attraction and retention of skilled workers for Canadian firms. This strategy was developed in collaboration with Canadian entrepreneurs and the innovation ecosystem to provide clear and tangible policy recommendations to combat this issue from all angles.

These recommendations span four focus areas.

First is a focus on talent attraction by bringing more tech talent to Canada, updating the national occupational classification codes, expanding alternative credentials and enhancing the global talent stream and global skills strategy.

Second is focus on talent generation by financially supporting Canadian businesses that upskill their workforces and incentivizing post-secondary institutions to develop better experiential learning opportunities.

Third is a focus on talent retention by introducing innovative solutions to support recent graduates with student debt and a commitment to leave employee stock options unchanged as a key incentive for Canadian innovators.

Finally, we acknowledge that there is no silver bullet or one-size-fits-all solution to properly address the shortage of skilled labour. Instead, we are calling for a whole-of-government approach to build capacity and apply a skilled-talent lens to all economic policies and programs.

To conclude, with smart changes to existing strategies and the development of new measures where required, we can ensure that Canadian scale-ups have access to world-class talent and become leaders in the digital economy. Without this strong base of homegrown scale-ups, we will not be able to generate the economic growth and public wealth necessary to pay for the public services that Canadians depend on.

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you for bringing forward your perspective. Again, we're really glad to have you as witnesses tonight.

Now we will go to the president and chief executive officer of Mohawk College, and that's Ron McKerlie. Welcome.

[Ron McKerlie, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mohawk College]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and to the committee for providing me with the opportunity to address you this evening. As mentioned, I have the privilege of serving as president and CEO of Mohawk College, based in Hamilton, Ontario. Mohawk is one of the top 10 research colleges in Canada.

Community and industry partners engage our college for workforce development needs, rapid training and our ability to quickly address challenges that are limiting their productivity. We provide students with essential experience, in partnership with researchers, to develop and deploy customized innovations that increase efficiency and give organizations a competitive advantage. These partnerships provide employers with the ability to attract and retain highly skilled and competent workers.

Today, I would like to recommend four ideas that would make a significant and lasting impact on Canadian colleges, our employers and the communities we both serve.

The first relates to international learners. Many cities, like Hamilton, are working to attract and retain international learners as a way to address critical workforce needs. To successfully do so, it's essential that the federal government create the conditions to make Canada a destination of choice for international students. Timely and efficient study visa approvals, as well as ready access to work permits upon graduation, will help ensure Canada attracts the best and the brightest to our communities. Employment incentive programs targeted specifically for international students and graduates will create more immediate opportunities for graduates to establish themselves and contribute to the economy. Incentive programs designed to help international student graduates set up or transition into their own business will also ensure Canada is the destination of choice. These opportunities will motivate international learners to live and settle in the community with their families, buy a property and become a key part of the city’s economy.

The first recommendation, then, is to please continue to find ways to make it easy and efficient for international students to study in Canada, including timely access to study visas and post-graduate work permits, and consider providing targeted incentive programs for employers to hire international students and graduates.

My second recommendation relates to the retention of the workforce. We need to encourage domestic students to settle in the area. As part of their education, many of our learners are involved in work on projects, co-ops and internships with employers, providing meaningful work—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

I'm sorry to interrupt, President McKerlie. I'm going to have to stop for a second.

Monsieur Blanchette-Joncas.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

There has been no interpretation for about the last 20 seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you, Mr. Blanchette-Joncas.

I apologize, Mr. McKerlie. Would you go back about 20 seconds.

Thank you.

[Ron McKerlie]

The first recommendation is to continue to find ways to make it easy and efficient for international students to study in Canada, including timely access to study visas and post-graduate work permits, and consider providing targeted incentive programs for employers to hire international students and graduates.

My second recommendation relates to the retention of the workforce. We need to encourage domestic students to settle in the area. As part of their education, many of our learners are involved in work on projects or co-ops or internships with employers providing meaningful, work-integrated learning, but the work doesn't continue after the initial term because the SMEs don't have the funding to hire and retain those students upon graduation.

The second recommendation is to consider programs that would support small and medium-sized enterprises in hiring learners as they study, and then keep them employed as the company innovates and builds capacity. This benefits the student and the employer, and strengthens the community.

The third relates to funding opportunities of colleges. I'd like to begin by thanking the Government of Canada for the many programs currently funded in our sector. There are challenges, however. Today, colleges have to wait for open calls for proposals to be posted once or twice a year, and they often don't align with project opportunities, creating unnecessary urgency for partnerships and proposals. Also, I would respectfully submit that six to eight months is too long for the review of a project submission.

The third recommendation is to offer programs with ongoing intakes, rolling application dates and multiple opportunities to submit proposals. Colleges have been proven to respond quickly to help address industry challenges, and providing ongoing access to research funds would allow colleges to help business and industry partners quickly develop new technologies and processes.

Finally, the committee recently heard from our friends and partners at Colleges and Institutes Canada, Denise Amyot, and Durham College president Don Lovisa. I echo their points about the importance of funding applied research projects at Canadian colleges. For example, Mohawk applied research projects raised more than $3.3 million last year from industry; however, our college only received $17,600 from the research support fund.

The final recommendation is to increase support for the research support fund or create a new funding option for colleges that can address the unique needs to allow us to expand and execute the research projects with the varying sectors.

Colleges across Canada are deeply involved in and committed to the communities we serve. We train and educate the local workforce, and colleges support and strengthen businesses, industries and organizations. Colleges are leaders and contributors to vibrant, prosperous communities. Your support of our role and mission is greatly appreciated.

In closing, I'd like to thank you for your time this evening. I'm happy to expand on any of my points during your question time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you so very much.

I really would like to thank all the witnesses. We're grateful for your expertise tonight.

Our colleagues here have many questions, so we're going to go to the first round of questions. This will be a six-minute round.

We will start with Mr. Tochor.

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

Thank you kindly.

I'm going to be splitting my time with Madam Gladu. She has some questions for this panel.

I'll start off with the Council of Canadian Innovators. You suggested micro-credentials through partnerships between academia and the industry to train workers in cutting-edge tech. Could you expand on what role you envision the federal government playing in that process?

[Nicholas Schiavo]

When it comes to international or alternative credentials, highly skilled tech workers may not have the formal credentials or that formal education that we typically look for. I think more than that, what we're seeing is innovative companies may actually require a wide range of technical skills, depending on the product, service or industry that they're trying to disrupt or transform. Given that this industry is moving so fast, the traditional model may just not cut it anymore. That's really what we're hearing from our members.

Really, I think the idea behind this recommendation is for the government to play a role in creating more flexibility within the immigration system to allow for a wider range of candidates who are self-taught or who have pursued alternative education paths to be considered. Obviously, there have to be some criteria; there have to be guardrails in place. That is something we and our members would be very eager to engage and consult on to make sure that there is some form of rubric. I think the idea is we need to move away from that formal education process that is becoming a drain on the talent market.

I don't know if my president, Benjamin, has anything to add to that as well.

[Benjamin Bergen, President, Council of Canadian Innovators]

Thanks, Nick.

In terms of supporting the specific comments that were raised by the member, the federal government's role in some of this will definitely be looking at how funds are allocated to upskilling and retraining—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

I'm sorry, Mr. Bergen. I'm going to have to interrupt. We have no interpretation. Please give us a second.

He doesn't have the correct mike.

[Benjamin Bergen]

We've tried many different mikes on my end to get this to work, so I will kindly bow out and leave it for Nick to pick up the baton for our organization.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you for being so gracious.

[Nicholas Schiavo]

Thank you, Ben.

I'll follow up on where I think Ben was going to go, which is to say that the federal government can absolutely play a role in upskilling and retraining as well. There are examples across Canada of Canadian companies that have already developed these curricula that fit with the industry and that meet the need. There's a variety of solutions that the federal government can provide to support these companies in that upskilling, whether it's in the form of a financial kickback or tax break.

What we've seen is that the private sector—our innovators—is stepping up where we need it. If there's a role for some financial support from the federal government, it would go a long way in spurring more of that upskilling across Canada.

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

Quickly, are there any similar provincial programs that are successful in our country? If there aren't any in our country, are there any other countries around the world that you think are achieving what you're proposing here?

[Nicholas Schiavo]

That's a great question. In terms of provincial-level programs, I would have to get back to you on that. I'm very happy to follow up with your office.

What I will say, to give some concrete examples, is we have the Montreal-based FX Innovation. This is a company that partnered with the University of Ottawa to build the CloudCampus program and it's had great success in terms of broadening the range of roles in the cloud computing sector. Another great example is in Alberta. Calgary Economic Development provided funding to AltaML to create the Applied AI lab, which aims to generate AI talent for the tech ecosystem.

Those are two examples that are near and dear to our hearts at CCI of the innovation ecosystem stepping up for that reskilling. Is there a role for the federal government to play in supporting them? That's really what we want to discuss.

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

I will pass my remaining time over to my colleague.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

My question is for Ms. Wishart. As the first female engineer in the House of Commons, and as a woman who started her career by building a woman's washroom everywhere I worked because there wasn't one, my question is this. Do you think there's more work to be done to eliminate discrimination against women as a barrier to attracting top talent in Canada?

[Andrea Wishart]

Thank you. That's a fantastic question. Thank you for being such a pioneer on that front.

It is definitely difficult in many ways to be a woman in science, even today. The biggest pinch point that I see isn't so much at the student level, where even up to the Ph.D. there are relatively large numbers of women participating. However, the big pinch point, and the one that I'm currently facing, is that move from the Ph.D. into either industry or into the post-doctoral fellowships.

Of note, women only hold about 35% of NSERC's post-doctoral fellowship awards. Only about 37% of the applicants applying for those are women. There's a huge drop-off in that. Part of that comes from years and years of higher tuition and higher costs of living, but the awards and the stipends offered to students are stagnant, essentially. In particular, the CGS master's and the PGS D doctoral awards haven't changed in value since 2003 and they're below the poverty line.

By the time people such as myself are reaching the end of a Ph.D., with years of spending lots of tuition money, we have no savings backed up. You get to that point where there just isn't that option to stay funded in that kind of career trajectory. A huge part of it is investing in those sorts of opportunities, particularly at the post-doctoral level, to try to increase the participation of women—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you, Ms. Wishart. I'm sorry to interrupt.

Thank you, Mr. Tochor and Ms. Gladu, for your questions.

Now we will go to Mr. Collins for six minutes.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thanks, Madam Chair.

Welcome, and thank you to all the witnesses for your attendance here this evening.

I'll start first, Madam Chair, with Mr. McKerlie, from Mohawk College.

Welcome, Ron, to the committee.

I want to pick up on the immigration theme that you talked about earlier in your recommendations. One consistent message we've heard from witnesses to date—and I think Mr. Schiavo was very succinct in his comments—is that it is a global labour market and there is fierce competition.

When there are discriminatory immigration practices in place—and we witnessed this during the last U.S. administration—I think we recognize what kind of an effect it has on the labour market and the impact it has on attracting and retaining top talent. We noticed the brain drain in the U.S., and Canada was the beneficiary of that for a number of years.

I would ask, through you, Madam Chair, to Mr. McKerlie, how important is it for us to have immigration policies and legislation in place that actually attract people from other parts of the world and to have a message that says to the rest of the world—especially those young people who are looking at colleges and universities here in Canada—that we're open for business and we welcome immigrants from all areas of the world?