Science and Research Committee on Nov. 26th, 2024

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

As we were just discussing, it's important that investigators, if they have ideas thought to meet a bar of excellence, have the freedom to pursue those ideas. The knowledge is generated. The training of young researchers, not just for the research community but for society as a whole, is a really big benefit of that. That's always done through a peer-review process to ensure that you have the highest standard of research quality.

When it comes to mission-oriented research, it may be that, as we were discussing, there are different ways to identify the priorities and what you're trying to focus on as a target. If you want to get the best quality of research in support of those targets, you still need an assessment of the excellence of that research. In the case of something that's more mission-oriented, you could see it being in two parts: What we are shooting at—what our target is in terms of what we're trying to achieve—and then how we ensure that we get the best quality of research that will support that goal.

That latter part is something where you want to have an independent review of excellence to make sure that the research can deliver. That's how you can do both with the same model.

[Shaun Chen, Liberal, Scarborough North, ON]

The current system of the granting agencies allows them to really home in and focus on the unique needs of their respective research communities. How should this new organization balance central oversight and maintain the autonomy of those respective communities?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

The model that's being proposed is one where you wouldn't lose the individual domain-specific councils for that very reason, because there is an expertise, a knowledge and a community that can foster knowledge in those domain areas. That would be preserved in the structure, but that structure would also be tied to the goals of the organization as a whole.

The question that you would then get is how we can better leverage, for example, the health research community to address this broader objective, as in the case of the pandemic, or how you can engage social scientists to do so. It draws on that expertise with an accountability and a mandate to bring them together around these larger challenges that we're trying to address.

[Shaun Chen, Liberal, Scarborough North, ON]

I'll turn over to Ms. Boudreau and ask about health research, because your focus has been, for over 20 years in government, on pharmacare and in the areas of mental health and substance abuse.

You mentioned earlier in your testimony focusing on equity-seeking groups, Black and racialized people, the disability community, and LGBTQ and gender-diverse as well as indigenous people.

I believe that there's an understanding that health research requires us to look at the different health outcomes of diverse groups to ensure health equity. In terms of the need to focus and the lens you bring within health research, how can that be maintained or perhaps even strengthened with the creation of the new capstone organization?

[Michelle Boudreau]

I would reply to that with the two words that you used, “maintained” and “strengthened”. The importance there is maintaining that link of CIHR to the health portfolio and the Minister of Health, and then also ensuring that the links of CIHR with other important health partners across the ecosystem are also strengthened. It's that opportunity, those links with health partners, universities and other academics and, also, even just going into the communities as well and ensuring that those are maintained.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

That's well over our time. Thank you.

Now we turn to MP Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Vats, how do you think the new research funding framework organization will make it possible to promote French and scientific research in French, specifically?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

I don't have specific mechanisms in mind. I mean, the councils, as you know, are making an effort in this regard now. They'll be here for the second hour.

I think what is really important is that we highlight this as an objective of the organization explicitly, because once you have a clear mandate to promote the use of French in research, then it becomes the accountability of the organization as a whole to achieve that. In terms of the specific modalities, I don't have specific recommendations on that.

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

Mr. Vats, you talk about a clear mandate. However, in October 2024, just over a month ago, the federal government announced the creation of the external advisory group on the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French. That group is managed solely by Canadian Heritage. Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada was excluded from management.

Can you explain to me why the department wasn't included in the management of this new initiative?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

My group is actually engaged in that effort. It's being led out of Heritage, but it is something that we are actually drawing on as well and are participating in. I know our ministers' offices have discussed this as well. It is being led by Canadian Heritage, but it's not uniquely a Canadian Heritage initiative.

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

Let me get this straight. In public communications, there's only mention of Canadian Heritage and the recently tabled action plan on official languages. There's no mention of your department anywhere.

When we talk about disseminating, promoting and creating science in French, how can we forget to mention your department's participation?

What is your role on this new advisory group?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

My team's participating in the working group that's supporting that consultative process, and we intend to draw on the insights from that.

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

Will this new science advisory group also be part of the new umbrella organization?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

It's not a standing committee. It's a consultative committee that may not have a life beyond it. I could see mechanisms like that being drawn upon to make sure that is integrated in the new organization, but that's still to be established.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you. You were right on the button there.

MP Cannings, you have the floor for the last two and a half minutes for this panel.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you again.

I'm just going to try to pick up where I left off, I think, about getting an idea of the roles, for instance, of the governing board of this new capstone body. You mentioned the advisory council on science and innovation, another new body. I'm wondering whether you could explain for us what the difference is there and what the advisory council will be doing. Will it have some role in saying, “Hey, we should be putting more focus on AI, quantum or climate adaptation,” and will those then become some of the missions in this mission-driven structure? I'm curious and, maybe, a bit concerned about how those missions might be drawn up and put forward.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

The council on science and innovation is meant to provide that higher level of strategic direction for the science enterprise as a whole. It's important to remember, as this committee knows, that there are a large number of organizations, beyond the councils and even this more integrated structure, that are involved in science and supporting that in terms of knowledge generation as well as the downstream impacts of science. The idea with a council like that is it would draw on the insights of leaders in industry, academia and society to set some of those broad directions. Those would then cascade down not only to the council, to the new capstone, but also to other organizations that receive government funding, or even that don't, to give a bit more of a sense of direction in terms of where the country, as informed by these experts, seizes the opportunities and challenges that we need to be addressing.

This is still to be established as the council is stood up, but yes, it could be priorities on the basis of some really strong input from knowledgeable people across Canadian society and maybe internationally as well. It could also be more directionally around things like how we collaborate better internationally or how we better support talent in this country. There could be other kinds of thematics beyond just research priorities that come off that.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

If we had a new pandemic, say, and we wanted scientists to gather together and come up with direction and ideas and research, how would that flow through capstone into the research community?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

If you had a health emergency, I think you need to ensure there's still a connection between the Minister of Health and the research community. For those kinds of special purposes, I think you'd want to make sure that you have the agility and the connection that you need to be able to mobilize research in a way that wouldn't take as long as a deliberative process.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Do you mean there would be other sources of funding flowing in?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

There could be. I think the important thing is that some of these urgent priorities for the country may be defined by governments as the needs arise, and you need to have a mechanism for doing that as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you very much.

Thank you to both of our witnesses, Nipun Vats and Michelle Boudreau, for their testimony today and participating in the committee's study.

If you have any questions or anything further to add, you may submit that through the clerk.

We're now going to suspend briefly to allow the witnesses to leave, and we'll prepare for our second panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

We're back.

It is now my pleasure to welcome, from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Dr. Tammy Clifford, acting president. From National Research Council Canada, we have Ms. Maria Aubrey, vice-president, business and professional services, by video conference. From the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, we have Dr. Alejandro Adem, president. From the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, we have Dr. Ted Hewitt, president, and Normand Labrie, vice-president and chair of the SSHRC board.

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

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

[Dr. Alejandro Adem, President, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council]

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

As president of the largest government funder of natural sciences and engineering research in Canada, and as the current chair of the Canada research coordinating committee, I am pleased to provide remarks concerning the capstone.

The CRCC is pleased to have the opportunity to engage the research community on the government's vision for this new organization.

Over one month, we held numerous engagement sessions and received 118 written submissions. Respondents voiced clear and consistent themes. These are captured in our report to the ministers, published and shared with you on October 16.

First and foremost, the community called for a continued commitment to investigator-led, fundamental research, which is where the vast majority of major breakthroughs and discoveries occur. They also articulated core values and essential strengths in the current system on which to build the new organization: academic freedom and peer review; equity, diversity and inclusion in research; a commitment to research training and indigenous research priorities; and strong agency leadership with dedicated funding and reliable program delivery. Lastly, they called for sustained community engagement in the design of the new organization and as part of its culture going forward.

During the engagement process, we met with members of the NSERC council and its standing committees, as well as NSERC leaders, a network of over 70 institutional representatives from universities across Canada.

Consistent with the information I just highlighted, there was a focus on, again, the importance of fundamental research; how mission-driven research will be framed; the alignment of research and research infrastructure; the importance of guiding values and principles; and preserving disciplinary funding envelopes.

They also voiced a particular interest in the new organization's relationships with industry. Through our grants, scholarships and fellowship programs, NSERC is committed to developing talent, generating discoveries and supporting innovation in pursuit of economic and social outcomes for Canadians.

Let me leave you with a few facts about NSERC.

Each year, NSERC funds over 11,000 researchers and provides direct support to more than 6,000 students and post-docs. These investments have impact. Since 2015, three researchers based in Canada have won Nobel Prizes in physics, one of the main disciplines supported by NSERC. More importantly, NSERC invested in all three, including Dr. Geoffrey Hinton, the most recent Nobel winner.

When NSERC began supporting his work in the early 1990s through its discovery program, which is investigator-led, the concept of artificial neural networks was purely theoretical. In fact, it can take decades to build the foundations of new, high-impact research areas such as AI. NSERC's early investments in AI research supported not only Geoff Hinton but also other leaders in the field, such as Yoshua Bengio. In addition to decades of research, they have trained whole generations of AI experts. Consequently, Canada's AI research ecosystem has grown by leaps and bounds.

NSERC funding at universities and colleges has supported the development of key world-class technologies in partnership with the private sector in areas such as AI, but also quantum science, biomedical engineering, clean energy, semi-conductors, electric vehicles and agriculture, to name a few.

NSERC's investments have real-life, real-time impacts on Canadian society.

As another example, this year, NSERC awarded Mehdi Sheikhzadeh, a chemical engineer and research administrator at Lambton College, with a prize recognizing partnerships. Origin Materials partnered with Sheikhzadeh and his team to optimize a pilot plant where they extract carbon from non-food biomass. The partnership was a success, and Origin opened a $140-million facility in Sarnia that employs 50 people to produce recyclable, carbon-negative, plant-based plastic bottles.

We can also talk about the remarkable achievements of Professor Jeff Dahn, a lithium-ion battery pioneer at Dalhousie University.

This type of partnership with industry exemplifies our commitment to local innovation and supporting research that moves quickly to meet the needs of our partners.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have, and I would be happy to share with you more examples of the research NSERC is funding, which is producing direct and tangible results for Canada and Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you, Dr. Adem.

Now, Dr. Hewitt, the floor is yours for an opening statement of up to five minutes.