Science and Research Committee on Nov. 26th, 2024

[Dr. Ted Hewitt]

I'm sorry, but that's incorrect. That's my colleague, Professor Adem.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Okay, then we'll go to Dr. Adem.

Dr. Adem, you are the chair of the Canada research coordinating committee. It sounds very much like that committee was attempting to coordinate research. We are now looking at capstone, which is to provide the same coordination, we understand. Will capstone replace the Canada research coordinating committee? If so, is it going to add some value? If there has been some attempt at coordination, why do we now need this new agency? Could you just clarify that for me?

[Dr. Alejandro Adem]

Sure. I think we should see this as an evolution of the ecosystem. The Canada research coordinating committee was created to start this coordination more organically among the agencies. CFI is also a member, as is NRC, and the chief science adviser also sits on it.

It had some very specific goals to deliver on—early career researchers, EDI, indigenous research and talent, etc. Over the years, we have developed a suite of activities, which I think have really helped pull together activities among the different councils. Research security is an example of a theme that comes up a lot to the CRCC. We're working very hard all together to make sure this is moved forward.

There's also a program delivered under the supervision of the CRCC. It's called the new frontiers in research program, and it delivers multidisciplinary projects across the three councils on areas of compelling interest. It's like a pilot for what we want to move to, so then as we evolve to these larger-scale interdisciplinary activities, the big-scale international ones that our colleague, Dr. Vats, talked about—mission-driven, etc.—then I think what the government is proposing is to move to a next level of integration where we're not doing it informally under a committee but really as part of our job, and where there's a structure, where above it is the strategic committee informing on the strategies for Canada. Then we get very clear and crisp instructions to deliver in this interdisciplinary mode without, of course, debilitating the disciplinary verticals, which will continue to exist.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

You think there is a definite benefit to the capstone organization as has been proposed.

[Dr. Alejandro Adem]

I see great value. I'm a big enthusiast of it.

I'm a mathematician, so I like to work with examples. Look at the case of UKRI, UK Research and Innovation. That is a consolidation of multiple councils that continue to exist. There's also a nice study about what didn't go so well when they created that structure. You might want to look at that review. I've been to the U.K. and have spoken to their CEO, as well as the heads of their different councils, and right now I think it's working quite well.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Now, we've also heard from Dr. Vats about the council on science and innovation. Again, not being really familiar with what is already on the ground, is this an organization that exists already, or is it to be created as well?

[Dr. Alejandro Adem]

We used to have something called STIC. It wasn't replaced, so I think this would be the new version of that. It would be people from all different walks of life—universities, colleges, community and industry, very importantly—and they would develop strategies for Canada. I think the chief science adviser would be the co-chair. I think they would be told to create a strategic plan.

We should not be developing strategy. We are deliverers, and we do this in the most efficient way possible.

I think that piece has been missing. In some sense, it might be the most important piece to inform the whole process.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

It struck me, as we were hearing about the National Research Council of Canada, that it performs, to a certain extent, a function that sounds on the surface to be a little similar to this new council on science and innovation.

Ms. Aubrey, perhaps you could clarify for me some key differences, as you see them, between this new council or replacement council and the work of the National Research Council.

[Maria Aubrey]

The National Research Council, in its mandate, is to do research and develop technologies that can be put in the hands of those who can actually execute on them for the benefit of Canada and Canadians. Our mandate goes beyond research.

To do that, we need to make sure that we engage all of the capabilities of the ecosystem and provide a way of convening the best players, the best minds and so on to provide that research and that technology.

One of the things we did, starting in 2017, was create what's called the collaborative science, technology and innovation program, which basically facilitates not NRC trying to do everything and trying to bring more money into the NRC, but rather engaging others and funding them so that we can get the best possible, both in Canada and internationally, to provide solutions for Canada. That could be done at the early stage of research or at the later stage, where the technology research levels need to be closer to commercialization.

We are not really doing the same thing as the council. Rather, we're complementary. We engage with them and leverage—

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

That's our time, Ms. Aubrey. Perhaps you can elaborate in another question.

We're now going to 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 welcome the witnesses who are with us for the second hour of our study.

Mr. Labrie, you have had an impressive career, particularly as an expert on bilingualism, language policy and the humanities. You have highlighted issues that are crucial for the future of French in Canada. You have closely observed the dynamic between language and research throughout your career, both as part of your work on linguistic pluralism and as head of the Fonds de recherche du Québec.

Given your many years of experience and your commitment to the francophone community, how do you perceive the vitality of French in the scientific field today, and what specific measures do you suggest to strengthen its vitality, particularly through the new capstone organization?

[Normand Labrie, Vice-President, Chair of the SSHRC Board, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council]

Thank you very much for asking me this question and giving me the opportunity to address a subject that I find very important.

Indeed, Canada operates in two official languages, French and English, which are two international languages, and we have the opportunity to produce knowledge in both languages. Unfortunately, the proportion of knowledge produced in French is lower, due to the demographic ratio between French and English speakers, as well as the tendency of researchers in certain scientific fields to produce and publish in English. Examples include health and engineering.

This has an important impact, insofar as generative artificial intelligence today produces new knowledge on the basis of an existing corpus. If the existing corpus in French is smaller, we have less capacity to develop knowledge, even though we have a global role to play in these two international languages. We really need to think about this.

In the social sciences and humanities, more knowledge is produced in French, because researchers are connected to communities. For their research to have an impact, it needs to be disseminated in French. This is generally the case for French-speaking communities. In other areas, efforts must be made.

If broad priorities are to be established, on a global level, for the new framework organization for research funding, French should be an important part of them. This will have to be reflected in the appointment of members to the board, in the establishment of a standing committee, and in the development of concrete policies and measures within the organization to ensure the place of French, not only in the social sciences and humanities, but in the sciences as a whole in Canada.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Labrie, what we've heard, and what's in the report published on October 16, 2024 by the federal government following the public consultation on, among other things, the research funding framework organization, is that the predominance of English in scientific publications is detrimental to the visibility of French-language research. In parallel, in October 2024, Canadian Heritage launched an external advisory group on the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French, but it seems that this group is not permanent.

Do you think it would be relevant to integrate this group into the research funding umbrella organization in the future? Also, in your opinion, how can we facilitate scientific communication in French in the future research ecosystem?

[Normand Labrie]

Several players are involved in the research. There are the three current councils and the umbrella organization that is currently being developed. There are other organizations, as we've just seen. I'm thinking of the National Research Council and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, which supports research infrastructure projects. There are also a number of other governmental and paragovernmental organizations involved in research.

In the umbrella organization, there has to be some kind of permanence, to monitor the presence of French in the sciences. As it's more global than just these three or four funding organizations, it could also be the federal government, through Canadian Heritage or other departments. The government should also keep an eye on the priorities established for the production and dissemination of knowledge in French.

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

Thank you very much.

Concretely, how do you see the fact of grouping, with the umbrella organization, the three granting councils under the same umbrella to try to improve the situation and encourage an increase in the number of scientific publications in French?

[Normand Labrie]

At SSHRC, there are programs on scientific journals, knowledge mobilization and ways of disseminating knowledge. I think programs like these should be maintained, and perhaps extended to all scientific fields as well.

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

Thank you.

My next question is for Ted Hewitt.

Thank you for being here today, Mr. Hewitt.

Do you think the strategic science fund, which is currently administered by ISED, should be administered by the new capstone research funding organization?

[Dr. Ted Hewitt]

Which organization are you referring to?

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

I'm talking about the strategic science fund.

[Dr. Ted Hewitt]

Oh, the strategic science fund. I'm not sure. I don't work with that, sir. I have no idea. That's not within our purview.

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

All right. I see.

[Dr. Ted Hewitt]

I have no opinion on that.

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

Very well.

Do any of the granting council presidents want to answer that?

[Dr. Alejandro Adem]

It's above our pay grade. I'm sorry.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!