Science and Research Committee on May 19th, 2022

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to acknowledge the witnesses joining us this evening.

My question is for Mr. McCauley, of the AdMare BioInnovations organization.

Mr. McCauley, in the early 2000s, Montreal was a hub for the global pharmaceuticals industry. But then the lack of federal government support led to the massive departure of many major players in that ecosystem.

What, in your opinion, was the impact of this wave of departures on the retention of researchers and on pharmaceutical expertise in Quebec and Canada?

[Gordon McCauley]

It was without question a very challenging time in the early 2000s, as global pharmaceutical companies restructured their research enterprise. A number of organizations, like one of our predecessor organizations, grew out of that. We took over and acquired the research hub of a global player in Ville Saint-Laurent, and we have turned it into a vibrant innovation centre in Canada.

It is actually very exciting to see the kind of growth and development in Canada, and the attitudinal shift of researchers and entrepreneurs in Canada to build here the companies that can grow and scale here to be globally competitive. When we first started out, let's say five years ago, one of the things that distinguished Canada relative to our competitors globally was that we were the only advanced pharma market in the world without a domestic research-based anchor company by the classic definition. We find ourselves today with certainly two anchor companies by that definition and probably, depending on whom you want to ask, 10 to 12 putative anchor companies.

I'm very excited about the growth that's happening in this space. There is lots more to do, but I think Canada is absolutely poised to lead the world in this regard.

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

Thank you, Mr. McCauley.

That's definitely good news.

Moderna recently announced that it would be locating a facility in Montreal and that it would be producing up to 100 million doses of its vaccine per year. That's very good news in terms of attracting, developing and keeping talent in Quebec.

What measures should the federal government be taking to make sure that this is only the first of many good news stories?

[Gordon McCauley]

There are quite a few extraordinary examples.

If you look at AbCellera in Vancouver, Precision NanoSystems in Vancouver, Biovectra in Atlantic Canada, J & J, and a number of other major pharma companies, I think we've seen an extraordinary resurgence.

Let's be honest. We learned some lessons through the pandemic about the need to maintain and build this infrastructure in Canada. I find it very exciting to see companies.... The Moderna example that you cited is just the latest of a number that have come. I think the data points to a very strong picture for the ecosystem.

Again, the challenge now is not to sit back and congratulate ourselves, but continue to do the work that's necessary to build the ecosystem in Quebec and across Canada.

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

Thank you, Mr. McCauley.

We have definitely learned from the pandemic.

Canada is the only G7 country not to have produced a COVID‑19 vaccine. What we are talking about here is infrastructure. The entire pharmaceutical ecosystem has been building infrastructure since the early 2000s.

Are there other mistakes we've made that should be avoided in future?

[Gordon McCauley]

I can't resist pointing out how exciting it is that virtually every vaccine in the world has Canadian research based in it. Certainly when you look at the lipid nanoparticle technology that is centred in British Columbia with Dr. Pieter Cullis and others, it's very exciting for all of us in the field to see that technology coming to the fore in vaccines—for virtually every vaccine in the world. I think we've seen other manufacturing advances that are quite helpful as well.

There is a lot more work to do. We would be making a mistake to rest on this progress. We need to make sure that we continue to build the manufacturing infrastructure and continue to build the industry.

Again, relative to the work of this committee, I am really interested in encouraging public policy-makers to focus on the talent that we need to respond to those jobs. We've seen from third party measures, like the BioTalent study that I referenced, that there is a significant opportunity for the attraction and growth of talent in this space. We need to make sure that we continue to support that effort.

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

Thank you, Mr. McCauley.

I have a question for Dr. Whiteside now.

Dr. Whiteside, do you feel that the federal government is doing enough in 2022 to support its leading researchers?

[Dr. Catharine Whiteside]

Certainly programs like the Canada research chairs and the Canada excellence research chairs have been terrific. I'm a former dean of medicine at the University of Toronto. These programs have really been the lifeblood for recruiting and sustaining some of our most excellent scientists and researchers.

However, it's still not enough. I think if you look at the per capita funding—

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Dr. Whiteside, I'm sorry to do this.

[Dr. Catharine Whiteside]

We're out of time. I know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

It's the worst part of this job.

Monsieur Blanchette-Joncas, go ahead.

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

Madam Chair, I'd like to ask Dr. Whiteside to give us an answer in writing.

[Dr. Catharine Whiteside]

I'd be pleased to do so. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you very much.

We will go on to Mr. Bachrach for six minutes.

[Taylor Bachrach]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Perhaps I'll give the first 30 seconds or minute of my time back to Dr. Whiteside, if she'd like to finish her response to my colleague.

[Dr. Catharine Whiteside]

Thank you.

My experience is that these programs, which have been excellent, have really been subsumed mostly within the budgets of the departments and the faculties. In other words, they've just become part of base.

I think that if we want to really stimulate the recruitment of new talent along the lines of what Mr. McCauley has suggested, we need new funding. This funding should be competitive and it should be for the best and the brightest. It should be really competitive with organizations like the Wellcome trust in the U.K. and Howard Hughes in the U.S. I think that's really where we need to go.

[Taylor Bachrach]

Thank you, Dr. Whiteside.

I'm going to ask you another question on a somewhat related topic. I asked a previous witness about this letter that was released by a group of 270 university professors, including two Nobel laureates and 37 recipients of the Order of Canada, calling on the government to increase federal scholarships, both for graduate students and for post-graduate students.

I note in your testimony that your organization, the Banting Research Foundation, has proposed a $100-million federal investment, specifically, I believe, toward researchers in the health and biomedical sciences field.

There is only so much federal funding. If there were $100 million, it seems like there is another proposal, to increase graduate scholarships in general. Would that achieve a similar end to what you're proposing with this $100-million fund, or is much more money needed across the ecosystem in general? I don't know if that question is clear.

[Dr. Catharine Whiteside]

Let me say that the increased support for graduate students and post-doctoral fellows is absolutely crucial. The percentage of graduate students and post-doctoral fellows funded through those federal funds, though, is quite small. The vast majority of funding for graduate students and post-doctoral fellows comes from the universities, hospital-based research institutes and the granting sources to researchers' supervisors, and quite a bit of that is TA support—teaching assistant support—as you heard in the last session. I couldn't agree more that the value of the graduate student and post-doctoral fellowship awards should be on par with inflation, and I strongly support that.

Nevertheless, the $100-million investment in new recruits is different. This is for faculty positions, in the first five years of an assistant professor's career, so it is along those lines, the same pathway, but it would enable us to take those post-doctoral fellows who are really the most innovative and who are really going to support our best research in Canada and recruit them with the type of funding that is competitive internationally.

My recommendation is that both are required.

[Taylor Bachrach]

Thank you so much for explaining the distinction there. I think that's really valuable information.

We heard from a previous witness about the shift in universities away from tenure-track faculty towards more sessional lecturers, part-time contracts and that sort of thing, and that the percentage of university budgets dedicated to tenure-track professors has decreased over time as universities focus on other priorities.

I'm not sure if you're in a position to comment on that and how that contributes to the overall trend we're seeing around retaining and attracting top talent in these fields, but perhaps you could offer your thoughts.

[Dr. Catharine Whiteside]

I think university budgets are of considerable importance in terms of where their budget comes from. It is true that in most universities across Canada the amount of base budget to support tenured faculty is fairly flat, if not even in decline. That puts a lot of onus on the universities, and I'll mention the hospital-based research institutes, many of which do not have tenured faculty. This requires new lines of revenue. It's always a balance, and I would say that bringing more external funding, in a competitive way, for top-ranked talent—in this case, researchers—to support tenure-track positions would be a great investment.

Enabling universities to have that kind of salary support and initial funding.... All the universities in Canada today are struggling with that. Again, I think it would be strategic. It should be aligned, in my view, with some of the key priorities that the federal government sees as their areas of innovation, and I believe it can really be a great opportunity today in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bachrach.

Thank you to the witnesses.

We're now going to go to the second round for this panel.

We start with Mr. Soroka, for five minutes, please.

[Gerald Soroka, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and to all of the witnesses for coming this evening.

We're going to start with Dr. Mosca.

You mentioned your colleague who resigned due to a faulty immigration system. How do you think the Canadian immigration point system can be further improved to be more inclusive of foreign credentials with regard to innovation and retaining people with the education to spearhead our innovation?

[Dr. Michele Mosca]

That wasn't the issue in her case. To be clear, I think it was just a backlog issue. Her scores were off the charts. Actually, we don't know what the issue was. I think it was purely a backlog issue.

I'm very sympathetic to all of the challenges they've been under with Afghanistan, Ukraine, COVID and everything. With regard to the point system, I don't know. It's changed a lot since my parents came here 50 years ago. My dad was a cabinet-maker and didn't have a problem getting in because we needed cabinet-makers.

I'm not sure how well aligned the current system is with our economic needs across the spectrum, whether it's high-end or just specifically skilled labourers. I'm guessing that there's room for improvement there too, but I'm not so familiar with the system now.

[Gerald Soroka, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you for that.

I was concerned when you said you really don't know what the problem was other than the backlog. I guess the concern for me is how we improve this if it's not working effectively.

[Dr. Michele Mosca]

It's a bit of a black-box mystery. She tried very hard to find out, and she sought a lot of help. It was really hard to get colour into what was going on, other than, “You're in the queue and please be patient.”