Science and Research Committee on May 4th, 2023

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Welcome to meeting number 42 of the Standing Committee on Science and Research.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

Before we get going, I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of our witnesses and members.

For interpretation for those on Zoom, you have the choice at the bottom of your screen of either floor, English or French audio. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

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

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, February 14, 2023, the committee is commencing its study of the Government of Canada's graduate scholarship and post-doctoral fellowship programs.

We have three witnesses on the first panel. Each will have a five-minute opening statement, and then there will be rounds of questions from the different respective parties here in the room.

To start off our first five minutes, we will have, from the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations—

I recognize Ben Lobb.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll keep this brief.

It's just a comment for the committee. It comes out of the occurrences of the last meeting and the subcommittee meeting. I'm putting this on the record. I don't know what my colleagues think. They don't have to say anything about it now anyways if they don't want to. I just want it on the record.

My preference would be to not have subcommittee meetings to discuss the future business of the committee. Maybe for scheduling, perhaps, for calendar-type things, but for the details of what will be studied and when, I think all members of the committee should be allowed to be part of the discussion. Through past meetings that we've had, it has worked out well.

I notice that today there are a few members from our regular committee who are not here, so we can have a discussion on this later. I wanted to put that on the record. I always like to hear everybody else's comments about what they're thinking, rather than being told what occurred and how we're going to do it.

That's all.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you, Mr. Lobb.

Mr. Lauzon, I'll let you have the floor quickly, and then we'll get into the witnesses.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We did hear my colleague's recommendation. Since several members of the committee, including the chair, are absent today, I think we agree with Mr. Lobb that we should postpone this discussion to a future meeting.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

As the vice-chair and temporarily in this role, I'll say that we'll keep those comments on the record and I appreciate the different takes on how we should be running this committee and how we can best serve the constituents and the House of Commons through the important work we do in this committee.

I'll go back to the witnesses. I will give each witness five minutes to make an opening statement, and then we'll have some rounds of questioning.

First up, from the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, we have Mackenzy Metcalfe.

You have five minutes.

[Mackenzy Metcalfe, Executive Director, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations]

Thank you.

Good morning, honourable chair, esteemed committee members and fellow witnesses.

I would like to begin my statement by acknowledging that we are meeting today on the territory of the Anishinabe Algonquin nation.

My name is Mackenzy Metcalfe. I'm the executive director of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, or CASA. We are a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization that represents college, polytechnic and university students from coast to coast to coast. Through our formal partnership with the Union étudiante du Québec, we are a trusted national student voice, together representing 365,000 students across the country.

First, I'd like to thank the committee for recognizing the importance of students through the study of the Government of Canada's graduate scholarship and post-doctoral fellowship programs.

On Monday, May 1, thousands of graduate students walked off their university campuses across 45 schools in support of increased funding for tri-agency grants for graduate and post-doctoral researchers. Students want to study in Canada. They want to stay in Canada and build their careers here. Students want to contribute to Canada's research ecosystem. Canadian students use tri-agency awards as a point of entry into this research. However, without increased investments in these awards, many students simply cannot afford to.

Today, CASA is calling on the government to support Canadian research by increasing the award values and the number of awards available, and by legislating specific student seats on each of these governing councils.

The Government of Canada's graduate scholarship and post-doctoral fellowship programs drive the science and innovation that keep Canada globally competitive. Without graduate student work, Canadian research and development would grind to a halt. Specifically, these programs in question today, provided through the tri-agencies, provide government-funded research grants to grad students who help keep Canada at the forefront of industry. Though I myself am not a graduate student, I've heard from graduate students how important this funding is, as it often sets the precedent for Canada's top graduate researchers and what others in the field are paid for their work.

These students engage in full-time work as researchers and their scholarships act as their primary source of income to pay their rent, child care costs, groceries and other expenses. Often, these students are restricted from having other jobs, as their attention is and should be completely focused on their research. However, even with the tremendous value these scholars bring to Canada, the government funding provided for the most prestigious graduate awards amounts to less than minimum wage in many parts of the country. Graduate award values for Canada's tri-agencies have not changed since 2003, despite inflation rising 48% during this time. With the current value of these awards, we have researchers aspiring to study beyond Canada's border—not because they want to, but because they have no other choice.

Other countries are taking action to equip their scientists with the funds for cutting-edge research. The U.S.A.'s CHIPS Act more than doubled their national science fund commitment over a period of five years and increased their graduate research fellowships by 50%.

Every student researcher who chooses to study abroad to pursue better research funding in the United States, Europe or elsewhere is a lost future innovator, entrepreneur or Canada research chair.

Let me be clear. This is a government that has made many investments in students: removing the interest on Canada's student loans, increasing grants through Canada student grants, and making project-specific investments in the sciences and tri-councils in previous budgets. However, even the previous investments in Canadian research have not trickled down to the pockets of graduate researchers, who have been making the same wage since 2003. Good science requires the best scientists, and the best scientists deserve to be paid an equitable living wage for their cutting-edge research.

This brings me to the end of my remarks, but I wish to briefly reiterate our recommendations.

First, increase the amount of funding for the Government of Canada's graduate scholarship and post-doctoral fellowship programs to compensate students for their work.

Second, simultaneously double the number of awards given out through these programs.

Third, legislate a reserved student seat on each of the governing councils to ensure student perspectives are always taken into account in future tri-agency decisions.

On behalf of our member at CASA, I thank you for the opportunity to speak today and look forward to answering your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you so much for that testimony.

We're now going to move online to the Canadian Federation of Students. We have Hilary Hennessey.

The floor is yours, Hilary, for five minutes.

[Hilary Hennessey, Campaign Coordinator, Canadian Federation of Students]

Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for this opportunity.

I come to you from Newfoundland and Labrador. The island of Newfoundland is the unceded traditional territory of the Beothuk and the Mi'kmaq, and we acknowledge Labrador as the traditional and ancestral homelands of the Innu of Nitassinan, the Inuit of Nunatsiavut and the Inuit of NunatuKavut.

Thank you for allowing me to speak today. I'm very new to this role, but I am the campaign commissioner for the national graduate caucus, representing all graduate students across Canada.

I have a few things I would like to raise today, such as the poverty that students are facing: 71% of graduate students live below the poverty line, and one in three graduate students lives on less than $1,250 a month. This is incredibly low, and is creating lots of struggles and barriers for students in completing their research and also creating a life for themselves.

On May 1, as Mackenzy said, thousands of graduate students, post-doctoral fellows, faculty, staff and community supporters across Canada walked out of their academic institutions to demand increased federal investments in scholarships, fellowships and grants to support increased pay for graduate students and post-doctoral fellowships. Although I am not an international student, I want to recommend that it is incredibly important that we create substantial funding to allow graduate students to pursue their studies without the stress of being able to afford their daily life. Lots of students do not have access to federal and provincial funding, and we would like to see them have access to this.

Our recommendations are set forth in section 4 of our pre-budget submission. We want to extend eligibility for Canada student grants to graduate students, estimated at $25 million per year.

We recommend exploring the creation of dedicated research fellowships for indigenous and international students. As I said, they are not adequate, so we would like to see approximately $30 million per year associated to this.

We would like to increase the value of graduate scholarships and post-doctoral fellowships awarded by the tri-council agencies by 48%, to match inflation since 2003—especially the post-graduate scholarships.

We would like to see all award values indexed to the consumer price index, which will ensure that awards are internationally competitive and increase with the cost of living.

We recommend doubling the number of post-doctoral fellowships awarded by tri-council agencies. The cost is $51 million in 2023, and we would like to see that doubled.

We would like to see a 50% increase in the number of graduate scholarships awarded by the tri-council agencies. We would like to see that increase as well.

It has been communicated to me that there is no mention of graduate students in the last budget, specifically in research or science. As government has been vocally supportive of this research, and of research in general, we are looking for the government to action ways that we can increase research in Canada and create a better experience for students.

Thank you so much for this opportunity. I look forward to answering your questions as well.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you as well for your testimony.

We are now moving on to the final witness for this panel. We have Samy-Jane Tremblay, president of the Quebec Student Union.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Samy-Jane Tremblay, President, Quebec Student Union]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank the committee for its invitation.

My name is Samy-Jane Tremblay, and I'm the president of the Union étudiante du Québec. The UEQ represents more than 91,000 university students throughout Quebec, including more than 25,000 graduate students. The UEQ has a partnership with the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations. Together, they represent over 365,000 students across Canada. The UEQ and the alliance support the Support Our Science organization, which aims to promote greater funding for graduate students. On May 1, we participated in a march with underfunded students to support this cause.

As you know, there has been no investment in increased funding since 2003. However, research without students is simply impossible.

We are currently in a critical situation. Canada is the only G7 country to have reduced its investment in research and development over the past 20 years. However, other countries have recognized that this is a priority and have set ambitious research targets.

The Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System recently tabled a report—the Bouchard report—that stated that Germany plans to increase its research investment to 3.5% of GDP by 2025 and Finland, to 4% of GDP by 2030. Canada, on the other hand, is at 1.6% of its GDP. This is clearly insufficient to compete internationally. The Bouchard report clearly explains that research funding has not kept pace with the pressures of the last 20 years.

In addition to international competition, there is growth in the size and activity of the research system. According to the Bank of Canada, inflation has increased by 50.63% between 2003 and 2023, yet, the amount of scholarships hasn't increased since 2003, even though they should be indexed to the cost of living, as is the case in Australia. The number of scholarships should also be increased in order to better support the pool of young scientists that is indeed present throughout the country.

This is a serious matter. Canada is falling behind in research, science and innovation. It isn't a priority, and it should be. We're talking about the future of our country and the work that needs to be done to solve major societal challenges. By not investing in the next generation of scientists, Canada is encouraging a brain drain and losing great talent, and this, it must be remembered, in a context of a shortage of skilled labour.

To remedy the situation and to deal with the constant pressures we are currently experiencing, the solution is simple. The Bouchard report should be put into practice and massive investments should be made in research and development. To do this, we must not only increase the amount and number of scholarships for students, but also increase the grants that support a majority of graduate students.

Another issue that was exposed, this time by the 2017 Naylor Report, is that the length of current funding does not match the actual length of study. To give you an idea, federal granting agencies award one-year master's scholarships, while a master's degree takes at least two years to complete. At the doctoral level, students receive a three-year award, while a doctorate takes at least four years to complete. This is a problematic situation, because students are not funded at the end of the course, and they need it. At that point, students are going to have to find alternative sources of funding or delay graduation or even abandon their study and research project. By way of comparison, the Quebec granting agencies of the Fonds de recherche du Québec fund master's degrees for two years and PhDs for four years. We invite Canada to apply the same measure, which is much more realistic.

If we are talking about challenges that concern the student population, it's important that they be able to express their views on the decisions that are made. Currently, the three federal granting councils do not reserve any of their board seats for students, unlike in Quebec. Indeed, the boards of the Fonds de recherche du Québec and the student intersectoral committee of Rémi Quirion, Quebec's chief scientist, reserve seats for the student population to express their views. We therefore call on Canada to amend the legislation governing the three federal granting agencies to ensure that seats are allocated and reserved for the student population, thus allowing them to voice their concerns and express their views.

In closing, I want to remind you that the contributions of graduate students and post-doctoral fellows are significant. The future of our country will depend on investments in research and development. To attract and retain the best talent, Canada must make this a priority, as other countries are doing.

Thank you. I am now ready for your questions and discussion.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you so much for that testimony.

Now we'll open up the rounds of questioning. This will be the six-minute round, starting off with the Conservatives and Mr. Mazier.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for coming out here today.

We have some out-of-control inflationary spending and out-of-control spending as well, and it's causing inflation, I guess. Those on fixed and lower incomes are being particularly hit, especially students, and they are finding it difficult to live.

After eight years of this government, there are some startling statistics that I want to share with you. Rent has doubled. Students are now paying 25% more for housing than the average Canadian renter is. We've heard stories of students living in homeless shelters. Inflation reached a 40-year high last year. Interest costs have increased to a 15-year high. Forty per cent of undergraduate students and 50% of graduate students say they are worried about running out of food. Food bank use on campus is reaching new highs. Food is becoming unaffordable, and we continue to see more Canadians skipping meals.

This is for all three of you, and you'll be able to elaborate here. Not only has this government not increased scholarships and fellowship programs, but the cost of living is also out of control. Can you describe how this funding freeze and the increase in the cost of living have impacted the students you represent?

Ms. Tremblay, we can start with you.

[Samy-Jane Tremblay]

Yes, the freeze on the amount of grants has had a significant impact on students. To give you an idea, at present, the amount of the grants isn't harmonized between the three federal granting agencies, nor is the duration of the funding. As a result, there are disparities in award amounts, which can range from as low as $17,500 to as high as $35,000 and even $50,000 for prestigious awards such as the Vanier scholarship.

In fact, we recommend lowering the amount of these prestigious awards to fund more students. These prestigious scholarships are worth $50,000 per year for three years, so we suggest reducing them to the level of the Canada graduate scholarships, which is $35,000. This would allow for more students to be funded, with less of the impact you mentioned, and less financial insecurity.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you.

Ms. Metcalfe, are you aware of the difference? We talked about the G7 compared to any other countries, and the difference between here and the U.S. in scholarships and what they're actually getting paid. We've been asking for an increase in funding, but what is the actual dollar amount we're talking about, the difference between taking your post-doc down in the States versus taking it here in Canada. What does that difference look like?

[Mackenzy Metcalfe]

With the recent investment they made in the United States with the CHIPS Act, their graduate fellows earn around $50,000 a year Canadian compared to $17,500 for the Canadian master's funding that is provided, as an equivalent.

To address your question from the beginning, I work with students every single day from coast to coast to coast, and for the past three years the number one thing I've been hearing from Vancouver Island all the way to the east coast is concern about affordability. We have also heard similar concerns about students accessing food banks at higher rates and really being concerned about being able to afford to get an education. There have been investments in the sciences, specifically in the 2018 budget, but unfortunately that money hasn't trickled down to the amounts for graduate students, who are still living off the same amounts that they were in 2003.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

That's the fundamental problem. Instead of focusing on the students, the funding does not allow for, “Here's what we have to pay,” like a living wage almost, to make sure that the students are looked after, because they are going to actually do the work.

Ms. Hennessey, do you have anything to add?

[Hilary Hennessey]

I definitely do. You raised some great points that need to be addressed, in my opinion. Students are working a lot of hours to try to make a living for themselves and to afford the cost of living, because inflation has made the cost of everything so high. These low wages that we're seeing in scholarships and grants are keeping these individuals in precarious financial positions that are preventing students from really dedicating their time and effort to their studies.

As the other panellists here today have mentioned, we're seeing students reach out to external resources to try to get support, which usually ends up not being successful for them. There are inadequate social supports for students, so we're leaving them in very hard positions that are taking away from their research and from their experience as graduate students.

I believe it's important to say as well that 64% of students—and this data comes from our recent survey—say that the cost of tuition and student debt they are facing is negatively impacting their mental health. There's a lot of stress associated with being a graduate student, which means a lot of people are being excluded from pursuing graduate studies, and it is preventing them from contributing to research and contributing to our economy in this way.

That's all I have to say, but thank you for the opportunity.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Briefly, you mentioned the budget and how that was a budget ask on the pre-budget consultations. Are you aware that there was no mention of and no budget increase for graduates in this last budget?

[Hilary Hennessey]

Yes, I am aware that there was no increase.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

All right. Moving on to the next round of questions, Mr. Lauzon, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I would like to thank the three witnesses. We did hear some agreement in their speeches. They mentioned the need to increase the budgets that have been frozen since 2003. They also talked a lot about the scholarship system.

Ms. Tremblay, you spoke mainly about the need to harmonize funding, which you consider important. You also suggested that the amount of the prestigious scholarships should be changed. Do you think that the committee needs to look at the distribution of the amounts as well as the funding? I'm not saying that one goes without the other, but should we be talking about both at the same time?

[Samy-Jane Tremblay]

I think we have to talk about both at the same time. When we talk about research funding, it's important to think about how the money is distributed by the three federal granting agencies. Right now, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, or SSHRC, awards four-year grants, which is a good thing. The other granting agencies, however, only award three-year grants. We also need to talk about the amounts of the awards. SSHRC is giving a $20,000 grant, while the Canadian Institutes of Health Research is going to give a $35,000 grant. So we need to harmonize these measures to ensure that students are funded at the same level.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

The witnesses also talked about the importance of having student representatives on the boards of these granting agencies in order to intervene in the distribution of scholarships. I'd like to hear more about that.

Ms. Metcalfe, I'd like to hear your comments on the importance of having your members on these boards to make the right decisions on the distribution of scholarship dollars

[Mackenzy Metcalfe]

I'm sorry. The translation is just catching up.

One of the recommendations that we are putting forward today is asking the government to legislate a student seat on these tri-councils. This is something that we think will be a bit of a proactive measure, so that students' concerns and experiences on the ground as researchers can be taken into account proactively as these tri-councils make decisions.

Obviously, the award amounts haven't been increased since 2003. We think having a student mandated at that table will help prevent challenges like this in the future. I'll note that these 19 seats for the councils are not always filled. We have spoken with different people in the appointments office about different processes, so we definitely think the government is hearing us on this, but we would like to see it in legislation so that problems like this don't arise again.