Science and Research Committee on May 4th, 2023

[Samy-Jane Tremblay]

Okay.

According to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the support that students receive allows them to concentrate fully on their studies in their chosen field. I think this is totally false: students who receive scholarships from research granting agencies cannot concentrate on their studies because the amount offered is simply insufficient.

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

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Metcalfe, I'll start with you in terms of some of your recommendations.

You and the other two witnesses have raised some consistent themes here in terms of lack of funding support since 2003. That is some constructive criticism for both governments that have served since that time. I think the recommendations that you, Ms. Tremblay and Ms. Hennessey have provided here today will be consistent themes that we hear from other witnesses.

One thing that I'm looking for from some of the witnesses is recommendations that they might have in mind related to other supports that we could provide, apart from increased scholarship funding and increased financial support for bursaries and fellowships.

I'm looking at housing. You referenced housing twice—once in your opening and once in a response. It's a shared responsibility between all three levels of government. Municipalities, provinces and the federal government have a shared obligation to provide housing supports. To know, as Ms. Hennessey pointed out earlier, that 71% of postgraduate students live below the poverty line.... That is a disturbing figure.

I'm interested in looking at how the federal government can provide financial support through housing incentives or initiatives. Our national housing strategy currently provides funds to universities through the national co-investment fund and the rental construction financing initiative. However, we don't have a specific line for post-secondary institutions in our budget. I think there should be one for the national housing strategy, to assist with the debt that students are taking on.

What are your thoughts on that, in terms of providing other forms of support at the federal level to assist with some of the costs that not just students but all others across the country are experiencing?

[Mackenzy Metcalfe]

It's a very timely question.

CASA recently finished authoring a policy paper on this subject, which is going to be released in the next couple of months. I'd be happy to share that with you once it's ready.

The crux of our recommendations actually focus around data collection, because students are not a recognized class of renters in a lot of the data that we have. There are actually some non-government organizations—specifically UTILE in Quebec—that have done national student surveys to fill this gap, but it's difficult as a student organization to make these recommendations when there isn't consistent data from the government to help us identify trends.

Consistent funding through the Canada student grants program is something that students are very concerned about, and it is top of mind. This is a very important program that specifically targets low-income and middle-income Canadians in their access to post-secondary education. It includes a calculation for housing.

The two recommendations I can provide to you today would be ensuring that this program is consistently funded for those students, and collecting data so that we can help fill some of the other gaps.

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

Thanks very much.

Ms. Hennessey, can I ask you the same as it relates to housing supports for postgrad students?

[Hilary Hennessey]

If we adequately supported graduate students through funding, grants and scholarships, we'd be able to alleviate a lot of the stress that comes hand in hand with housing and counselling, for example not having mental health support and access to that.

Again, if students were funded properly, they'd have less financial stress and be able to afford the cost of living, such as rent, all the utilities that come along with that, and groceries. Adequately funding students in one aspect could alleviate all the other external factors.

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

Thank you both for the answers.

Mr. Chair, I think I'm out of time at this point.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

You have 11 seconds.

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

That's fine.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you so much to our witnesses.

We are now at 12 o'clock, so we will be switching over to the next panel—

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Chair, in the interest of fairness, I would ask you to allow the members of the Bloc Québécois and the NDP to have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

No. We are at the 12 o'clock mark. We were supposed to stop at 11:55 as per the schedule; we're already five minutes over.

You will have an opportunity—

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

The meeting started late, Mr. Chair, which isn't our fault. In fairness to the Bloc Québécois—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

We will wrap up on this panel.

I'd like to thank the witnesses once again for being here today. Take care.

We now stand suspended for a couple of minutes to make sure all of our next witnesses are ready to go.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

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

We have our next panel of witnesses. They will be provided with an opening round of five-minute statements and then rounds of questioning to follow.

First up, for the first round of opening comments, we have Sébastien Paquette.

The floor is yours.

[Sébastien Paquette, Union President, Association du personnel de la recherche du Québec]

Thank you, Mr. Chair

Hello, everyone.

I'm Sébastien Paquette, and I'm here on behalf of the Association du personnel de la recherche du Québec. The role of the APRQ is to help reduce the precariousness of research personnel and to recognize their contribution to university research throughout Quebec. I was pleased to accept the invitation to testify before the committee on the subject of research funding for post-doctoral researchers. Please note that I no longer use the term “trainee” as it is considered prejudicial and demeaning to our members. Indeed, the term “trainee” has too often been used to legitimize poor working conditions, denying our members recognition as highly qualified research personnel.

What do post-doctoral researchers do on a daily basis? They conduct one or more research projects, be it a purely academic project or an industrial partnership. Because of the experience they have gained in their own doctoral research, post-doctoral researchers supervise students in research internships, at the master's or doctoral level. In some laboratories, students rely on post-doctoral fellows much more than on professors, who are the official supervisors. Post-doctoral researchers are often the ones who write the most scientific papers in a laboratory. In addition, they help professors write the grant applications that guarantee their survival. In short, the tasks are very similar to those of research professionals or early career professors. There is no doubt that they are needed in a laboratory, and that's why professors wouldn't consider doing without these employees, whose status has only existed since the late 1990s.

However, whether it's through a scholarship from granting agencies or through the research funds of the professors who hire them, which more often than not come from the same granting agencies, the status of post-doctoral researchers remains precarious. This precariousness stems from the nature of the job, which is a transitional period under a fixed-term contract, but also, and above all, from the low amounts of funding. Indeed, the amount of the current scholarships and research funds doesn't generally give post-doctoral students a salary that can compete with what is offered by private industry or other universities in Europe or the United States. In fact, were it not for the recent unionization of post-doctoral researchers, it would likely be more lucrative for them to work for the legislated minimum wage. The current salary for post-doctoral researchers is simply not enough to live on or to attract talent from abroad.

When an older colleague told me about his post-doctoral fellowship in 1996, I realized that the fellowship amounts available today have not kept pace with inflation. Even before the record inflation rates of the last two years, the indexation did not keep up. Scholarship amounts, which become taxable salaries, typically range from $40,000 to, in very rare cases, $80,000 per year. From these amounts, universities often subtract employer expenses and some equipment costs, lowering the gross salary amount by about 25% from what was advertised prior to hiring. Unfortunately, the employee won't know this until they begin their employment.

Many post-doctoral researchers work many more hours than they are paid for. This comes with the precarious nature of the job and the need to build a career with good references. Increased scholarships and salary floors therefore remain the best means of ensuring a level of compensation per hour worked that meets the minimum principles of the law. Universities pride themselves on their research reputation, but this reputation wouldn't be possible without the contribution of post-doctoral researchers, and should not be achieved at the cost of precariousness.

Collective agreements negotiated by the unions have resulted in salary floors for post-doctoral fellows. This floor currently ranges from $33,000 to $48,000 per year. In some cases, professors who hire post-docs whose scholarship is too low must make up the difference using their research funds. This is still not enough, and not all post-doctoral researchers are fortunate enough to have union protection. Furthermore, having to make up a gap to meet an already low minimum wage is a further indication of the inadequacy of post-doctoral fellowships.

In light of this, I advocate for a massive reinvestment in post-doctoral fellowships, while ensuring a significant increase in project-based funding.

Society should provide post-doctoral researchers with decent working conditions, consistent with their high level of expertise and their essential contribution to the advancement of science and the training of future professionals. This will also make Canadian universities more competitive with other countries, enabling them to attract and retain these highly qualified professionals.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you so much for that.

Moving on to the next witness, we have Mr. Bélanger for five minutes.

The floor is yours.

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger, President, Canadian Association for Graduate Studies]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the committee for having me here.

I'm the director of graduate studies and student success at the Institut national de la recherche scientifique. INRS is an academic institution dedicated exclusively to research and graduate training. It's one of the 10 institutions that make up the Université du Québec network.

I'm speaking to the committee today in my capacity as president of the Canadian Association for Graduate Studies, a national association that promotes excellence in graduate education and research. Our members include more than 60 Canadian universities and research institutes, as well as many stakeholders with an interest in graduate education.

The association recognizes that the federal government's significant investments in the university research ecosystem, past and present, have contributed significantly to the development of a research culture in Canada. However, the association continues to advocate that the three granting councils obtain the means from the federal government to increase the value of excellence awards and research grants. I must say that the members of the association were expecting a substantial increase in graduate and post-doctoral fellowships and research funding. They were therefore extremely disappointed by the 2023 federal budget and the lack of investment in Canada's university research ecosystem.

Despite numerous calls for action from researchers and student coalitions over the past few years, and against the recommendations of its own advisory committee on the federal research support system, the Government of Canada has decided to ignore Canadian graduate students, post-doctoral researchers and the broader higher education community in its 2023 budget. Federal funding for graduate students and post-doctoral fellows has been stagnant for almost 20 years. Indeed, since 2003, there has been virtually no increase in the value of master's or doctoral scholarships. Due to inflation, tuition increases, and cost-of-living increases, the current value of scholarships is at or below the national poverty line set by the federal government. The result is therefore damning, as under this system, we are keeping 3,000 of the nation's most talented young scholars below the poverty line.

A comprehensive 2016 study by the University of Montreal found that financial insecurity contributed to alarming rates of mental health problems among university students, from mental illness, alcohol and drug addiction, and an increase in chronic illness and suicide.

In order to address the significant problems associated with research funding in Canada, the Canadian Association for Graduate Studies recommends increasing the number of graduate student awards, significantly increasing the value of research excellence awards and, finally, significantly increasing the value of research grants. This last recommendation would allow faculty to increase the support they provide to students from their grants.

In conclusion, the members of the association remain convinced of the importance of graduate studies to better understand and solve the complex problems facing all Canadians. The availability of high-quality researchers and young scientists is particularly important to the fair, equitable and sustainable development of the country. To achieve this, it is essential that graduate students, post-doctoral researchers and the scientific leaders of tomorrow are supported in a decent manner.

I would like to conclude my remarks by quoting the Honourable François‑Philippe Champagne, Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, in October 2022, in response to petition e‑4098, which was tabled in the House of Commons and dealt with funding for higher education:

The Government of Canada also recognizes the importance of investing in post-secondary research, and the critical role that federal scholarships and fellowships play in nurturing and sustaining Canada's top talent through support for career progression and increased financial security and independence.

Today, I want to say to the minister and to the members of the committee that we agree with the minister, but now is the time to act.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you so much for that.

Now, we move on to our last panellist. I'll cede the floor to Madame Mbuya-Bienge for five minutes.

[Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge, President, Syndicat des travailleurs et travailleuses étudiant(es) et postdoctoraux de l’Université Laval, and PhD student in epidemiology]

Thank you.

Good afternoon to the members of the committee. It is a real pleasure for me to have the opportunity to speak to you today in my home region.

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that we are on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation, and I would like to thank my colleagues for their interventions.

I'm Cynthia Mbuya‑Bienge. I'm the president of the student and post-doctoral workers union at Laval University in Quebec City. I'm also a doctoral student in epidemiology, and I have personal experience with the Government of Canada's graduate scholarship programs.

I would like to begin by thanking the committee for bringing this motion to the House, as it is particularly relevant in this time of historic inflation, which disproportionately affects the most vulnerable population groups. Among these vulnerable segments of the population are students and post-doctoral fellows. Therefore, in my presentation, I will discuss the effects of the scholarship system on the living conditions of graduate students and post-doctoral fellows.

First, although the federal government provides several hundred million dollars annually in graduate scholarships, this amount is no longer sufficient, and the living conditions of students are precarious. To support this statement, let me illustrate our daily lives. Being a master's or doctoral student means doing full-time research work—well over 40 hours a week—and working on weekends. To support themselves, many students combine several contracts, which can lead to burnout and even academic failure, as we know that research requires a high number of publications to succeed in the field. These working conditions have a significant impact on the family-study balance, as well as on the physical and psychological health of students. In fact, according to the latest report by the Union étudiante du Québec, whose president appeared here before me, 58% of university students suffer from psychological distress.

However, since 2003, the amount of federal scholarships has remained unchanged at $35,000 per year for a doctoral student and $17,500 for a master's student. Given that the after-tax low-income cut-off in Canada for a single person living in a city of 500,000 or more is $22,060 and that the majority of Canadian universities are located in large cities, there is no doubt that these amounts are no longer adequate to provide students with an adequate standard of living. If we add to this the fact that many doctoral students have families to support, the $35,000 amount, which seems high at first glance, is no longer sufficient given the reality of students.

The objective of the Canada graduate scholarships is to promote excellence by supporting students in their research careers and allowing them to benefit from a high-quality training experience. It's important to remember that the scientific work of students has an impact on all areas of society, from understanding the development of disease to the environmentally responsible use of energy sources and the improvement of health care systems. However, with the current scholarship amounts, we have to wonder whether this goal is really being met.

We should also note the important contribution of international students, who represent nearly 30% of post-secondary students in Canadian universities and who contribute greatly to the social and economic development of the country, but who do not have access to these scholarships.

However, the major granting agencies in health, science, engineering and the social sciences and humanities operate a scholarship system that is often difficult to understand and that gives rise to many misunderstandings. Indeed, I would like to focus here on the distribution of the number of scholarships among the three agencies and how the quota used for the distribution of scholarships by university is determined. Moreover, while there is much talk of new measures of equity, diversity and inclusion in these systems, these measures remain vague and abstract.

Finally, the amounts of Canada post-doctoral fellowship programs vary from competition to competition, ranging from $45,000 per year for two years for the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council to $70,000 per year for two years for the Banting fellowships. Unfortunately, these amounts have not evolved nearly as fast as inflation over the last few decades, thus contributing to the impoverishment of post-doctoral fellows. It should be noted that post-docs are recognized as highly skilled workers, given their demanding training and ability to conduct research. The minimum awards for post-doctoral researchers do not reflect this, as they are far below the entry-level salary of a professional with a PhD in Canada. With this in mind, not only should the amounts of the various fellowship competitions be standardized, but a real increase in the amounts of post-doctoral fellowships should be considered.

In view of the arguments presented, I support the motion to undertake a study of the Government of Canada's graduate and post-doctoral fellowship programs, and I invite the government to substantially improve these programs.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Corey Tochor]

Thank you so much for that.

Now we'll have some rounds of questioning.

Opening up for the six-minute round, we have Mr. Lobb.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Tochor. My first question is for Mr. Bélanger.

Is there a number, a financial dollar ask, so that you could say, “If there were this many more dollars for the tri-council's granting system, that would fix the problem”? Among all your colleagues from province to province, is there an agreed-upon number there?

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

The value of scholarships hasn't increased in over 20 years, or so, and it is around $20,000. The Canada graduate scholarship competition offers $35,000 awards. However, the normal awards from the federal councils, such as the Canada graduate scholarship program at the doctoral level run by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, are still at $21,000. So my recommendation—

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

What I'm asking is, do you need a billion dollars more from the federal government; do you need $500 million or you need $10? What's the number?

[Philippe-Edwin Bélanger]

We would have to do some simulations, but I can tell you that $20,000 in 2000 is equivalent to $35,000 today. I therefore believe that the reference value of doctoral scholarships should be increased to $35,000. As a result of this correction, these amounts should be indexed. Indeed, leaving the value of an award fixed over time creates inequity between the cohorts of students who are studying below the poverty line and those who benefit from the correction on the day it is made.

Therefore, I invite Parliament to evaluate the possibility of correcting the value of scholarships and, subsequently, to put in place a system of indexation to avoid finding ourselves in the same situation in 10 or 15 years.

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

I notice that in some of the universities' annual reports they make mention of the fiscal disparity that is experienced by the research people and the post-doctoral fellows, etc., but I find it odd—and it's not a criticism of you—that with all those billions of dollars in annual budgets at these universities, they can't come to the federal government and say, “We need another billion dollars to make this happen.”

Is that not a little odd to you?