Science and Research Committee on May 9th, 2023

[Sarah Laframboise]

I think it comes down to who we are allowing to do a graduate degree now.

I look at myself as one example of many other stories that exist. Should it cost $100,000 in debt to get a Ph.D., especially if we're looking at my prospects for a career? If I wanted to continue on in science, I would do a post-doc, make $45,000 a year and continue to start paying off my debt.

These students in post-docs are young adults. They are in their late twenties and early thirties. They often have dependants. They want to invest the same way their peers do. They want to be functional young adults in society. That's not possible right now.

You're right. It's going to eliminate people who don't want to take on all of those burdens. In our survey, this was shown many times.

Home ownership is one that comes to mind. This was brought up in the committee before. Eighty per cent of our graduate students rent. Only 10% own their homes. These are students in their early thirties. This is unprecedented compared to the national averages, which we are already concerned about. I think examples like this show just what that impact is on the students and post-docs.

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

Thank you very much.

I've met many people who thought about giving it all up, and others who unfortunately had to resign themselves to the situation.

I would like you to tell me today, as a representative of the Support Our Science movement, what students have to say about the urgency of taking action immediately.

[Sarah Laframboise]

Well, they're feeling the direct impact of this right now. They're living it.

Every year that we don't invest is one less student who will continue on doing this and one less innovator who we're going to get at the end of the day. Who knows who we're losing. It might be the next cancer researcher. We don't know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sousa, go ahead for four minutes, please.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your presentations, your passion, your engagement and the people you brought with you to provide support.

Notwithstanding the cuteness of the opposition, there is a collaborative effort by all parties to try to do what's best for our families. I have kids and nephews, and I have members who are Ph.D. students. They're struggling. They're trying to make a go of it and getting by somehow. Some of them have moved to the east coast. They were teachers or professors, and they went through the process you're engaging with.

Certainly, the government has increased funding and infrastructure, beyond other things. Whereas the opposition asked for cuts, we've actually been increasing...but not nearly enough, which is why you're here and why we called this meeting. We want to see this improved. We really do.

Professor, you said something I want clarified. What makes Canada competitive? You're saying we're not, so what is it that's missing? Obviously, you made recommendations and we heard you. What makes us competitive versus the United States, Australia and elsewhere?

[Prof. Maydianne Andrade]

I have to say that I actually think Canadians do a lot with a little. Our grants are small, yet we punch above our weight on an international scale, so that's great.

However, there's a gap between science and innovation in Canada, right now, relative to other countries. That's been shown in numerous reports, including some from the CCA. What we need is more going into the pipeline, because you don't know where the innovation is going to come from that will result in a COVID vaccine. That was someone who toiled in the trenches for decades with very little payoff and who actually lost her grants in the United States.

We need more people with new ideas in order to make that jump into something that's innovative for a challenge we haven't even met yet.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Julia and Gavin, I sense we're over time.

The recommendations were put out. What's the total amount involved here? What are we asking for? When you increase the number of students and applications, and when you increase the 40% to 50% funding, how much of a dollar value are we talking about, and would the opposition support it?

[Gavin Douglas]

The second question I will defer to people with political expertise.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

I'm kidding.

[Gavin Douglas]

I will speak to the first part.

The current tri-agency budget for 2022-23 was $3.72 billion. For our recommendations, based on increasing the tri-agency awards and number of awards, it would be $134 million. When you're talking about the increase to the tri-agency budget, a 10% increase corresponds to about a $441.7-million increase starting in 2023-24. That would be compounded over five years.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

You're saying $3.7 billion, which we're giving now—

[Gavin Douglas]

Yes.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

—and you want to go up to $5 billion. That's 20%, right?

[Gavin Douglas]

Well, that is essentially...eventually, yes, if we do that 10% increase compound.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Julia, do you have anything more?

Good luck, by the way.

[Gavin Douglas]

This may seem like a large number, but it corresponds to 20 years of neglect. That's why a large investment is—

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

I'm not questioning it. I'm just trying to get specifics.

I'll ask you this, Julia Messina-Pacheco: As a Ph.D. candidate, you know what you're getting into. You want to make certain you have a good quality of life as you proceed.

[Julia Messina-Pacheco]

Absolutely. So far, that is not looking good.

As Professor Andrade mentioned, we do not get into this business because we think it is lucrative. We know it isn't. In fact, we have data to show that the median salary of Ph.D. holders in Canada, across all disciplines is about $80,000 per year. When you look at science disciplines specifically, you're looking at only $50,000 per year.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you, Mr. Sousa.

Next we have Mr. Blanchette-Joncas for two minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I always like to have data. I'm a very factual guy, but you know, it's kind of futile when you know that a government invests zero dollars. It's not hard to do better than zero. When $134 million, $137 million or $162 million could be invested, zero dollars doesn't make much difference. When we are the only G7 country to have reduced our investments, when we compare our gross domestic product with that of other G7 countries, we don't need to know how many millions of dollars been have invested. When we're the only G7 country losing researchers, we know that, too.

I'm going to put my questions to the Science and Policy Exchange representatives. We talked about the United States, which is very attractive. They have decided to double—I did say double, Mr. Chair—the budget of their largest five-year funding program through the CHIPS and Science Act. This means that our ambitious and talented researchers will end up going south to do their research. Canada is at risk of becoming even more of a scientific colony. I have quoted Dr. Chad Gaffield of the U15 network, who came to the committee to present his views.

I would like the Science and Policy Exchange representatives to tell us what they plan to do about this situation.

[Gavin Douglas]

I actually missed the key part of the question. I apologize.

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

What do you plan to do about this situation?

We're listening to you.

[Sarah Laframboise]

I'll just add quickly to give an example of what this looks like.

A Ph.D. student in the United States right now with an NSF grant will make $65,000. The awards in Canada are $21,000. That alone is going to drive people away.

The National Institutes of Health gives a $52,000 salary for a Ph.D. student and a $70,000 to $85,000 salary for a post-doc. This is uncomparable to Canada. This is nearly double the salary, so it makes sense that they're not staying in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you.

We're wrapping up with two minutes for Mr. Cannings, please.

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

Thank you.

I'm going to turn to Dr. Andrade, again, just to get some more details.

I was a bit surprised to hear that you've been talking with departments or researchers about taking fewer grad students. I assume that concurrent with that would be a policy of paying them more so they could live a dignified life. I just wanted to get the details on that.

Just to follow up on that, if everybody started doing that, how would that affect our science ecosystem in Canada?