Science and Research Committee on Nov. 20th, 2023

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

We could give you a report on what they're doing.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

I guess we have some follow up there.

Thank you for the questions.

Now we'll go to Mr. Lametti, for five minutes, please.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. This is an important meeting.

I'll start by saying that I agree with Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas and Mr. Cannings. I spent 20 years working as a university researcher, so I understand the added pressure of trying to find research funding and hiring master's and Ph.D. students.

If the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council or NSERC decide not to fund your research idea, you have to look elsewhere for funding, so you're constantly under pressure. First and foremost, we need to make sure Canada's programming does a better job of funding researchers.

Is training available to researchers to help them figure out the risks, or is that something that needs to be put in place?

Obviously, it's important to work with the RCMP and other agencies. Some universities have research security advisers. Is research security training mandatory? If not, is there an opportunity to communicate with researchers whose projects are high risk?

[Francis Bilodeau]

As far as I know, there is no mandatory training.

The federal government has put together training material, a website and tools to support researchers. Universities also have funding to build their capacity, but there is no mandatory training.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

As far as the federal government is concerned, there is no mandatory training, but some universities use our tools and online courses to develop mandatory training for professors and researchers.

[Francis Bilodeau]

Our approach has been to give universities tools. The requirement to assess the research security risks is in the hands of the federal granting councils.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you.

Some universities have research security advisers. Is that an effective mechanism? Could the federal government do more to support them so they could do a better job of educating university researchers?

[Francis Bilodeau]

That's a great question. I think it's still a new problem.

Measures are in place, such as the federal government's guidelines and federal funding to support universities in their research security efforts. There is no doubt, though, that more can be done as we make progress and learn.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you.

If a research project is denied funding or a party is excluded from a research project for national security reasons, can the decision be appealed?

I know there is a court challenge process for decisions involving foreign investment, so I was wondering whether a similar process existed in the case of NSERC funding, say. I'm really just trying to better understand how the process works.

[Francis Bilodeau]

Mr. Vats can correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe there is an appeal process.

It's not a court system or a contract dispute resolution process. It's a system for allocating grants and contributions. Nevertheless, the system is quite rigorous, with peer reviews and other processes that the three granting councils have in place. You may be more familiar with them than I am.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

I see. Thank you.

I didn't know the answer, so thank you for that information.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Sir, we have 10 seconds.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Someone else can have the 10 seconds I have left.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

I'm sorry, Mr. Lametti. I didn't want you to start what you couldn't finish.

We'll go to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to continue the discussion with Mr. Bilodeau.

Thank you again for being here today.

The committee did a lot of work leading up to the release of its report “Revitalizing Research and Scientific Publication in French in Canada”. The committee put forward 17 recommendations, based on the feedback of numerous witnesses, to end the agonizing state of French science and research in Canada.

The government released an 18‑page response to the committee's report, a response which I took the time to read. It contains lofty principles and fine words, but I'd like you to tell us what tangible measures the federal government has taken to support science in French since the report came out.

Also, what measures are being taken in the short term?

[Francis Bilodeau]

I believe I spoke with the committee about research in French.

To date, our efforts have been delivered through the granting agencies. Some program funding is available specifically for advancing research in French. A clear commitment is also in place to ensure that committee members reviewing research applications are always bilingual. All three councils have adopted that approach.

The success rates and results for researchers applying for funding to work in French are actually about the overall average.

Nevertheless, there is no doubt that, like other countries, Canada is seeing a drop in the number of research funding applications. We are examining the problem, but it's something all jurisdictions are struggling with.

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

I see.

Allow me to highlight a few facts.

We noticed that a very significant proportion of funding was going to English research projects. Radio-Canada reporter Christian Noël wrote an article in May revealing that more than 95% of the funding awarded by the three granting agencies over the three-year period from 2019 to 2021 went to research projects that were carried out in English.

In its response to the committee's report, the government talked about the language proficiency of peer reviewers, the people on the review committees. You know that, currently, the language proficiency of evaluators is self-reported. This is an excerpt from the government's response: “Adding formal language proficiency or testing requirements would raise barriers to recruiting volunteers…”.

If I understand this correctly, the government has no problem with a reviewer's inability to read or understand a funding application in French because requiring that they be able to do so could mean not being able to recruit enough volunteers to review applications.

We are talking about millions or billions of dollars for scientific research. It's hardly trivial that the government doesn't even bother to check the language proficiency of the people who sit on the review committees and decide whether a research project gets funding or not.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

We're over our time, but make a short comment, if you can.

[Francis Bilodeau]

We expect people who report being bilingual to be able to review research funding applications in French.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

That's great. Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. Cannings for two and a half minutes, please.

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

Thank you.

I want to get back to the funding and the recommendations, for instance, in the Bouchard report. You were saying how...I'm not sure if the report was vast or the ecosystem was vast. Whatever.

As an ecologist, I know ecosystems can be complicated, but it strikes me that there are parts of that report that are so obviously correct and good advice that they could be acted on immediately. One of them is what we've mentioned here multiple times in this committee, which is making sure that those fellowships and scholarships are boosted. They haven't been increased for 20 years. We have our best graduate students living in poverty. Surely, that's low-hanging fruit which this government should change.

I wonder what efforts ISED has made to impress upon government—whether it's the Minister of Finance or any part of cabinet outside of ISED—that this is something that really should be done, very much as a preliminary first step. If we do anything, we have to do this.

[Francis Bilodeau]

Obviously, it's difficult for me to tell you what we've provided as advice or not. What I can tell you is we have very carefully tracked the funding levels. We're very aware of the historical and current funding levels and those of our partners. That is something we do analysis on and we understand.

We welcomed and worked with Mr. Bouchard and the members of that committee as they were formulating their advice. We had the opportunity to benefit from a number of discussions with them and others who made representations, some in the sense of what you're providing.

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

You said, “those of our partners”. What do you mean by partners?

[Francis Bilodeau]

We've engaged with universities. We've also engaged with the provinces and others to understand the funding realities in that ecosystem. The dynamics around the funding realities for students, researchers, etc., are the ones that we pay attention to. We do the analysis, and we share that information with the public and ministers.