Science and Research Committee on Nov. 20th, 2023

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

There are institutional agreements, so the institution is endorsing these—

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

There are no criminal charges if they filled it out wrong.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

Well, if they broke the law, yes, there would be a criminal charge.

In this case, there's a code of responsible conduct of research that institutions agree to with the granting councils. If they violate the terms of that, there can be sanctions on institutions with respect to the receipt of funding for research.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Okay. Thanks. It's good to get that out there.

We'll now go to Ms. Lena Metlege Diab for the final two and a half minutes.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, welcome. Thank you for being here bright and early for our committee.

Let me start by saying that I'm glad to hear your response to my colleagues across the way that helping students and researchers is top of mind. We had a number of studies here, and a number...who have been with us. I think all of us understand the challenges they're facing. I'm glad to hear that it's top of mind, not just for science but also for all graduate students in different....

Can you talk to the committee more about how your department is working with allies on multi-country dialogue, and how this supports increased security for research?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Yes.

[Lena Metlege Diab, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I'll give you an opportunity, in whatever minutes I might have left, to conclude with whatever you think you would also like to share with us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

You have about a minute.

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

A minute.... Thank you very much for the question.

In fact, to go back to the colleague's question on why you need a proper process to draw up these lists, I think you touched on it. This is not just a Canadian-made list. This is a list that has been worked on with our Five Eyes allies to make sure it will be the benchmark you're going to see.

I want to take the opportunity to thank all those who contributed. Colleagues, I've been fair in mentioning that there are a number of intelligence agencies in Canada that have been contributing, because it is fairly complex work.

I know there are politics in these committees, but let's be clear. We're talking about national security. This is very serious stuff. This is not about politics. This is about the people who put names of institutions on the list, which will have legal consequences. This is very serious. You don't want to miss anyone. You want to put the right ones on there. This work is being done diligently. As I said, that's why we're going to publish it soon, on both the research side and the entity side. It's to make sure we protect our national security.

However, to your point, I think the fact that we work with our Five Eyes partners should give comfort to our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, in terms of this being serious stuff. Protecting Canadian research is our top priority. The fact that we took time to do this should also give comfort to the research institutions and Canadians. This is work we are undertaking seriously to protect our national security for decades to come.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

That's terrific.

Thank you, Minister. Thank you for coming early and staying late.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

We're going to excuse you, because—

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I have a point of order before the minister goes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Sure.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Mr. Chair, we cannot conclude this report without the material the minister has committed to. I want to make sure the minister is very clear on the expectation that we will receive a list from him of the many experts who agree with the position of the government. We know the minister is having difficulty making lists, so I want it clear that we will have that list of all the experts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Yes. That's the next thing on my agenda.

As we're excusing you, we've asked for some written information that can come in through the clerk. We have some operating principles here, in terms of how the committee expects responses in a timely fashion. If those can come in.... This is our second-last meeting on this study, so getting the answers in is very important.

We'll let the minister go. We've heard from Mr. Vats a bit, and we'll hear from Mr. Bilodeau, as well, in the second hour.

Thank you very much.

With that, we'll suspend for a moment.

I'd like to thank the officials for being with us.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, June 6, 2023, the committee resumes its study of the use of federal government research and development grants, funds and contributions by Canadian universities and research institutions in partnership with entities connected to the People’s Republic of China.

Again, it's my pleasure to welcome, from the Department of Industry, Francis Bilodeau, associate deputy minister; and Nipun Vats, assistant deputy minister, science and research sector.

We are going to continue on with questions. We had the presentation from the minister at the beginning.

We'll go to the first person for six minutes, who is Ben Lobb.

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

Thank you, Chair. I'll share my time with Mr. Tochor.

My first question, before I turn it over to Mr. Tochor, is about filling out that assessment form. There are a number of criteria. Food is one of them in the criteria.

Take, for example, a state-owned enterprise like Syngenta. Syngenta is an international agriculture megacompany. They'd have to check the box that it is a state-owned or state-controlled enterprise, and that it is food. If you look under some of the things they do, I think it's a fine company, but there's biosecurity, biohealth.... There are a lot of different pathogens that can be inside a livestock barn. There are all sorts of different things that can happen.

Would a company like Syngenta be eligible for a project? How would that work? Who vets it? Who determines...? How would you know?

It's a real-world question.

[Francis Bilodeau, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Industry]

The starting point is not necessarily speaking to that company. The forms, as you've mentioned, would be filled out by the researchers. They'd be asked to identify a series of pieces of information, including their partners.

The point on this one is that it's intended to be a project-by-project or an initiative-by-initiative assessment. In this instance, there could be flags that push the NSERC folks to take a deeper look at it and seek input. If they were really concerned about it, as Nipun mentioned before, it would be reviewed by some of our security agencies, which might look deeper into this.

The fact that it is on a case-by-case, initiative-by-initiative basis allows us to weigh the risks with regard to individuals.

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

I have one quick follow-up, and then I'll turn it over to Mr. Tochor.

If you were a Chinese, PRC, state-owned enterprise, there's a chance that you would be allowed to have a research application approved, based on case-by-case, from what you just said.

[Francis Bilodeau]

Again, if you're a state-owned enterprise and you are in an area of potentially sensitive research, I don't believe that would be the case.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

I think it depends on what the nature of the research is. If there's a risk associated with the research of exfiltration of sensitive data, for example.... When it comes to pathogens, there would be other biosecurity measures and limited access as well. We have rules around that as well.

It would depend on the specifics of the project.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Tochor.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Witnesses, thank you for the public service that you guys do and the important work you do. It is very much appreciated.

I'm going to follow up on what my colleague, Ben Lobb, was talking about. Once the application comes in and you have someone look over it.... I would assume that you would look over a lot of these applications. Would you have a list internally? It may not be public yet, but it's internal.

Is there a list so that it's easy to say, “Yes, we saw this one before. Scratch it”?

[Francis Bilodeau]

I'll mention two things. Part of the intent in creating a research security centre and funding it within the Public Safety organization and not within our department is to build a certain capability. As per any organization, it will be a learning organization.

That won't be within—

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Is there a list internally? There must be a list internally that you can quickly check off so that you don't have to go through all that. This is a make-work project for government. The same entity repeatedly applies, you turn it down and it applies again.

There has to be a list of the ones you've declined. Is that right?