Science and Research Committee on Nov. 20th, 2023

[Francis Bilodeau]

The list isn't final. It provides information on areas that are sensitive, such as technology that could be used for military purposes or that could be excluded from being exported. There is information, but it's not a final list.

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

All right. I see. Progress is being made.

Some clarification was provided initially, so there are criteria to follow. The much-talked-about list would certainly be helpful, but we don't have it yet. As many witnesses have pointed out, when people's applications are denied, they don't get any further explanation.

I'll refer to what witnesses have told us, so you have some real-life examples. We are talking about science, and we go by facts. Nigel Smith, the executive director of TRIUMF, Canada’s particle accelerator centre, said it would be helpful to have clarity on the threats in question.

David Robinson, a researcher and the executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, said he didn't know why his association's application had been denied.

Representatives of the U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities submitted 48 applications to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, NSERC, and 34 were denied. They requested further explanation, but they didn't get any.

Researchers don't know what they are doing wrong, and the government isn't telling them what they need to improve in their applications going forward.

[Francis Bilodeau]

In theory, under the process, researchers are supposed to be given feedback as to why their application was denied.

I'm not familiar with the cases you are referring to, but I would be happy to take a closer look. Normally, researchers are supposed to be provided with feedback.

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

I see.

What exactly was done? Were new measures or new processes put in place in an effort to provide rejected applicants with clearer answers and more specific information?

[Francis Bilodeau]

As I said regarding the 34 applications, the process allows for feedback, or at least the opportunity to provide feedback, as long as it doesn't involve the disclosure of sensitive information. We are able to provide feedback, then. It is already part of the process.

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

Very well.

Research that concerns national security is the reason we are here today, but I would like to hear your comments on other issues. In particular, I'm interested in the “Report of the Advisory Panel on the Federal Research Support System”. The panel was established at the government's request. The Bouchard report, as it's known, is a fine report. Earlier, the minister was not able to give me an answer, so I'd like to discuss it with you.

In the report, the panel proposes a clear timeline for concrete actions. The panel gives the government until the end of 2023 to set up the Canadian knowledge and science foundation, to increase funding for the three granting councils and to increase funding for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows to competitive levels.

Can you give us a clear timetable or plan today?

[Francis Bilodeau]

We can't give you a timetable as to when decisions will be made. We have both spoken to Frédéric Bouchard and are examining the significant recommendations that were made, but I can't give you a timetable as to when measures will be put in place.

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

I want to make sure I understand, Mr. Bilodeau. The Bouchard report contains 21 recommendations and was submitted in March 2023. The report was commissioned by your government to make sure that Canada had a science ecosystem that was internationally competitive.

What recommendations have been put in place since the Bouchard report came out?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

The recommendations in the Bouchard report are comprehensive and interconnected. They are complex, so it's important not to implement some of them without having a clear idea of the path forward for all the recommendations.

We are in the process of figuring out how to proceed. If we implement only certain things, we will have—

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

Mr. Vats, can you get back to the committee in writing on the status of the 21 recommendations in the Bouchard report? In other words, which ones have been implemented, are being implemented or have yet to be implemented? That would be very helpful.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

I can tell you that, as of yet, we haven't taken any concrete measures to address the recommendations.

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

That means none of the recommendations has been put in place.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

No, but the reason is that we have to examine them as a whole. We can't just implement some of them without clearly understanding how we are going to implement the rest.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you.

I think there's a timeline for reporting back on Bouchard.

We'll now go to Mr. Cannings for six minutes.

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

Mr. Chair, I realize that 30 seconds isn't enough time for the witnesses to cover the 21 recommendations, but I do expect a written answer.

[Francis Bilodeau]

We can get back to the committee with that.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Yes.

Again, the written answer could be about the review period, if you're not able to give the specific details asked for in the question.

Go ahead, Mr. Cannings.

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

Thank you.

We've heard a lot about the research ecosystem, etc.

This may have come up previously in the study, so I apologize if you or other people have answered this question. What's the percentage of research funding provided by ISED in universities across Canada? I imagine it's mainly through the tri-council. Do you have...?

He has some pie charts, I see.

[Francis Bilodeau]

I would like to be very accurate when we respond to you in terms of funding. We can definitely provide you with a breakdown of federal funding by federal, provincial and other [Inaudible—Editor].

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

I think it's important, because we're talking about research, universities and risks for national security.

One of the few sticks we keep hearing about is pulling funding from research projects that we consider too risky to fund, in terms of national security. However, if federal funding is only a small part of that funding, it seems to me there are other sources researchers at universities could go to. Sometimes, these are perhaps funding sources we would rather they not go to. That's all.

[Francis Bilodeau]

I will say that when it comes to research in post-secondary around Ph.D.s, the federal government is a significant contributor, but maybe Nipun could speak to that.

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

To your more general point about the reach of our actions, I think it's true that there is a lot of research that goes on that isn't funded through federal grants.

The prohibitions on federal grants do solve some of the problem. They also send a very clear signal to the research community on where the security concerns are, but we also have, as the minister mentioned, the research security centre, and the funding we've provided institutions has allowed a lot of institutions to actually hire a director of research security so that there's a natural point of contact between the security agencies that can help to identify risks and someone who is responsible for managing those risks at institutions.

It is true that you're not solving the whole problem through prohibitions on federal funding, but there are other layers that have been implemented to try to address those broader risks.

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

Are the security agencies relying on the universities, then, to bring issues to their attention or do they have some direct oversight?

[Dr. Nipun Vats]

It works both ways.

I wouldn't call it oversight, because there's not a jurisdictional kind of accountability. If there's a security threat, the security agencies would act on that threat. If there is a concern about risks, there would be a discussion. There would be information shared with institutions where appropriate—where it doesn't compromise our security interests—but it is also about developing a relationship with institutions where, as they have questions or concerns, they have a place to go, a trusted source of expertise and advice they can use to better mitigate risks on their campuses.