Science and Research Committee on Feb. 27th, 2024

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

I think this is a difficult question. Perhaps I can help clarify.

When we do a report, for example, we always mention that this is based on the evidence available as of that date. If the information changes, then we'll take another look at it.

That's precisely what we're doing, actually, just this afternoon, with the long COVID. We've reconvened the expert committee one year after we put out the report because it was based on data up until December of 2022. Now there have been developments, and we're reconvening. We will put out—I don't know if it's going to be a correction, but it will be an update, for sure, on where the science is, and any further or newer recommendations that we will be providing will be based on that.

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

Have you considered studying anything to do with mental health limitations in Canada, and how science could relate to new treatments and analyzing what we're doing now?

Seemingly, a lot of Canadians are worried about addictions. What we are told by science and academia is that what they're doing in British Columbia should be utilized within the Liberal drug policy across Canada. I think there are many Canadians who are questioning whether academic analysis is the smart way to have a drug policy in Canada.

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

We recognize that this is a very important topic. Mental health and substance abuse are very important. Many years ago, we considered doing a study on that, but at the time Health Canada and the Public Health Agency were doing a study. We try not to duplicate studies. We take on things we believe require more than one department and so on. I cannot tell you whether we will revisit this or not, but, you know—

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

Did Health Canada shut you down, then?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

No, they didn't shut me down.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Okay, thank you.

Now we go to Dr. Jaczek for five minutes.

I understand you're splitting your time with—

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Yes. Ms. Kayabaga will take the first minute or so.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you so much.

I want to quickly ask this question.

We're talking about science integrity and transparency. Given that COVID-19 disproportionately impacted racialized communities, what lessons and infrastructure does your office think should be in place for the government to better respond to other pandemics and climate change impacts, as you mentioned?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

Thank you very much. This is a very important question, and one for which we had several expert committees that included sociologists, psychologists, communication experts and people from the community.

I think we need to be engaging with communities not only in a crisis but also on an ongoing basis. There's a lot to gain for everyone in doing so. It's one of the recommendations we already put out, and probably one you'll see again in our recommendations in terms of the use of science for emergencies.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Thank you so much for that, and thanks for that important question, Arielle.

I'll go back to funding for research activities in Canada.

Back in 2017—the year, in fact, you were appointed—Canada's fundamental science review made a number of recommendations. The one I'm particularly interested in is a formal coordinating board for Canada's research granting agencies. We've heard that overall, Canada is not spending as much as other OECD countries in terms of research and development. We have, of course, as you know, the granting agencies federally.

Would it be useful to have such a formal coordinating board to create some efficiencies if we are not going to increase the actual budget? Would there be some value in having this recommended coordinating board?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

I think this is a very important question.

I would say that we need to look at what others have done or are doing. I mentioned Quebec. Recently, they brought together their different granting bodies under one umbrella, which provides efficiencies and, above all, coordination—no gaps for certain fields.

I believe such an approach is also particularly important for what I would call mission-focused research and development activities. Other countries, such as Germany, Australia, the Netherlands and the U.K., have a single agency. I think that's definitely something that can and should be considered in the context of better alignment and to minimize duplications of programs for researchers. Every time you have a program, you have people applying, but you also have people reviewing. It's a lot for a small country like ours.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

I want to elaborate a bit on the role of scientific advisers within some departments. Those individuals report, presumably, up through the department. How do they relate to you? Could you elaborate a little?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

Yes, I can, with pleasure.

Actually, there was a recommendation to the government to enhance science advice in government, and it was based on the U.K. and New Zealand models.

Yes, these science advisers are usually seconded from outside of government for a specific period of time on a part-time or full-time basis. It depends. They report to the deputy minister of the department, but they also work with me and my office as part of a network. What we do together is look at horizontal issues. For example, they were involved in the science workforce and science integrity policy. We're developing some online learning modules together for science integrity and science advice.

Essentially, this approach provides departments and the government in general with increased deep expertise in different areas, and the department—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you. I think we got the thought.

We now go over to Monsieur Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Nemer, I'd now like to turn to our next topic, the concentration of research funding in higher education in Canada.

I'd like to hear what you have to say about this.

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

That's a very [Inaudible—Editor] question.

If I understand correctly, you want to know whether it is a good idea for universities or post-secondary institutions in different parts of the country, which may have different—

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

I'll be more specific, Ms. Nemer.

During our last studies, some researchers mentioned that a small number of researchers had access to the majority of funding. There is therefore a concentration of research funding in certain organizations, but also among certain researchers. As a result, fewer researchers are able to meet the conditions for obtaining funding.

As chief scientific adviser, do you think this is a problem for Canada?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

This probably affects Canada and all scientific circles, because sometimes success breeds success. We need to ensure that openness, inclusion and diversity are kept in mind when evaluating research projects and invitations to tender. If we don't do this, a small number of researchers will be working on a small number of subjects and there will be huge gaps in several areas. What's more, it's never good to always have the same bosses, the same thinkers, the same ideas.

In my career, I've often been a bit of an outsider. My research focused on the heart, even though I had never studied that organ. I didn't come with any background, which was very good, I think. That's important.

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

Okay.

When you talk about diversity, are you also referring to distributing funding more equitably in the smaller universities—that is, the small and medium-sized universities—rather than in the large universities, which claim a large proportion of research funding?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

Don't get me wrong: Everyone needs more investment in research, small and large universities alike.

It's important for small universities to thrive and for researchers to give young people a taste for research, to give them training and practical experience.

Moreover, these institutions are always—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you. That's what you were looking for.

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

Ms. Nemer, can you send a written response to the committee?

[Dr. Mona Nemer]

Yes, it would be a pleasure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

We're 30-plus seconds over.

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

Mr. Chair, I would like to receive a written response.