Science and Research Committee on April 30th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

I call the meeting to order. We'll get started.

Welcome to meeting number 83 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research.

You'll notice we are in a new room today, with a little bit more elbow room. That actually has to do with an audio incident that happened a few weeks ago.

I will remind members that we have to watch out for our interpreters and keep our headphones away from the microphone. Also, there's more space between one another so that our headphones don't interfere with our neighbours' microphones as well.

As indicated in the communiqué from the Speaker to all members on Monday, April 29, these measures have been taken to help prevent audio feedback incidents. All earpieces have been replaced by a model that greatly reduces the probability of audio feedback. The new earpieces are black in colour, whereas the former ones were grey. Use only the approved black earpieces. By default, all unused earpieces will be unplugged at the start of the meeting.

When you're not using your earpiece, please place it face down in the middle of the sticker that is in front of you at your desk. Consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents.

Also, the room layout has been adjusted so that we can also help reduce the risk to people who are using earpieces, including our interpreters, but also including us.

We want to conduct our business without interruption and to protect the health and safety of all participants. Thank you for your co-operation. Health and safety come first and foremost as what we have to pay attention to.

Today's meeting is in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. For those participating virtually, I'd like to outline a few rules.

Speak in the official language of your choice; interpretation services are available for the meeting. You can choose, at the bottom of your screen, whether to have floor, English or French. If the interpretation is lost at any time, please inform me, and I'll immediately suspend the meeting until it's restored.

Before speaking, wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, just click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. When you're not speaking, your mic should be on mute. As a reminder, all comments by members should be addressed through the chair.

With regard to a speaking list, the clerk and I will do our best to maintain the consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether they're participating virtually or in person.

We might have a group of students join us from Havergal College in Toronto, so we'll welcome them when they come—if they come. These meetings are open to the public, and we welcome anybody interested in science or in democracy to come to see what we're doing.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i) and the motions adopted by the committee on Tuesday, January 30, 2024, and Thursday, February 15, 2024, the committee resumes its study of the distribution of federal government funding among Canada's post-secondary institutions.

It's now my pleasure to welcome, from Conestoga College Institute of Technology and Applied Learning, Dr. Michelle Chrétien, vice-president for research and innovation.

From Loyalist College of Applied Arts and Technology, we have Dr. Kari Kramp, senior scientific manager, applied research and innovation, and Dr. Kalina Kamenova, director of applied research and innovation.

Online we have, from Okanagan College, Dr. Neil Fassina, president.

Welcome to all of you. Thank you for preparing to be with us this morning. You each have five minutes for your remarks.

We will start with Conestoga—my next door neighbour, and where two of my daughters graduated from.

It's over to you, Ms. Chrétien.

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien, Vice President, Research and Innovation, Conestoga College Institute of Technology and Applied Learning]

Thank you very much.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

As noted, my name is Michelle Chrétien. I'm the vice-president of research and innovation at Conestoga College.

I would like to begin by thanking this committee for undertaking this study on the allocation of federal research funding and for all the work that you're doing to ensure that Canada's research ecosystem remains vibrant, diverse and world class. I'm really honoured, honestly, to have been invited to appear before this committee, so thank you, Mr. Chair and members, for this opportunity.

Today, in keeping with the theme, I would like to speak to you about the role of colleges within Canada's research ecosystem through the lens of impact—the impact on students, on industry and community partners, and on knowledge translation.

In Canada, we are rightfully proud of our history of research excellence. This study provides an opportunity to look to the future and at how Canada's research funding dollars can be allocated to best position our country for success.

This is also perhaps an opportune moment to reflect on what Canadians expect from federal investment in research. Certainly, it's the creation of new knowledge, but perhaps also, and increasingly, it's the focused and efficient translation of this knowledge to industry and to public benefit.

Canada's colleges have strong ties to both industry and the communities that we serve. We believe that collaborator-driven applied research can empower our partners to create economic and social impact while also providing our students with the opportunity to learn in rich experiential environments.

A significant portion of our research funding goes to ensuring that students benefit from the experience of collaborative, practical, solutions-driven, applied research that creates impact for small and medium-sized enterprises and communities while also sowing the seeds for a more innovative industry and public sector in the future.

This past year, grant funds at Conestoga supported more than 250 students from 45 different academic programs to engage in research projects at the college. If we collectively aspire to build Canada's research capacity and develop the full spectrum of talent, we need to ensure that this funding is more broadly available. When we engage undergraduate students in applied research, we're creating a future workforce that understands and values innovation.

I'd like to provide a few really quick examples of the type of work that our students and our faculty are engaged in.

Currently, students from our school of engineering are working with a local start-up, Vortex Technology Group, to develop a novel supercapacitor energy storage technology for fast and efficient electric vehicle charging. This project is beyond conception; Vortex is now expanding its technology demonstration sites with local utilities and partnering with the well-known EV charging infrastructure player, Flo.

In our food research and innovation lab—it's my favourite, although I'm not supposed to have favourites—students are working to address food waste using novel approaches to upcycle spent grains from the brewing industry. Through this project, we have helped a company, Terra Bioindustries, to develop and launch two new products to domestic and international markets.

It's not just in science and engineering that we have impact. Students and faculty in our social innovation lab are currently collaborating with local credit unions to explore innovative solutions to housing affordability through novel co-operative models and unique financial products, such as rent to own.

There are more examples and I would love to tell you about them, but unfortunately the scope and scale of this work is limited by the availability of funds. As I know you will have heard in previous testimony, less than 3% of the nearly $4 billion invested by the federal government went to support this type of community-driven research last year.

The advisory panel on the federal research support system specifically identified an inability to respond quickly to emerging societal and economic needs as one of the greatest gaps of the current funding system. These examples, I hope, demonstrate how colleges are addressing this gap by responding to the pressing and topical challenges of business and society. Just imagine what we could do with the right-sized investment.

While Canada has historically underperformed in translating our strengths in science and research into marketable innovations that benefit Canadians, this gap in translating innovation to impact is precisely where colleges and CEGEPs shine. Unfortunately, this capacity is somewhat under-recognized and under-leveraged.

While I agree that there does exist a disparity in research funding between large and small institutions, as I know this committee has heard, I would also suggest that the current funding allocation model undervalues certain types of research, even though applied research and incremental innovation of the type led by colleges can lead to big impacts for a country and an economy made up of small businesses.

In conclusion, I would like to again express my gratitude for the opportunity to appear today before this committee and share the important role that colleges play in creating social and economic prosperity for Canadians.

Together, let's rethink how research investment is evaluated and allocated, and reimagine colleges and CEGEPs as full partners in Canada's research and innovation ecosystem.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you, Dr. Chrétien.

Now, from Belleville's Loyalist College in the Bay of Quinte, it's Dr. Kramp or Dr. Kamenova.

Who is starting? It's Dr. Kramp.

The floor is yours for five minutes.

[Dr. Kari Kramp, Senior Scientific Manager, Applied Research and Innovation, Loyalist College of Applied Arts and Technology]

Thank you.

Through you, Chair, it is my privilege to be here today with my colleague Dr. Kalina Kamenova as representatives of Loyalist College. We are here to share with you our 20-plus years of experience in post-secondary research and innovation.

Loyalist College is a small and vibrant college in eastern Ontario, with several locations: Belleville, Bancroft, Port Hope and Tyendinaga. It serves a population of approximately 250,000, made up of many small rural communities. Our mandate is to provide an inclusive learning environment and a collaborative applied research network that creates shared value for students, industry, community and our indigenous partners.

Each year, we open our doors to almost 4,000 students who enrol in over 70 full-time diploma, certificate and apprenticeship programs aligned with our region's social, economic and environmental priorities.

Research and innovation at our college have benefited from federal funding. Through CFI, we've expanded our laboratory space and invested in state-of-the-art equipment, providing an environment for students to experience learning and for college-industry partnerships to thrive. Over the past five years, our NSERC-supported Centre for Natural Products has become a nationally recognized technology access centre, a TAC. Our TAC has supported over 71 small businesses and completed over 165 projects. This has led to the development and improvement of products and processes for many businesses across sectors, including natural products, food and beverage, and cosmetics and personal care.

We were the first college in Canada approved to conduct research activities on cannabis, and we received our Health Canada licence approval for psilocybin this past year.

We are currently advancing social innovation and community health at Loyalist with funding through NSERC's Mobilize program. Our Centre for Healthy Communities leverages the expertise of our community partners in the health care and social services sector to enable action that addresses the growing needs in our community for health and wellness support.

For the fourth consecutive year, Loyalist has been named as one of Canada's top 50 research colleges. We consider our small size to be our biggest strength. We listen and adapt to the evolving needs of the industries and communities we serve. We engage a diverse student body in order to foster a culture of innovation. Finally, we equip the future workforce with the skills needed to ensure Canadian businesses and community organizations have the tools to grow.

[Dr. Kalina Kamenova, Director, Applied Research and Innovation, Loyalist College of Applied Arts and Technology]

Good morning. I am pleased to be here to make the case for stronger funding for applied research at small post-secondary institutions like Loyalist College, which are deeply connected to their local communities.

Our capacity to provide valuable solutions to economic, social, health and policy issues is largely dependent on timely access to tri-council and Canadian Foundation for Innovation funding. With the current level of federal research funding, we face considerable constraints in addressing local and national priorities related to community health, climate adaptation, labour market development, affordable housing and the bioeconomy.

While we recognize the importance of investment in discovery research, we are here to highlight the value proposition of industry-driven and community-driven applied research.

At Loyalist, applied research goes beyond serving the immediate R and D needs of our partners. Our labs and centres of research excellence attract and retain regional talent, create employment opportunities, make local businesses more competitive and strengthen our communities.

More equitable funding distribution to the college sector will bring tangible social and economic benefits to our region. Increasing the level of federal funding from 3.1% to 6% will have a transformational impact on Canada's college research ecosystem. It will expand the existing funding programs and establish challenge funds for applied research that responds to urgent sectoral needs.

I have two additional considerations for this committee.

First, enhanced funding for NSERC-funded technology access centres—TACs—will benefit the college sector. Seed funding provided by this program supports specialized research centres that provide timely research and training services to private, public and non-profit organizations. Colleges rely heavily on TAC grants for building enhanced expertise and technological capacity for regional economic development and social innovation. At the current funding levels, securing funding for new TACs is becoming extremely difficult.

Second, through their industry-friendly intellectual property approach, colleges drive innovation and maximize productivity in the Canadian economy. Our sector needs federal funding programs that provide wraparound supports for IP development and commercialization for local partners. IP protection is a pillar of the innovation economy and—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

We will have to call it there. I'm sorry, but we are over the time. Maybe we can get the rest in through the question-and-answer portion.

Now we will go to Dr. Fassina from Okanagan College for five minutes. Welcome.

[Dr. Neil Fassina, President, Okanagan College]

Good morning. My name is Neil Fassina.

I am the president of Okanagan College in British Columbia.

My route to becoming a college president is somewhat unusual, having started my academic career in three U15 universities, followed by a vice-presidency at a polytechnic and a presidency at a research-intensive university. I mention my career path only insofar as it has provided me with an invaluable insight into the different and complementary roles of colleges, polytechnics and universities in the Canadian research ecosystem.

Colleges occupy a special space in the post-secondary landscape because they are deeply embedded in the communities we serve. Aligning with the needs of our communities, colleges provide relevant and responsive solutions that empower people of all ages and from all walks of life to transform themselves and the communities they call home.

Regrettably, most Canadians have limited awareness of the significant impact colleges have in this country. They know colleges offer amazing entry to practice by reskilling or upskilling learning opportunities. What is less understood, however, is the high-impact applied research taking place in our communities in partnership with colleges across all sectors of the economy.

Imagine, if you will, not an individual, but a team of highly qualified professionals and students collectively helping a community, an entrepreneur, a business or a government solve a real-life problem by applying the same rigorous scientific methods used by scholars throughout the world.

Team-based applied research thrives in the college environment because the primary goal of these teams is to strengthen the social, economic and cultural fabric of the communities, rather than publishing their work downstream so that they can be credited with advancing a field of practice. These teams stay laser-focused on the problem at hand, because they are not concerned about complex IP agreements, as IP stays whole and with the research partner. In short, these teams are driven to find affordable, effective and scalable solutions to real-world problems.

“Where's the benefit to the college?”, you may ask. It's in the immediate impact on our communities, with demonstrable outcomes typically occurring within one to three years. It is in the impact on our learners, who will take the skills they develop through applied research to become lifelong innovators in our communities. It is in the impact in our classrooms as the applied research projects inform our curriculum.

That said, colleges face a disproportionate challenge in the research space, to a great extent because they're much newer.

When we compare the relatively short history of applied research in colleges to the lengthy history of pure research in universities, one might draw on the analogy of comparing an entrepreneurial start-up to an established corporation. Colleges have bootstrap resources to create a thriving research start-up that has a real-life impact in our communities, having been supported by what amounts to minimally viable research infrastructure. Anyone who has been an entrepreneur or has worked with one knows, however, that the transition from start-up to scale-up requires investment.

Drawing further on this analogy, the applied research environments of colleges have exhausted the “friends and family” round of fundraising and are now in need of real external equity to scale up and create a parity of impact alongside our university partners.

We have reached a turning point in our storyline, at which the contemporary and impactful role of applied research in colleges needs to be valued with the same respect and esteem as the pure research environments of universities. By investing resources and supporting research projects and the underlying research infrastructure in both of these complementary systems, Canada is poised to become a global innovation hub.

To truly recognize the power of complementarity, however, colleges need to be supported differently from universities. If the applied research arena of colleges is assumed to be the same as a university or is restricted by requiring university partners, then the true impact of applied research will be proportionately diminished.

Take, for example, an area in which college applied research teams shine: supporting organizations through the innovation valley of death. There is funding that supports pure research, which is incredibly valuable in the university context, and private equity supports the scaling and development of a product that has been proven to be commercially viable. In between those two areas is the space where colleges do their applied research.

Colleges fill this gap by providing research and development support, proof of concept and high-fidelity testing that is financially unattainable for small start-up organizations. For example, at Okanagan College, we have a CFI- and NSERC-funded biology lab that helps start-up food and beverage companies test for bacterial contamination so that they can get their product to market more quickly. This lab has equipment that small companies won't be able to access, and they don't have the expertise to use it. Having access to it at Okanagan College means the difference between these entrepreneurs being limited to farmers markets versus becoming a commercially viable food producer to address issues of food security.

In closing, I would encourage the committee to consider the real-life impact of applied research that happens in our communities in partnership with colleges across the country. This impact is within reach of being scalable, but only if colleges are treated with the same respect and esteem extended to our university colleagues through support for research and its underlying infrastructure in colleges and independent of the support for universities. In doing so, you can empower innovators, entrepreneurs, communities and governments to be innovation hubs, thereby transforming the communities that we all call home.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you, Dr. Fassina.

Now we'll go to Ms. Rempel Garner for the first six-minute round.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Chrétien, we've had witnesses suggest the committee recommend to the government that a post-secondary institution's eligibility for federal research funds be tied to housing affordability metrics within the region the institution resides. Would Conestoga College support this recommendation?

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

Just to be sure that I understand the question, did you say that a member of the committee had suggested that federal research funding—

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

No, these were witnesses.

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

Witnesses have suggested federal research funding be associated with housing affordability in the post-secondary institution's region. Is that correct?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Yes.

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

I don't know. That's a complex question. I'd want to think about it and look at some data. I'm a scientist. That's what I do.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

This morning, about an hour ago, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation published a story entitled “Conestoga College under fire by students, union leaders for aggressive international student recruitment”. The article goes into great detail about the deplorable living conditions Conestoga students are facing and the poor conditions faculty are facing due to the massive uptick in international student permits being issued at your institution, apparently without a plan to house the students.

Is your hesitation to support a recommendation to tie eligibility for federal research funding to housing affordability metrics related to this situation?

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

I wouldn't characterize my response as a hesitation to support a recommendation, but rather a lack of information to provide an informed answer to your question—

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you. I have a short period of time.

Conestoga College posted a $106-million surplus for the 2022-23 fiscal year, up from $2.5 million in 2014-15, largely due to international student tuition, yet the CBC article says that Conestoga College instructors say that many of the institution's students now “don't have the basic three Rs: reading, writing, arithmetic”.

Why should an institution be eligible for federal research funding when it can't even meet the basic educational needs of the students from whom it's making its surplus?

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

I think the data would indicate that students graduating from Conestoga College are actually meeting the requirements of our regional workforce. I think the statistic is that 90% of our graduates are employed in their field of choice within six months of graduation, which is actually above the Ontario provincial average.

Our employer satisfaction rate with students graduating from Conestoga College programs is about 92%, which is on par with Ontario KPIs, the key performance indicators.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

The CBC article suggests that the instructors at Conestoga College, as well as the students, have a differing opinion.

Another article from last fall said:

As Conestoga College comes under fire for soaring international student enrolment highlighting affordability concerns and a lack of student housing, numbers out of the Cambridge Food Bank are also painting a concerning picture.

According to the food bank, approximately 2,000 students and their dependents have come through its door in 2023—

—the same year your institution posted a $100-million-plus surplus—

—with each receiving a referral back to the college and the school's various...assistance programs.

Should an institution be eligible for federal research funding when it has taken in so many international students that many of them are forced to go to food banks?

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

One of our research partners is actually the Cambridge Food Bank, so it's also an institution that benefits from the minds of our students and our faculty in terms of addressing these challenges.

The point I would make is that federal research investment in colleges, CEGEPs and polytechnics doesn't stay with the college or the CEGEP, but is rather a flow-through model that allows our students and our faculty to engage in the type of research that my colleagues and I have described, which has an impact economically and socially.

I would separate the difference between federal investment in research funding as revenue to a post-secondary institution versus a flow-through to student benefit.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Building on that remark, in your role as vice-president of research, have you expressed any concerns to your board or to those higher up your food chain about the ethics of pursuing a research enterprise that includes sponsored research from industry at your college, given the unsustainable situation facing your students and instructors due to the international student permitting levels?

[Dr. Michelle Chrétien]

I've been in my current role as vice president of research and innovation since about February, so I have not had the opportunity to present to our board. I'm fairly new in this role.

In my role, which is research and innovation, my portfolio doesn't include student recruitment—

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

But now, since you're in front and have an opportunity, do you think that it is ethical for an institution like yours, where there are so many international students that can't be housed and 2,000 people going to food banks, to pursue federal funds and industry funds that are going into the operation of a research enterprise when your instructors and students are saying they can't afford to live—the students' stories in this article are something—and your instructors are saying that it's difficult for them to provide for the basic education needs of these students? Do you personally, in your role, think that these are...that perhaps there's a link here?

Building on that, do you think that there's any reputational risk to federal granting councils to grant funds to institutions like yours when, in my opinion, there is clearly an ethical dilemma?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you. You are unfortunately right at the time, but if there's anything in writing, we can accept that into the committee.

Now we're going to Dr. Jaczek for six minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all our witnesses.

I've certainly been most impressed by the testimony we've heard at this committee from colleges and small universities on the need to look very carefully at the distribution of federal funds. I think the benefits of applied research have been made very clearly, as well as the benefits of retaining local talent and allowing small businesses within the communities to thrive through the products that are produced.

Having said that, I think I'll start with Dr. Fassina.

You made reference to supporting colleges differently. In a practical sense, do you have some suggestions as to how the tri-councils should actually look at funding when they look at applications coming in from across the spectrum, from U15, from small universities, from colleges? What sort of criteria should they be looking at when they decide on their allocation of funds?