Science and Research Committee on May 9th, 2024

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Can you provide us with the most recent output that could help our committee's study on Arctic research? Then we could also appreciate the critical role that ArcticNet is playing in these discussions. I'm thinking of the Arctic Council, which was mentioned earlier. What's the interface between ArcticNet and the Arctic Council?

[Dr. Christine Barnard]

The leadership—Jackie Dawson, me and Philippe—sit on various working groups of the Arctic Council. We're also looking to fund Canadian Arctic experts to sit on these working groups to contribute to assessments that touch on various themes, such as biodiversity, contaminants and fresh water across the north.

ArcticNet brings experts to the table and sits on these working groups to make sure the information trickles down to the research community. I think one of the biggest problems, perhaps, in Canada is that when we have some agencies sitting at these tables, there isn't a trickling down of information to the research community.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

There is a gap—

[Dr. Christine Barnard]

There is a gap.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

—and Canada, being one of the eight founding members of the Arctic Council, has always been respected. However, if there's a gap, we need to identify that in our study.

[Dr. Christine Barnard]

Yes, we do, absolutely. I'd be happy to share our science priorities report with you.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

That's terrific.

I only have 30 seconds left. I'm thinking of budget 2024, with $46.9 million over five years going through Natural Resources Canada to the polar continental shelf program. How does that interface...?

[Dr. Christine Barnard]

That's extremely important. It's providing researchers and northerners access to remote sites to conduct research. One of my points specifically addressed that we don't have the funds to meet the demand to access these remote sites.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

This funding includes travel, and it includes expenses for people to get to those expensive-to-reach places.

[Dr. Christine Barnard]

Yes, it's logistical support, whether it be for fixed aircraft, airplanes or whatever else you need to access those remote sites. It's also for the possibility of staying in Resolute Bay before you're brought to other remote sites.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

We just have to pass our budget.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

Thank you very much, Dr. Barnard.

We will now have MP Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My next question is for Dr. Voyer.

Dr. Voyer, I want to come back to what you said a little earlier about the importance of co‑construction of scientific research projects with indigenous communities.

The committee's last study was on the concentration of research funding. Some universities share the vast majority of the funding. To be more specific, 15 universities receive 80% of research funding across Canada.

Do you think it would be beneficial for everyone if more money went to universities, or study or teaching centres that do scientific research and are close to those scientific research activities? For example, I'm thinking of Yukon University and Aurora College, which are directly on site.

Currently, the distribution of funding means that they aren't necessarily able to carry out scientific research on issues that closely affect their territory.

[Dr. Normand Voyer]

That's a great question. It takes a long time to build up a research tradition. Training doesn't happen overnight. A great deal of effort has been invested in the creation of the Nunavik Research Centre and other centres such as the Aurora Research Institute and the Yukon Research Centre. It's going to take time. However, these university training centres are already engaged in research activities and already receive funding.

I'm not in a position to answer the question about whether they receive enough to meet all their needs. Is it normal for 85% of research funding to be concentrated in 15 institutions? If we did an audit, we would probably find that the same is true in the United States and in the other G7 countries. However, research funding must be allocated to co‑construction projects that will directly affect the communities.

I'm talking about carrying out projects that are relevant for Inuit, for northern communities, which would require specific programs. We're currently trying to export existing programs from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, or NSERC, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, or CIHR, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, or SSHRC, and the Canada Foundation for Innovation. We are trying to tie these programs to the reality of northern communities, which is completely inappropriate. There is a need to review the way funding is done—

[The Chair, Liberal, Valerie Bradford]

I'm sorry. I'm afraid that's a bit over, and we're getting close to the end of the meeting. Thank you.

For our final round of questions, we'll go to MP Boulerice for two and a half minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Dr. Voyer, it was fascinating to hear your explanation of this small plant that is used to make tea but that could have side effects as a result of climate change. You made a very precise point about a real situation.

You also said that, in the north, there are no laboratories that analyze water safety. Is that correct?

[Dr. Normand Voyer]

In fact, there are labs, but they are underfunded, and their facilities are insufficient. In addition, the staff who use them aren"t properly trained. This is particularly true in Nunavik. I don't really know what the situation is in Nunavut, but the fact remains that drinking water is a major problem for northern communities. The instrument is absolutely necessary for the communities to be able to do certain checks. Now there are emerging pollutants. It's no longer just a matter of checking for coliforms or for safe water.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

There are perfluorinated compounds, PFAS.

[Dr. Normand Voyer]

There are indeed PFAS. There are now rare earth mines and nickel mines, which can release radioactive elements. So we need labs that are much better equipped and staff who are better trained to analyze water.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

You said that investments were needed, if only to maintain capabilities.

[Dr. Normand Voyer]

Absolutely.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

We're not even talking about development yet.

[Dr. Normand Voyer]

Right. Having instruments is one thing, but using them properly and optimally is another.