Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, I want to reassure people. I don't want to get the data, and I don't want the committee to get the data either. I just want us to find another way for researchers who are acting in good faith—again, I feel like I'm repeating myself, but so be it—who are doing research on research and who already have access to data through one of the three granting agencies. SSHRC has already collected the data. As far as I know, the other granting agencies have done so as well. I understand that passing on the data will add a bit to their workload, but it is vital and necessary to be able to analyze how scientific programs and policies are distributed, in particular. That's what I want to do today.
Once again, researcher Julien Larregue, who appeared publicly before the committee, submitted a brief during the study on research funding criteria. He said openly that as an experienced researcher in the field, he could not help analyze any inequities in the research system if he did not have the necessary data. He said he was capable of doing so, but that he didn't have the full picture, only one out of three components.
What we want is just to create a protocol. The granting agencies already collect data in a variety of ways. Once again, we don't want to get the data or analyze it. We simply want to find a way to ensure that the data these researchers need is transmitted to them in a structured and ethical manner, according to an established protocol. This is already being done, except that data governance is currently a problem. I think there's definitely a way to manage the process better, because two out of three people aren't saying the same thing.
Who is right? I think transparency always wins out, for the scientific community and also for public trust in the way public funds are managed.