Science and Research Committee on Nov. 17th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

The time is up. We will now proceed to MP Mahal for five minutes. This is our second round of questioning.

MP Mahal, you have five minutes.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank all of the witnesses who came today for their time.

I want to continue with Ken Doyle.

Thanks for coming back to this committee. As you mentioned in the last part of your testimony today, there was a recent report that was released by Statistics Canada, titled “Survey on Research Activities and Commercialization of Intellectual Property in Higher Education, 2023”, and it was mysteriously taken down by the department after being released. Have you seen that report? You haven't seen that report.

According to that report, one in 10 R and D contracts are held with colleges. When it comes it dollars, are colleges punching above their weight when considering funding?

[Ken Doyle]

Yes, I believe at present the college sector receives about 2.5% or 3% of the federal investments in higher education research and development, so by extension, having 10% of the partnerships and contracts going to the college sector would show that, yes, we're comfortably punching above our weight.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

In the same report, it says that 51% of the IP licensing from post-secondary institutions is done with foreign organizations. What we are seeing is Canadian-made technology being commercialized in foreign countries, not in Canada.

[Ken Doyle]

Yes, that is unfortunate. I believe the report did mention how the university-derived intellectual property disclosures make up about 90% of what the report tracked and that more than 50% of these licences went to foreign organizations.

Just like for the last few decades, these brilliant, big ideas are being supported publicly in Canada and developed in Canada, but as I mentioned in my remarks, we go from invention to innovation and then stop. Other countries are more than happy to license that IP, fully commercialize it and sell it back to us as finished products, processes or services. That's probably what we have to shine a bigger spotlight on if we want to tackle the productivity and competitiveness issues.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

Thank you.

If we look at the current budget, we see that there is nothing much in the budget to support colleges and tech institutes. How do you feel that the room that is already stretched for private colleges when it comes to funding—in comparison to universities and bigger institutes—is going to impact the already-saturated market when it comes to funding? What do you think your performance is going to be in this competitive field?

[Ken Doyle]

That's an excellent question. Thank you.

It's a bit of a nuanced answer, where everything we do is collaborative with industry. The real beneficiaries of any activity that we undertake are these small Canadian companies that want to innovate. When we do hit funding obstacles, it's those companies that will suffer. Capacity will drop, and our capacity dictates how many companies we can assist each year, as well as how many students will benefit from experiential learning opportunities—both university and college students.

What I did find interesting in the budget was the productivity superdeduction, where there's support for advance write-offs for companies investing in technology adoption and increased supports for the scientific research experimental development tax credit, as well as the IP assist and elevate IP intellectual property supports. These are all well and good, but as the data has shown for decades now, Canadian companies don't invest in technology adoption, which doesn't put them in a position to do R and D, which means they can't create IP to then export.

While you mention there's not direct support for the colleges in the budget, I think there may be some indirect avenues for us to assist, mainly by being those objective innovation intermediaries that can support with recommendations, technology adoption, collaborative R and D, and validating that. Then, if it is protectable, it's getting those IP supports in place and scaled up to commercialization and export.

[Jagsharan Singh Mahal, Conservative, Edmonton Southeast, AB]

Thanks so much.

On a scale of one to 10, how satisfied are you with the current budget when it comes to college funding over university funding?

[Ken Doyle]

That's a great question. Thank you for that.

I've studied the budget closely. Given the fiscally constrained times we're in and the other turbulence out there, it's a very ambitious budget. Without, I guess, seeing how things are going to be implemented on the ground, I'd be reluctant to rate it out of 10. However, I'd probably have to give it a strong six or seven.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you. Time is up.

We will now proceed to MP Jaczek for five minutes. Please go ahead.

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

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

We've certainly heard some very interesting testimony from all three of our witnesses today. What struck me is that both Mr. Doyle at Tech-Access and Dr. McCauley at the University of Calgary have taken somewhat of a similar approach when it comes to what we're calling applied research.

In other words, Mr. Doyle, Tech-Access provides a single door. You assist entrepreneurs, industry and small businesses to potentially commercialize through assistance with applications for grants, etc.

The University of Calgary has had a number of successes also. One of the things that intrigues me from your testimony, Dr. McCauley, was your reference to “national research goals”. Has the University of Calgary become known for concentrating on certain research goals related to your environment in Alberta? How have you perhaps concentrated on specific areas of research?

[Edward McCauley]

We're a comprehensive research-intensive university, but we pride ourselves in looking provincially as well as nationally as to where we can contribute people and talent, as well as ideas. In essence, we've taken the approach that we need the right priorities, the right people and the right catalysts. The right priorities are around supporting our sector in the province of Alberta, for example, in the areas of energy, health, agriculture, finance and so on. We then look at the horizontals that support growth in those sectors, whether it be quantum applications or data science and so on.

Then really, yes, we have taken the approach of prioritization, but what's really interesting is that the contributions from across our university span all of our different faculties, as the problems in those areas are truly multidisciplinary, the solutions are truly multidisciplinary, and we're able to do that.

In essence, at a national level, I think it's obviously very important, given the limited resources we have, to focus on very important priorities around our sovereignty, around protection and around building a prosperous Canada.

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

Further to that, as a member of the U15, I presume you bring your ideas to U15, and consequently to ISED, to the minister, with these kinds of priorities in mind. To what extent have you heard about the federal government's desire to establish mission-driven kinds of priorities?

There has been talk of a capstone organization. Are you aware of those federal initiatives, and what is your opinion of them?

[Edward McCauley]

I've actually testified in front of this committee previously about the importance of mission-driven research. There really isn't a trade-off between discovery research and mission-driven research.

Canada is at a very important point internationally where we have to identify our priorities and identify where we want to lead on the world stage and where we want to contribute. That's where all universities and polytechnics, etc., across the country—all of our post-secondary institutions—are willing to contribute. The U15, because of the capacity and talent that we have, has some ability to provide results at scale, which are obviously really important. We're well aware of how the programs are being developed and so on.

The capstone, as was mentioned in the budget, provides that opportunity for us to have the discussion around how we actually deal with that mission-driven research and bring together all the different disciplines and expertise from across the country to actually solve those problems.

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

Thank you.

Dr. Hannigan, could you give us some of your thoughts on the enhancements to the scientific research and experimental development tax incentives? We've heard some skepticism from Mr. Doyle about the value of these. How do you see them fitting into the whole picture here?

[Timothy Hannigan]

Thank you for the question.

I think they're important, but they're underutilized. It needs to appear as one tool amidst several. My message here today is about strengthening ecosystems and strengthening the signals to encourage private investment, of which that is, as you've mentioned, one of the tools we can use.

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

Why do you think SR and ED is underutilized?

[Timothy Hannigan]

I haven't studied this, so at risk of being outside my expertise, what I will suggest is that it is underutilized because there isn't a particularly good reason to lean into it at a high level.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The time is up.

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

Please go ahead.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Doyle, you represent Tech‑Access Canada, which represents technology access centres or TACs, which are funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, or NSERC. The technology access centres include Quebec's college centres for technology transfer, or CCTTs.

Outside Quebec, a TAC receives $350,000 from NSERC, but a TAC in Quebec, such as Innovation Maritime, in my riding, receives just $100,000 even though it does the exact same work.

Moreover, some of Quebec's technology access centres do not receive any funding at all.

Is there any justification for this difference in treatment, in your opinion, or is it simply a structural inequality that has to be corrected?

[Ken Doyle]

I think it's a structural inequality that has to be corrected.

The centres in Quebec receive just $100,000 per year. Some centres designated as college centres for technology transfer receive $200,000. There are also some centres that won the technology access centre competition and they are not even designated as CCTTs.

It has been that way since the program was launched in 2012: $350,000 for the rest of Canada, but $100,000 for Quebec. Looking at the 192 federal research and development funding programs, this was the only example we found where the centres in Quebec are treated as second-class citizens. Correcting that inequality would cost less than $7 million per year.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

That's incredible, Mr. Doyle.

As you said, this inequality dates back to 2012. The network in Quebec has lost out on roughly $200 million in applied research as a result.

What would you say are the real consequences of that underfunding, specifically as to the ability of Quebec regions to support innovation, commercialization and small businesses?

[Ken Doyle]

No one has ever been able to give me a good explanation as to why the centres in Quebec receive a third of the funding provided elsewhere in Canada, or even why the amount of funding has not changed since 2012. Considering inflation and other factors, it should be about $500,000 per year, or $150,000 for the centres in Quebec.

Small and medium-sized enterprises are of course the losers in all of this because the centres cannot afford to fund the requests from their client SMEs. It should be noted that the centres in Quebec do not only serve SMEs. Their expertise and facilities are so great that they receive funding requests from all over the country and even internationally. So they have to make choices.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

So Quebec is really being ripped off—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, but the time is up.

Thank you, Mr. Doyle.

Now we have two and a half minutes with MP DeRidder, then two and a half minutes with MP Noormohamed, and then we will end this panel.

MP DeRidder, please go ahead. You have two and a half minutes.