Evidence of meeting #26 for Science and Research in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Jennifer McKelvie Liberal Ajax, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My question is for Dr. Bouchard.
I was wondering if you could speak to what you think some of the key objectives for capstone should be.
Also, earlier panels spoke to the risks of politicization. How do we ensure that we can bring capstone forward and keep politics out of it?
February 23rd, 2026 / 5:20 p.m.
Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
In the lacunas we observed in the current ecosystem, there was a fragmentation. There was a difficulty of eligibility for Canadian scientists to build collaboration with international partners and work with them. There was a worry that interdisciplinary research was difficult to support in the current set-up. It's not a lack of goodwill on the part of the actors, but the funding instruments are not designed to support interdisciplinary research.
One of the big things missing, which is becoming more and more important, is mission-oriented research. CIHR does that to some extent in the health sector, but if we had a large mission on, let's say, food security or on limiting foreign interference or other types of larger societal needs or capacities, those would be difficult to launch in the current set-up.
Those were the main gaps in the current funding. Overall, we were hoping that they would coordinate the efforts of the existing actors to make sure these problems are not just technological. As my witness colleague pointed out, social science and humanities are very important in addressing these issues. Sometimes it's a sociologist or an economist working with an engineer and with public health to identify how to establish food security. It's relatively difficult to do that right now, and the capstone organization was designed to do this.
I must say that with the increase in our defence commitments and with industrial strategies that will be adopted to support this, it becomes supremely important to have such instruments, if only to put the money from industry and universities together for a shared project.
There were other aspects to this, but that was the general set-up. It was that we needed some sort of quarterback to make sure that the whole team would move forward on the field.
Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
We're all human, so I guess there is always politics.
More seriously, the basic importance of peer review in committees was addressed earlier. The batting average of scientists in peer review is actually very good. It is imperfect and it is perfectible, but basically, if you have peers, you have to give them clear criteria, and the programs have to be well designed. To me, that's a separate issue, but if you give them the right criteria and the programs are well designed, external assessment can say whether this is good or this is bad.
A lot of the grants are actually assessed via committees. Scientists across Canada, who oftentimes also have international experience, see these reports in committees and say that this can work or this may not work. This is the gold standard in science across the world.
As pointed out in the previous panel, transparency can be increased and improved. There are various means of improving it, but it's not a bad idea to determine what good science is. In the same way, since I'm wearing a cast right now because I ripped my Achilles tendon, I want my orthopaedic surgeon to give me advice, and when I want more advice, I want to ask another orthopaedic surgeon. I don't want to ask an engineer. You want the experts to assess which projects are the ones with the highest quality.
Liberal
Jennifer McKelvie Liberal Ajax, ON
I'm not sure I have time, but you had three key recommendations or measures. Maybe you could repeat them. The first was capstone and the second was something on science and innovation, and there was a third. Could you just repeat what the second and third recommendations were?
Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
In terms of a national strategy, right now it's difficult to determine if the system is performing at the level we want, because it's not obvious what the goals are at the system level. We know what the goals of individual programs are, but we don't have an overall architecture for determining what the objectives are. Is it regional development? Is it commercialization? Is it patents? Is it HQP? Depending on what you choose in terms of science policy, you then adopt indicators to see whether you have progress.
Quebec has the Quebec strategy to support research and investment in innovation—
Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
—so it's possible to have such indicators.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Thank you, MP McKelvie.
We will now end this panel with MP Blanchette-Joncas.
You have two and a half minutes. Please go ahead.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Maltais, is there a structured mechanism in place today to assess the efficiency of incentives for science in French in light of the obligations set out in the Official Languages Act regarding vitality?
President, Association francophone pour le savoir
The simple answer is no.
There is no such thing.
Executive Director, Association francophone pour le savoir
Do we need one?
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
If this development requires measurable and longitudinal monitoring of scientific capacity in French, can it be sustainable if it relies on ad hoc measures rather than a structured monitoring architecture?
President, Association francophone pour le savoir
Clearly, there needs to be a structured monitoring architecture. Anyone who monitors indicators will tell you that.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
In your opinion, would an independent analysis and accountability feature, such as the topic of today's study, make it possible to ensure sustainable monitoring of this growth?
President, Association francophone pour le savoir
We think it's relevant to have that kind of follow-up. The fact that the capstone organization hasn't been created yet allows us to include indicators on scientific life in French and obligations through the capstone organization's internal committee, whose mandate would be to monitor investments in science in French and in the promotion and development of scientific life in French. I would remind you that 23% of Canada's population is French-speaking. However, scientific life in French is not at the same level as that of anglophones. That balance doesn't currently exist.
The opportunities for a young person to access knowledge written in French have been reduced to very little. The ability to translate research findings to make them accessible, both for students in courses and for public decision-makers in the state or hospitals, is a challenge. The most conclusive research results are used essentially in anglophone communities around the world, and they're produced by people who have another mother tongue. It's not just a francophone language issue, but in this country, it's a matter of identity.
Earlier, Ms. DeRidder said that it was necessary to attract talent. I agree with her. However, talent must be not only high-quality talent that meets the needs of Canadian industries, but also talent that respects Canadian values and identity. Yet, what's missing when recruiting foreign talent is just that. Who are they recruiting? Are we undermining science in French in what we're doing, or are we going to support it in all the decisions we're going to make about science and technology?
President, Association francophone pour le savoir
The issue, in our view, is the identity of the Canadian nation.
Executive Director, Association francophone pour le savoir
I'd like to add one last thing.
Executive Director, Association francophone pour le savoir
Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas, I remind you that the Government of Canada has commissioned a group of experts who will submit recommendations that will no doubt answer your question.
Conservative
President, Association francophone pour le savoir
She was saying that the group of experts who will produce a report in a month from now—in March—will give some answers to the question you raised.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Before we end this panel, I have a few things for the information of all members of this committee.
For Thursday, February 26, as yet we have only had three witnesses confirm.
For Monday, March 9, we only have two witnesses confirmed so far. We would need more suggested witnesses from members in order to have our usual six witnesses on two panels. The clerk has already gone through the list of suggested witnesses.
MP Noormohamed, go ahead.
