Evidence of meeting #36 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 procurement.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

Belzile  Acting Executive Director, Research, École de technologie supérieure
Shorey  President and Chief Executive Officer, Invest Ottawa
Pawluk  President and Chief Executive Officer, RaceRocks
Church  Associate Professor, Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, University of New Brunswick, As an Individual
Huebert  Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
Doyle  Executive Director, Tech-Access Canada

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 36 of the Standing Committee on Science and Research. We are meeting today to resume our study on Canada's dual-use and defence research needs.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of all the witnesses and members. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. I remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

I would like to welcome our three witnesses for our first panel. Today, we are joined by Jean Belzile, acting executive director, research, representing École de technologie supérieure, by video conference. Our next witness for this panel is Sonya Shorey, president and chief executive officer, representing Invest Ottawa, joining by video conference. Our third witness for today is Anita Pawluck, president and chief executive officer, representing RaceRocks. She's here in person. Welcome.

All witnesses will have five minutes for their opening remarks, and then we will go the rounds of questioning.

We will begin with Mr. Belzile.

Welcome. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks. You have the floor. Go ahead.

Jean Belzile Acting Executive Director, Research, École de technologie supérieure

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the committee members for this invitation.

You may not be familiar with the École de technologie supérieure, or ETS, as it's a school specializing exclusively in engineering. However, it's the second-largest engineering faculty in Canada. For a number of years, we have been working to transform research‑based technologies into concrete solutions, in collaboration with industry and in response to operational needs. It is precisely in this transition from innovation to deployment that a strategic challenge for Canada in the areas of defence and dual-use technologies is currently being played out.

The main challenge facing Canada is the difficulty in rapidly adopting and integrating research-driven innovations into concrete capabilities, particularly in the areas of defence and dual-use technologies. Canada already has a recognized innovation system, but current mechanisms do not always allow for these innovations to be deployed and adopted quickly enough, within time frames compatible with operational needs. This challenge is concentrated in the critical phases—prototyping, testing and integration—where current mechanisms remain slow, fragmented and ill-suited.

In concrete terms, technologies developed in Canada take too long to reach the field or are deployed more quickly abroad. Consequently, Canada bears the costs of research without always reaping the benefits. The result is a loss of strategic and economic value and increased reliance on external solutions. This directly affects our technological sovereignty and our ability to take action.

This is not due to a lack of research capacity. It's not about rebuilding; it's about activating what already exists. It is precisely in this critical zone between research and integration that applied research models strongly integrated with industry, such as that of our institution, are found.

At ETS, a number of researchers have been working for many years on projects related to security, defence and dual-use technologies, in collaboration with industrial and institutional partners. My own career as a professor is based on these collaborations. These activities are supported by an integrated ecosystem that links research, validation and technology transfer to industry.

For example, the vast majority of research conducted at ETS translates directly into technology transfers to industrial partners. We work in close partnership with major companies such as Thales, Safran and CAE. Our partnerships notably include fields such as critical communications, aerospace and embedded systems. We develop and test technologies in real-world or near-real-world conditions.

At the same time, our technology incubator, Centech, supports emerging companies developing dual-use technologies in cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and autonomous systems. This ecosystem is reinforced by environments like Ax.c, a collaborative platform that directly connects operational needs with incubators, emerging companies, established companies and researchers.

These capacities are already being mobilized in concrete projects, in collaboration with industrial partners and in response to operational issues, particularly through federal programs like the IDEaS program. Our prototyping platforms enable us to rapidly mitigate technology risks and prepare them for integration into existing systems. This model is already significantly reducing the time between research and its practical application.

The challenge today is not to create new capabilities, but to expand and further connect this type of model to defence needs, ahead of requests. It is by strengthening this network among researchers, industry and end-users that we can sustainably accelerate the deployment of innovations on the ground.

Canada already has the capabilities it needs to act. The main challenge today is not a lack of research, but our ability to better connect these capabilities to real-world needs from the very beginning.

At ETS, our applied research model, developed in partnership with industry, enables us to develop, test and transfer innovative technologies quickly to users. This model works. The challenge now is to deploy it more widely, particularly to address defence needs.

Therefore, the priority is clear: connect existing capabilities, integrate defence end-users from the outset, and enable rapid testing and validation cycles. Otherwise, Canada will continue to develop technologies that it does not deploy, to the benefit of others. Canada has the means to act. It must now put them to use.

Thank you very much.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Thank you.

We will now go to Ms. Shorey, president and chief executive officer of Invest Ottawa.

Please go ahead. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks.

Sonya Shorey President and Chief Executive Officer, Invest Ottawa

Thank you, Chair and members of the committee.

Canada is at a defining moment.

The global security environment is shifting rapidly—and with it, the expectations on Canada to build sovereign capability, strengthen our armed forces and contribute meaningfully to our allies.

We are facing a once-in-a-generation opportunity. With the Government of Canada committing 5% of GDP to defence, the question is not simply how much we spend; it's how we leverage that investment. This is about execution and impact, and this depends on one thing: how well we mobilize our national ecosystem.

Canada has extraordinary assets: world-class universities, colleges and hospitals; a highly skilled workforce; federal labs; industry; ambitious entrepreneurs; start-ups and scale-ups; Canadian anchors and multinationals; and our investment and innovation landscape. They must work together to achieve a shared vision and shared goals.

These assets cannot operate in parallel. They must be a fully coordinated system at the scale of this investment—from programs to platforms, from inputs to outcomes, from fragmentation to integration. Defence, investment, innovation, research, procurement and economic growth are one system. This is how every dollar of the 5% delivers maximum national value.

The first recommendation is to have a national inventory and strategic alignment. We must conduct a capability assessment across industry, academia, government and the investment and entrepreneurship ecosystem—not a static report, but a living, dynamic map of Canadian capability. This would enable us to identify where we can lead globally and to target investments where we punch above our weight. This is how investment delivers global leadership, not just participation, aligning research, funding and procurement to mission and ensuring the 5% GDP investment is directed with precision and purpose.

In Canada's capital region, we have taken this approach. Ottawa-Gatineau has a concentration of defence assets, expertise and innovation that does not exist anywhere else in the country. Through our global defence innovation hub strategy, we are putting them to work. We are pursuing $3 billion in collective investment to unlock 18,000 new jobs and $9 billion in GDP, while strengthening sovereign capabilities. We are ambitiously pursuing moon shots, from the headquarters of the Defence, Security and Resilience Bank to the spinoff of the Canadian Photonics Fabrication Centre into a commercial compound stand-alone semiconductor fab. Every region in this country has distinct strengths. Combine them regionally. Connect them nationally. That is the blueprint.

Recommendation two is to leverage and integrate core infrastructure. Canada has already made major investments that are critically important in NRC, granting councils, academic research programs, regional development agencies and initiatives like BOREALIS, NATO DIANA and the forthcoming national AI strategy. The opportunity is to connect them and layer in new investment where opportunity exists and where we can punch above our weight. We must capture both funded and unfunded concepts in a national innovation pipeline so they can be connected, recombined and deployed as priorities evolve. New defence spending can't simply add volume. It must build an integrated, cohesive, collaborative national ecosystem.

Recommendation three is to accelerate lab-to-deployment and procurement pathways. The success of this investment will be measured by one thing: what reaches our forces and allies. In Canada's capital region, we're advancing this through Area X.O, developed by Invest Ottawa—our ITB-qualified R and D complex and NATO DIANA test centre serving dynamic companies—with integrated testing, direct DND and Canadian Armed Forces end-user engagement, and procurement vehicles enabling early-stage deployment.

The pathway must be consistent and continuous: research, test, validate, procure and scale. Procurement must be integrated from the outset. We must support multi-company consortia as well, because defence customers don't buy components. They buy integrated systems. Consortia allow us to build mission-ready capability, compete globally and export to allied markets.

Recommendation four is to further invest in and deepen industry-academic-government research collaboration. We must simply double down on collaboration and the investment required to scale it. We applaud the $1.6 billion in budget 2025 for research. We must build on this to keep pace with other nations and maximize our impact where the opportunity is greatest. This means more applied collaborative research, stronger industry-academic partnerships, accelerated commercialization and a relentless focus on homegrown capability. We must also attract trusted, values-aligned capital from allied nations, ensuring global investment strengthens our sovereignty.

Our post-secondary institutions here—Algonquin, Carleton, La Cité and uOttawa, which is a U15 research-intensive university—are already delivering. They are training future tech and trades leaders, collaborating with entrepreneurs, DND and global partners, and harnessing deep expertise in autonomy, drones, quantum, aerospace, cyber, AI and Arctic solutions. Research-intensive universities, colleges and hospitals are core engines of innovation and infrastructure.

We have the talent, the capability and the investment. Every dollar must strengthen our forces, protect our country and serve our allies. Let's build the strongest, most sovereign Canada together.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Thank you.

Now we will proceed to Ms. Pawluk for five minutes.

Please go ahead.

Anita Pawluk President and Chief Executive Officer, RaceRocks

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Anita Pawluk. I'm a proud Métis woman from St. Louis, Saskatchewan—Treaty No. 6 territory—and CEO of RaceRocks, an indigenous-owned, women-led technology company with over a decade of experience in the defence sector. We have delivered over $20 million in training systems to the Royal Canadian Navy and generated over $40 million in industrial technological benefits with major defence primes.

Innovation is at the core of everything we build and deliver. It is what makes our products and services effective in the field. The defence industrial strategy rightly identifies dual-use technologies as central to Canada's defence commitments. This is precisely the space we operate in, and I want to show you what that looks like in practice.

The Canadian Coast Guard, western region, has built strong partnerships with over 70 coastal nations on domain awareness and security. Together, they've built the framework for an integrated marine workforce.

RaceRocks is the technology partner behind CSR, a coastal security readiness system. A shared governance structure gives coast guards, coastal nations and commercial operators their own advisory boards, with observer seats across them, in order to keep mariner standards aligned. There are three outcomes: workforce development, coastal security and Canadian export capacity. That is what dual-use looks like when it works. It's our experience navigating these innovation programs first-hand that has taught us the most important lessons we bring to the committee today.

The existing architecture has gaps, some specific to indigenous businesses and some undermining Canada's ability to build sovereign industrial capability.

First, eligibility criteria are built around established firms, existing IP, revenue history and access to private capital for cost sharing. These are barriers that compound for indigenous SMEs that may have the capability and proven track record but not yet the balance sheet.

Second, when flexibility is communicated to indigenous businesses, it is not designed into the program. At a PacifiCan RDII session, a government slide explicitly stated that indigenous-led businesses may be offered more flexible funding terms. When we followed up, we were redirected to the standard online application. No criteria were listed. No indigenous pathway was described. The commitment in the communication was there, but it was never designed into the program.

Third is what I most want the committee to understand. Current innovation systems have no bridge between validation and commercialization. RaceRocks delivered a fast-boat full-motion simulator with VR headset to the Royal Canadian Navy through the innovative solutions Canada testing stream. The navy rated it five out of five stars. It was validated and is still in use today. However, the navy had no procurement budget. Without a contract to purchase the technology, commercialization could not proceed. That is not a technology gap. That is a systems design gap, and it is costing Canada the sovereign industrial capacity it is trying to build.

Indigenous business owners in Canada represent an extraordinary range of backgrounds, structures and relationships. Some offer this independent of community structures. We have proven federal delivery track records, and we have demonstrated capability. The government counts us towards its 5% indigenous procurement target, but it does not extend that same recognition when we apply for innovation support. That is not a gap in intent. That is a gap in design.

We are asking for one thing: consistency. If the government counts on indigenous businesses when it spends, we ask that it count on us when it invests. A clear indigenous business pathway, evidenced by completed federal contracts, technical validations and indigenous business directory certification, is a chance to close that gap.

Canada cannot meet its NATO commitments through large primes alone. Dual-use R and D distributed across indigenous SMEs is exactly the kind of industrial base the defence industrial strategy calls for.

Indigenous businesses are ready to be part of Canada’s defence commitments. We are asking for a system that is ready for us.

Thank you.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Thank you, Ms. Pawluk.

With that, we will go to our rounds of questioning.

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

Madam Chair....

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Yes, MP Baldinelli.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

Before we begin, I'll ask for a point of clarification.

I was hoping you could share with us, publicly, the status of committee invitations to the Minister of National Defence, the Minister of Industry, the Minister of Public Works and Procurement, the Secretary of State for Defence Procurement and the CEO of the Defence Investment Agency.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

I will share it, but the email was sent out to all members. I hope everyone got the email.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

For the public at home—for Canadians, who are our taxpayers—I would like that information to be made known, Madam Chair. If you could share that with us publicly, it would be greatly appreciated.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Just to clarify, invitations were sent to the Minister of Industry, the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Public Safety for the current study on Canada's dual-use and defence research needs. The clerk has sent me the information that all ministers were invited to appear for Monday, May 4, and Tuesday, April 28.

Minister McGuinty responded on April 28, saying, “Thank you very much for this invitation and the committee's interest in National Defence. Unfortunately, Minister McGinty is unable to appear at SRSR at this time.”

The Minister of Public Works and Procurement responded for the April 28 meeting, saying, “We have received the message from our Minister's office that they are respectfully declining the invitation. However, given the subject matter of this study, the committee may wish to invite Secretary of State (Defence Procurement) Fuhr.” After consultation with the member who submitted the witness, an invitation was sent to Secretary of State for Defence Procurement for Thursday, May 7, who responded, “Minister Fuhr is away next week and unable to attend. The Minister's office is considering the other dates in June and we will get back to you once his office confirms his availability.”

The Minister of Industry responded on Thursday, April 30, saying, “Unfortunately, Minister Joly is unable to appear at [the science and research committee] on May 4th. She will be appearing at INDU at the same time.” Another invitation was sent to Minister Joly on May 5 for Thursday, June 11. We haven't received a response to that.

These were the responses we had, and the email was sent to all members.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON

As a quick point of clarification, have we received a response from the CEO of the Defence Investment Agency?

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Wait one second, please. Let me check with the clerk.

I will let you know. The clerk is looking into it.

We will begin our rounds of six minutes each with MP Ho.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Vincent Ho Conservative Richmond Hill South, ON

Do I get a full six minutes?

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Yes.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Vincent Ho Conservative Richmond Hill South, ON

I'd like to thank the witnesses—

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

Would time not have been taken off, given you had already started the next round? You started the first round of questioning, and there is no such thing as a point of information. Technically, the time should have been running.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

We didn't start it, so we will see how we can compensate other members, obviously.

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

In that case, I have a further question for you. Perhaps we could also clarify for the viewing public that the ministers who were named by my friend opposite were not part of the request in the original motion. Is that correct?

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

Yes. I can read the motion.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Vincent Ho Conservative Richmond Hill South, ON

While we're searching for the motion, my understanding is that those individuals were requested to appear as witnesses.

The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid

I'm sorry for that. I'm just pulling up the motion.

On Monday, February 9, the Standing Committee on Science and Research adopted the following motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i), the Standing Committee on Science and Research undertake a study on the role of universities and colleges, the National Research Council Canada, industry experts and federal departments in supporting Canada's dual-use and defence research needs as a component of NATO spending targets; that the committee hold at least four meetings; and that the committee report its findings to the House and request a government response.

The names of the ministers were not mentioned, to clarify.

Go ahead, MP Noormohamed.

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

For avoidance of doubt, as is process, a number of witnesses were requested by the committee, some ministers, some CEOs and others. No one is compelled to attend unless a motion calls for them to attend. Is that correct? I want to be sure, because what I don't want is a bunch of misleading clips to say that ministers deliberately didn't come to committee.