Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Members of the committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this discussion.
I am Alexandre Blais, scientific director of the Quantum Institute at the Université de Sherbrooke.
The Université de Sherbrooke ranks among Canada's research-intensive universities and is recognized for its collaborative research model. We are also a founding partner of the Quebec innovation zones in quantum science and microelectronics—strategic ecosystems at the heart of today's security and technological sovereignty challenges.
Today I will argue that fundamental research is a strategic contribution to Canada's defence objectives, and that investments in research universities should be recognized as part of Canada's effort to meet its NATO commitments. Research universities like the Université de Sherbrooke not only produce knowledge; they build strategic capacity for the country.
I would now like to expand on three important points.
Firstly, there is fundamental research. When we talk about dual-use technologies, attention often turns first to their applications. While these applications are essential, we must recognize that investments in fundamental research contribute just as directly to the security of Canada and its allies.
Quantum technologies offer a particularly clear example. Quantum sciences have civilian and military applications in computing, sensing and communications. But key challenges remain unresolved. We still need to understand how to make these systems more reliable, more robust, more integrated and more useful.
This is why fundamental research is indispensable. Companies play an essential role in developing products and scaling them up, but they depend on universities to solve the scientific and technological bottlenecks that remain unresolved.
This is not unique to quantum science: In the life sciences, fundamental research protects against biological threats and strengthens public health; in the humanities and social sciences, it sheds light on social acceptability and the effects of disruptive technologies on conflict dynamics.
Focusing solely on ready-to-use technologies would make us dependent on other countries for the foundational building blocks of our own security.
This is why investments in research—from fundamental research to applied research—in strategic sectors should be recognized as a legitimate component of Canada's efforts to meet NATO targets—particularly through funding for the three granting councils and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, in order to preserve our long-term strategic autonomy.
For emphasis, let me repeat that focusing solely on ready-to-use technologies would make us dependent on other countries for the foundational building blocks of our own security. This is why investment in fundamental research in strategic sectors should be recognized as a legitimate component of Canada's efforts to meet NATO targets, particularly through funding for the three granting councils and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, in order to preserve our long-term strategic autonomy.
The second point is partnership-based research and company creation.
The defence industrial strategy and budget 2026 rightly recognize the role of small and medium-sized enterprises, SMEs, in strengthening Canadian defence supply chains. However, a key lever of this strategy lies within our universities. Most SMEs do not have the capacity or the long-term horizon required to conduct advanced R and D on their own. By connecting them with university research capabilities, we can accelerate their technological development and their integration into defence supply chains.
Universities also generate new companies and new innovation ecosystems. In disruptive sectors, these companies often emerge from years of research, training and shared infrastructure.
For the last ten years, the innovation–partnership–entrepreneurship program at the Université de Sherbrooke has demonstrated the effectiveness of this model. Deployed at the national level, with a defence and dual-use technology component, it would concretely accelerate the R and D capacity of Canadian SMEs.
The third point is obviously talent. Allow me to emphasize a fundamental point: Everything depends on talent.
Canada's ability to develop science and technology for its security depends entirely on the women and men who choose to dedicate their careers to research—to discovering new knowledge and applying it in service to Canadians.
In this regard, the decisions recently taken by the federal government—particularly the indexation of scholarships and investments in research chairs—are steps in the right direction.
Canada must now consolidate this effort through predictable support for the people and the research environments that train them.
Regardless of whether innovations emerge from a university, a national research centre or a company, they will be built on the people trained in our universities.
In conclusion, for Canada to respond effectively to its defence commitments, it must recognize that universities are not peripheral to this effort: They are a strategic pillar. Investing in science, in partnerships with SMEs and in talent development is not an academic luxury. It is an essential condition for Canada's national security.
Thank you for your attention.