Science and Research Committee on June 1st, 2026

[Alexandre Blais]

Thank you for your question.

I said earlier that the Canadian quantum champions program meets a need. I agree in that respect.

There is another important need, however: the need to support ecosystems. As I said, we face a real risk. Like the risk we faced of losing our champions to the U.S., we now face the real risk of losing the capacity the ecosystem has built over the past decade or so.

We need ecosystem champions, and we have them, so support for them is essential.

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

Were you consulted on the criteria for determining who the Canadian champions would be? Were you notified?

[Alexandre Blais]

We did our best to make our case to the government regarding who the champions should be, but we weren't consulted on the details.

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

Could you tell us what criteria are essential for a hub like Sherbrooke's to realize its full potential in relation to talent, IP, start-ups, industrial partnerships, capacity to participate and regional benefits?

[Alexandre Blais]

Actually, what we would like to see are whole ecosystems. They start with research excellence. Without research excellence, there's nothing to build on. The first thing is to establish a centre of research excellence. We have that. It takes more than that, though. It takes the whole start-up ecosystem, including the intellectual property piece.

I can also say that we don't just have the Quantum Institute in Sherbrooke. We also have prototyping institutes, which are absolutely crucial to transform ideas into applications. We have that prototyping capacity. We have centres like C2MI, which is a partnership between Université de Sherbrooke and IBM and Teledyne DALSA, making it possible to turn a prototype into an industrial application. We have the whole innovation chain required to turn an idea into a prototype and, then, an industrial application. Few ecosystems in the world are as complete.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Tony Baldinelli]

I'm going to have to stop you there.

We will now go to MP Mahal for five minutes.

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

Thank you again, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

I would like to start with Dr. Perry.

Dr. Perry, when you appeared before the national defence committee in 2023, you said Canada's defence procurement problems were systemic and persistent, upwards of two-thirds of the projects were delayed by a year or more and there was no detectable sense of urgency in the system.

Since then, has anything changed meaningfully, or are we still stuck in the same cycle of Liberal delays, reviews and announcements?

[David Perry]

That was a few years ago, and a lot has changed since then. Certainly, the senior level's political focus is quite significantly different, and it's moved in a positive direction.

In my discussions with folks in the industry, the big thing they remark on is how the sense of urgency and actual, meaningful change haven't yet translated down to the working level. Day to day, in terms of how procurements are moving, with a couple of exceptions, they're not seeing a whole lot of evidence of the urgency being conveyed at the top.

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

Is it fair to say that there have been some decent announcements made, but concrete action still lags on the ground?

[David Perry]

I think it's not yet become widespread. Whether or not some of those recent announcements, which were a long time coming in some cases, are more representative, and what the next slate of new announcements, beyond what's already been moved out the door will be....

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

Dr. Perry, you will recall that during the war in Afghanistan, the Harper government was able to move quickly on key urgent operational requirements, including airlifts, armed vehicles and helicopters. What did that period show about political will and urgency in procurement, in your opinion?

[David Perry]

I think it showed that when you really have the political will and a sense of urgency and focus, you can move things very quickly. It's about trying to replicate some of those same conditions, not just at the top, but throughout the whole system, right down to the working level.

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

Are you satisfied that the current Liberal government has the same level of will when it comes to delivering and when it comes to dealing with the delayed procurements?

[David Perry]

Politically, I think there's been a very strong indication that there is that kind of political will and urgency. What we really need are some wider changes that go down into the bureaucracy to change processes and some of the policy directions—both high-level policy and administrative policy that is set government-wide—and, as fast as we can, change some of the culture to refocus on the speed of delivery.

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

I agree.

Dr. Perry, in your opinion, what should come first in defence procurement? Should it be the needs of the Canadian Armed Forces or the industrial objectives of the government of the day?

[David Perry]

In reality, in most circumstances, it's always going to be a balance, but I think we need to keep the capability for the military top of mind. I worry that in some of these industrial strategy initiatives, we're not keeping as much of a focus on actually equipping the CAF as we should be.

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

Thank you for the answers.

Now I would like to move to Dr. da Mota.

You argued that Canada risks overdesignating too many technologies as dual use, which could misallocate funding and make it harder for DND to identify genuinely strategic investments. In your view, is the federal government currently using the term “dual use” too broadly, and could that lead to taxpayer dollars being spread across projects that do not meaningfully strengthen Canada's defence capabilities?

[Matthew da Mota]

I think my answer is no. I think NATO defines it very broadly. They're very open to countries deciding what dual use means when they do their defence spending.

I think there needs to be more focus over time on what exactly dual use should mean for Canadian priorities. That will be a process, but I think it is essential to not incentivize companies and institutions to try to turn fundamental research, which we've heard so much about in terms of how important it is, into targeted defence research when it doesn't have to be. I think we need the demand signal to get research to support the defence needs rather than the other way around, most of the time.

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

One concern I have is that government may use “dual use” as a catch-all phrase to make spending announcements look defence-related even when the actual military benefit is unclear. What criteria should Parliament use to judge whether a dual-use investment generally contributes to the Canadian Armed Forces' capabilities?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Tony Baldinelli]

I will have to stop you there.

Perhaps you can provide a written response to the member's question.

With that, we will go to MP Nathan for five minutes.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the panellists, including the panellist online, for being here.

This question is for Cambrian College. Large universities often receive much of the attention in discussions around defence innovation, but colleges play a unique role in applied research and workforce development. How can institutions like Cambrian College help bridge the gap between research, commercialization and the skilled workforce that Canada will need to support advanced manufacturing and defence innovation?

[Mike Commito]

I think it's an important question, especially on the implied R and D side of things. We are the bridge, especially when it comes to proving out a concept, testing and validating a new technology, and then hopefully getting that to market.

Through the work that colleges and CEGEPs do with applied research, we are training the next generation of workers on the technology that will be deployed. I think by bringing colleges further into the conversation around defence and dual-use applied R and D, that will only enlighten the future workers we have at our colleges and CEGEPs to better understand what role they could play in helping to develop and test and deploy these new technologies, wherever they may be.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Thank you.

In these courses where the research and innovation happens in the colleges, what is the gender? Do you see a lot of females in these programs much more than before?

[Mike Commito]

Certainly it's getting better, but in an industry like mining, which has traditionally been male-dominated, you obviously see it skewing more towards male students. Through initiatives we've been doing at Cambrian College—for example, “Jill of All Trades” is an annual event—to really encourage girls and young women to consider a career in skilled trades and engineering technology, that is improving. I think as society continues to shift forward, we're seeing more and more women take these opportunities to join the skilled trades.

It's certainly not easy, and we still have a lot of work to do, but we do pride ourselves, especially in our group here at Cambrian College, on having near gender parity when it comes to the students who are working with us on applied research projects. That includes students who are working in welding and fabrication, mechanical engineering and IoT-based programs as well.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Thank you for that.

Ms. Therrien, Canada produces world-class researchers and graduates in such emerging fields as artificial intelligence, quantum science and advanced engineering. What more can governments, universities and industries do to ensure that this talent remains in Canada and contributes to Canadian innovation rather than being recruited abroad?