Science and Research Committee on June 4th, 2026

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

Okay, I'll give you some specific examples.

Thank you for the example you gave.

In your 2024‑2029 strategic plan, one of your research priorities is health and biomanufacturing. The government created the pharmaceutical and life sciences sector task force. Is the National Research Council represented on this task force?

[Mitch Davies]

We are a departmental corporation within government. I believe that body is composed of folks from industry itself in order to draw in their views. We have an ability to bring our views directly to Health Canada in fulfilling that role. I don't feel, in any way, that there's any impediment keeping us from influencing what direction they might take. If they seek our views or if we have things to offer, we will certainly do so. I imagine they also reserve the places in such things for people who may not have the direct access, as an organization inside government, to influence policy.

I think that's how—

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

Your answer then, Mr. Davies, is that you don't participate on that task force.

[Mitch Davies]

Not in a direct way.... We don't take a seat there.

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

Okay.

Another of your strategic priorities is climate change and sustainability. The government has created a net-zero advisory body. Is the National Research Council part of that advisory body?

[Mitch Davies]

We are not directly on that body. It would be the same sort of rationale.

Our role is known. The technology areas we work in, the research we work on and the partnerships we have are reflective of our capability to deliver solutions. I wouldn't say that policy is something we don't have a concern in, but it's obviously not our direct responsibility. We need to be there to respond to what the country needs and to develop the solutions required. Perhaps it's just the difference between policy and being a science-performing organization working hands-on to find solutions.

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

Mr. Davies, of course, another of your strategic priorities is digital and quantum technologies. The government introduced Canada's national quantum strategy and an advisory council on artificial intelligence. Does the National Research Council of Canada participate in this advisory council and these strategic groups?

[Mitch Davies]

My colleague might need to add something, because she's been in quantum at the council for a long time.

In that case, the NRC was very much involved in the instigation as well as the work in the ecosystem that led to the national quantum strategy. If I would say anything, it's that we had a privileged place to shape it, to try to influence it and to draw its importance to government.

We're obviously delivering on many components of it. We have significant funding to deliver to the community. We also have a very strong relationship with Quantum Industry Canada and all the players in the industry. We feel we are playing an integral role—which we should, as Canada's national lab in this area.

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

That calls for some clarification, Mr. Davies, because it's not clear.

The National Research Council of Canada describes itself as an accelerator powering innovation in Canada, but the government is creating sector-specific advisory structures that don't include the NRC.

How can you advance innovation if you don't participate in committees tasked by the government to examine these issues and come up with strategies?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting.

There is an interpretation issue. Can we please check? There is no interpretation.

Monsieur Blanchette-Joncas, can you please say a few words?

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

It was a good question, Madam Chair. It's too bad that you interrupted me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

It's going well now.

I'll restart the clock. Please go ahead.

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

Thank you very much.

So, Mr. Davies, let's pick up where we left off.

You are working on strategic priorities, the government is creating advisory bodies, but you don't participate in them. Can you tell me why?

[Mitch Davies]

I'll expand in this regard because it relates to my previous answer.

We are co-chairing, with ISED, the body inside the government that is overseeing the strategy. The point is that for external consultation, which involves outside organizations and individuals, the government has created a structure. We don't need to recreate our role inside government by also being on the outside body. In fact, we would take up a place. It is best for the broader community to have a chance to influence policy-making and implementation. We don't feel, in any way, it would be additive to our being very intricately involved inside the system on what is happening with the national quantum strategy.

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

You're working on strategic priorities that are also being looked at by advisory bodies. Don't you think it's important for them to take your expertise into account as well?

[Mitch Davies]

The national quantum strategy entirely benefits from the expertise of the council because we are part of the government. Notwithstanding being a council and a departmental corporation, we are completely integrated with ISED in terms of providing advice—just as any other department would be—on the development of and actual pursuit of the goals of the strategy. I would certainly emphasize that, from the very beginning—when this thing was a nascent idea—right up to today, we've felt completely involved in every way we should be.

We're delivering as well. We have a lot of work to do in deploying the funding and working with partners to make this a reality out there, beyond the policy. We deliver through our expertise and our connections with industry and academia.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

We will now proceed to MP Ho. He has joined us virtually.

MP Ho, you will have five minutes. Please go ahead.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, President Davies, for appearing again today.

The National Research Council is supposed to be Canada's flagship science and industrial research organization. Its mandate should be excellence, commercialization, productivity and real-world innovation, yet across the federal research ecosystem, DEI requirements have now become embedded in grants, hiring of chairs, reporting and institutional compliance.

The Canada research chairs program now has top-down government-mandated equity targets and says that universities that miss them by the year 2029 will lose their chair allocations. Essentially, the federal government is threatening to withdraw research funding to Canada's universities if they don't meet their DEI targets by 2029. Federal research programs also expect applicants to demonstrate DEI commitments in the design and implementation of their research.

President Davies, should the first test for federal research funding be scientific excellence and commercial potential in the national interest?

[Mitch Davies]

For our part, excellence in research is fundamental. It's core to our strategy, and it's core to how we conduct the work we do as a science-performing organization.

The issue also is that our workplace should be representative of the country. Also, we have to design work that actually represents diverse needs and interests across the country, so I think that—

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

Okay, but—

[Mitch Davies]

—inclusion and diversity really come into how we do our business and the environment we create for people in our business. These two things can happen at the same time.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

According to this March 2026 policy, the Canada research chairs program says that institutions that miss their 2029 equity targets will lose chair allocations. It seems to suggest that universities will lose funding for not meeting government-mandated top-down DEI policies and that universities will lose more research chair funding for each DEI target that they don't meet.

Does that mean federal resource funding is now conditioned not only on merit but also on whether universities hit these DEI targets?

[Mitch Davies]

I would defer the matter of policy for science granting council funding and so forth to the responsible minister. Beyond our own activities, I don't feel I'm positioned to comment directly on a question of policy and its implications for other organizations.

[Vincent Ho, Conservative, Richmond Hill South, ON]

That is a policy that is in place. It's from the National Research Council website.

[Mitch Davies]

It's not a National Research Council policy that you're referring to.

If it's regarding federal granting councils and research grants from NSERC, SSHRC or CIHR, that's not something over which we have responsibility. Again, I would say you'd have to ask that of the policy department and the minister responsible.