Science and Research Committee on June 4th, 2026

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

This past year, 37 out of 38 Canadian universities dropped in global rankings. How do you continue justifying the lack of merit-based hiring when Canada's universities are facing a collapse in their reputations?

[Mitch Davies]

On the part of the question that I perhaps would answer, I would say one would have to look in a very nuanced fashion at what's moving in university rankings and do pretty in-depth analysis to figure out what it means.

I feel quite confident to say that the reputation of Canada's research universities is outstanding. The country has now, to its credit, multiple international awards and significant recognition in areas that are well known. I would leave how the rankings are composed or what they mean to experts in direct academic research.

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

The Canada research chairs program targets 50.9% women or gender equity-seeking groups, 22% racialized individuals, 7.5% persons with disabilities and 4.9% indigenous peoples. Those are the quotas that determine access to federal research allocations. I'm curious to know who decided those percentages.

[Mitch Davies]

Again, I would not comment on the design and implementation of policies that are not in our care. I don't think that would be responsible.

I appreciate the question. Obviously, I'd have to leave that for the minister responsible.

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

When one of the other members asked you a question about DEI, you were able to answer it, so I find that kind of puzzling.

For the purpose of hiring and funding, how does the NRC define a woman?

[Mitch Davies]

On this question, when people apply, they will self-identify. We accept that within the scope of the self-identification, obviously. There are many topics that are quite sensitive, such as people who self-identify as having a disability. This all relates to their lived experience and how they're deciding to fill out a questionnaire, and we accept that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

The time is up for MP Ho. We will now proceed to MP Deschênes-Thériault for five minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses for being with us today.

The NRC's industrial research assistance program is accelerating growth in a number of Canada's small and medium-sized enterprises, or SMEs, particularly through a range of innovation and funding services. SMEs sometimes lack the means to conduct research and development projects, so they enter partnerships, especially with college-level institutions.

An example of this in my riding is Innov, the applied research and innovation division of the New Brunswick Community College, which focuses on bioeconomy. This centre partners with SMEs engaged in projects that are sometimes funded by the industrial research assistance program. In my region, this is producing really interesting results.

I'd like to hear what you have to tell us about this program's importance, but also about the importance of encouraging collaborative ties between SMEs and centres like Innov, at the New Brunswick Community College.

[Mitch Davies]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

On the industrial research assistance program, there are two things I would emphasize. One is that the program provides contributions to organizations in cases where those organizations can provide a demonstrable value to the clientele of IRAP. There are instances where colleges, polytechnics and organizations that have a lot of applied research orientation are getting support. Further, we have a program that provides active referrals to technology access centres across the country to ensure that the small businesses we work with get the best help, particularly in the system that's been built.

Quite frankly, there are a number of institutions that do exactly what the member referred to. These are also institutions at the community level that do local economic development and, often, orient their programs to meet the needs of local business. We're very pleased to fund and support this system through our IRAP network, which is across the country. It's not only in the cities. We can meet needs that are very diverse, from province to province or region to region.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

That brings me to my next question.

You mentioned the importance of supporting research and innovation across the country, including in rural and regional communities. We have highly advanced centres of expertise in major urban areas, but in the regions, companies are also innovating and researchers are also making important advances.

When you implement your programs and support research and innovation by our SMEs, how do you ensure that these programs support companies and sectors in rural regions as well?

[Mitch Davies]

Through 76 years of building up IRAP—which I would say is at the heart of the question the member raised—the most important thing is that the people we've hired come from the places they go to serve. They're business people who've worked in those communities. They understand their clientele's needs, and they've decided they want to give back. It's an amazing institutional innovation in and of itself—bringing in these people to support economic development and innovation, in particular.

Also, they don't just sit in an office. They move around, get out into the country, go across Canada and find many projects and businesses worth supporting in places people may not have heard of but that are doing important things—building up businesses and growing. Ambition is not something exclusively defined by being in a given place. Wherever it is, we want IRAP to be there to serve it.

I would also say, regarding the changes we're making, which is something someone might ask.... Will we ensure that the network remains robust and strong across the country? The answer is yes.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Last month, the external advisory panel on the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French published its report. It contained a whole series of recommendations for strengthening the French-language research ecosystem, particularly where innovation is concerned.

How do you see your council's role in implementing recommendations to strengthen this research ecosystem?

[Julie Lefebvre, Vice-President, Emerging Technologies, National Research Council of Canada]

If I understand correctly, there were a number of recommendations. One of them, for example, concerned publications in French. I can tell you a number of things.

First, in our case, for those of us working for the National Research Council of Canada, we can communicate in the language we choose. In fact, publications and communications are in our language of choice.

For reasons related to scientific integrity, because scientific reports are extremely difficult to translate, they are left in their original language and summaries or excerpts are translated later on. Apart from that, we work very—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you. Time is up.

We will now proceed to MP Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes.

Please go ahead.

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

Mr. Davies, through its government, Canada says it wants to be a world leader in innovation. Can you explain to me how you intend to achieve that objective, knowing that about 510 positions were cut in the last budget, that annual reductions in subsidies and contributions will eventually amount to about $200 million, and that certain activities are going to be recalibrated.

Can you name other countries that have managed to become world leaders in innovation by cutting back on research and innovation?

[Mitch Davies]

I think, in this case, there are two goals the government has put in place.

One is fiscal responsibility, obviously ensuring at the macro level the fiscal health of the country. They've asked large federal organizations, organizations such as ours, to make a contribution by coming up with very solid, very clear priorities and making some choices.

I would say that I'm comfortable that our strategic plan, as we defined it, can be delivered with the resources that are being made available, even taking into account some reductions and choices we've had to make. In fact, I would say that we've also benefited from the resources that have been added to our ability to deliver for Canada through the defence industrial strategy. As I mentioned, it's close to a billion dollars in new funding.

In our case, I think that connection between innovation, defence and industrial development is very strong, and it has been strong—

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

I get the speech, Mr. Davies. Just to remind you, my question concerned countries.

So what country is capable of becoming a world leader in innovation after cutting back on research and development?

[Mitch Davies]

I wouldn't be able to speak comprehensively to the state of every country's situation from a budgetary perspective and their outputs. We, as the NRC, have strong capability, and we will continue to offer it to support overall system and industrial development—

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

Okay, Mr. Davies, all is good.

[Mitch Davies]

—as well as private sector investment, which we want to see increase.

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

Could you give the committee a province-by-province breakdown, especially for Quebec, of the positions to be affected and the cuts to be made? I'd also like a breakdown of the planned budget reductions affecting research centres, grants and contribution programs, academic collaboration and projects involving small and medium-sized businesses.

[Mitch Davies]

We would be pleased to present information as to the impact on locations and where the jobs that would be reduced are located. We have that information, and we would be pleased to provide it.

As far as the impact in a programmatic sense is concerned, obviously without running the experience of how, let's say, IRAP will support activities or other programs, our collaboration programs, we can't really predict exactly how that will influence, particularly, regional distribution. However, as for our workforce, we do know where those jobs are affected and can provide that information to the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you. Time is up.

We will now proceed to MP Mahal for five minutes.

MP Mahal, please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here.

The government talks a lot about dual-use technology, but without a clear definition almost anything can be labelled as dual use.

I want to start my questioning with President Davis. How does the National Research Council determine which projects actually support national defence needs?

[Mitch Davies]

I think the first point is that what the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces actually would have an interest in supporting or acquiring is their business, and that's a strong signal. Actually, that's what defines what would be used in the context for defence for Canada, and we take that quite seriously.

Dual use is a question of whether that product, service or technology could have a civilian use as well. Of course, that's defined by the market space. It's also defined by whether that product could be actually provided for a defence purpose and then made available under appropriate regulations for other markets. There are many cases where both can happen.

I actually think, from a commercial point of view, the market you want to see for these companies to really be strong and robust over time needs to have, to the extent it can, a sui and a dual purpose. A good example is our aerospace industry, which has had a very strong focus on civilian and now has an opportunity to move into defence, which actually provides strong, robust support to an industry in which it's very hard to realize technology programs. Having defence as an anchor will actually reinforce the strength of that industry, I imagine, in Canada.