Science and Research Committee on June 8th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 40 of the Standing Committee on Science and Research. We are meeting today to have a second briefing session with the chief science adviser.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witness and the 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 would like to remind the witness that committee members may ask questions in either French or English. If you need interpretation, please take a moment now to prepare your earpiece and select your listening channel in advance, in order to take full advantage of the time allotted for questions and answers. As a reminder, all comments should be addressed through the chair.

With that, I would like to welcome our witness for today: Dr. Mona Nemer, chief science adviser of Canada, Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada.

Dr. Nemer, thanks a lot for coming back to the committee. It's good to have you. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks, and then we will go to the rounds of questioning.

Please go ahead. The floor is yours.

[Mona Nemer, Chief Science Advisor of Canada, Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning, members of the committee.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you about my mandate today.

Before I do so, allow me to acknowledge and congratulate the Right Honourable Louise Arbour on her appointment as Canada's new Governor General. In my view, she embodies intelligence, integrity, principled conduct and public service.

My mandate encompasses many aspects of the interface between science and policy. Ultimately, it rests on four fundamental pillars: providing scientific advice to support public policy, advancing excellence in research, strengthening public trust and engagement in science and promoting Canada's scientific leadership and international collaboration. These interconnected responsibilities underscore the vital role that science plays in advancing our national priorities.

Indeed, research and innovation support development in the sectors of clean energy, cutting-edge technologies and advanced manufacturing, while strengthening public health, food security and Arctic sovereignty.

Evidence-based policy can help the government address complex challenges more effectively and ensure that Canada remains prosperous and competitive in a rapidly changing global economy.

The work of my office reflects this evolving landscape. In recent weeks, I have provided the government with advice on two critical issues requiring long-term scientific planning by Canada. One is the need for a nuclear fusion strategy to prepare our country for this possible revolution in energy technology. The other is the need for a natural capital accounting framework to better measure and protect the natural systems that sustain our economy and society.

This same forward-looking approach has guided our efforts to strengthen the science and research ecosystem in Canada. Among other initiatives, we have recently proposed a national data governance framework and updated the federal research integrity policy to help ensure that Canada's scientific enterprise remains well positioned in the context of artificial intelligence's growing impact on science and innovation.

At the same time, strengthening Canada's research capacity also means ensuring that it is inclusive and accessible. That is why my office has been closely involved in efforts to ensure the vitality of science in French. Supporting the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French reflects the importance of Canada's linguistic diversity in the field of science and strengthens Canada's role within the global francophonie.

Looking ahead, we are also examining how science can support safe and responsible research in the rapidly changing Canadian north. Our current work on Arctic research safety aims to better protect researchers and northern communities, while supporting effective scientific work in one of the world’s most demanding environments.

Taken together, these initiatives illustrate a broader reality. Science is no longer peripheral to public policy. It is increasingly central to it. At a time when countries around the world are confronting rapid technological change, growing complexity and declining trust in institutions, maintaining strong scientific advisory capacity is essential for social resilience and the vitality of our institutions and our democracy.

Your recommendation in 2022 that the government make the position of chief science adviser permanent by enshrining its mandate in an act of Parliament recognizes that independent science advice is a crucial component of the long-term capacity governments need to address national and global challenges.

I look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure science remains a source of insight, innovation and public benefit for Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Dr. Nemer.

Now we will start our rounds of questioning. We will begin our first round of questioning of six minutes with MP Baldinelli.

MP Baldinelli, please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Dr. Nemer, and thank you for always agreeing to appear when we ask. It is so good to see you again.

Quickly, in your remarks, you talked about part of the mandate and said that your role is to provide “science advice to advance public policy”. Last week, the government came forward with its AI strategy. In your capacity as the chief science adviser, did you participate in the federal government's consultations on the recently released AI strategy?

[Mona Nemer]

I have participated in the consultations, meaning that the minister and his office have consulted with me, through different channels, of course. We had some pretty substantive conversations around what needed to happen.

I'd like to also mention that my youth council prepared a report on the views from the next generation in terms of AI and human-centric AI, which we forwarded to the minister's attention. I'm happy to say that a number of their recommendations are actually in the strategy.

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

Thank you.

Thank you for sending us a letter on June 2 with regard to my question on whether or not your office had been consulted with regard to the closure of the agricultural research centres across this country.

In your written response on June 2, you talked about how “Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada did not consult me on the outcome of any of their research centres” and their closures.

You then said, “Had I been consulted, I would have recommended following best practices and scientific evidence to answer questions of scientific excellence and relevance.... This is usually best done through an arm’s-length expert group.”

You mentioned that your “office has the expertise and the convening power to provide...scientific assessments” and that you “have done it in the past on matters related to major scientific infrastructure in Canada”. You also mentioned this: “My team and I stand ready to provide advice on research and science, be it related to infrastructure or talent.”

Are you disappointed at all that the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada did not seek your advice?

[Mona Nemer]

It's always nice to be consulted. There is no obligation to be consulted. I have at heart to better science in Canada and to strengthen science advice. If there is an opportunity to contribute, we always stand ready to do so.

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

Madam Nemer, of the proposed 665 layoffs at the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 364 are from the science branch alone, meaning that 54.7% of the workforce reduction targets science. Does it concern you that a government department targeted its science branch for over half of its proposed job layoffs and neglected to consult you?

[Mona Nemer]

Matters of human resources are complex. Maybe I'll just step back for a second and perhaps remind the committee that we put out a report on the science workforce a year and a half ago or so. In that report, we noticed that the average age of the science workforce was actually far higher than the average age of the non-science public service, which meant that there would be massive retirements that could happen, and that there was a bit of a preoccupation to ensure that—

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

These are permanent layoffs. These aren't reductions by way of attrition through retirement. For example, by the end of the 2029-30 fiscal year, the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada expects to cut a total of $154.7 million across the entire department. The science branch alone is taking a $115.4-million hit, so science is bearing roughly 75% of the total financial cuts to the department.

What is your takeaway, knowing that over 75% of the spending cuts at that department came at the expense of science and research?

[Mona Nemer]

I'm not going to lie. I will tell you that I'm always disappointed when I see that we are reducing the science workforce in the country, whether it's within the Government of Canada, in the private sector or in institutions.

That being said, we need to look at the entirety of the research sector which is an extremely important sector for the Canadian economy. We have to ensure that what we need to get done is getting done.

Things evolve with time. Perhaps some of the research that was being done within the government department is now being done in the same way, a different way, or a better way in universities, colleges and the private sector. We need to be analyzing and evaluating what happens in the entire country.

I'm hoping that as we put in place a council for science, technology and innovation, we develop an S&T strategy that will be able to answer these kinds of questions.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We will now proceed to MP Deschênes-Thériault for six minutes.

Please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Nemer, thank you for your remarks.

A report by the External Advisory Panel on the Creation and Dissemination of Scientific Information in French was recently published. I would like to discuss the specific recommendations set forth in this report.

How do you envision the implementation of these recommendations—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting.

There is no interpretation, so we just need to check.

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

Will we pause the clock?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Yes.

Please go ahead now.

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

Thank you.

As I was saying, the External Advisory Panel on the Creation and Dissemination of Scientific Information in French recently published its report. I'd like to discuss the report's recommendations.

How do you envision the implementation of these recommendations? In your opinion, what role could your office play in carrying them out?

[Mona Nemer]

First, I would like to commend the advisory panel for its work. It is doing a remarkable job. There is a great deal of substance to its recommendations. This is an issue where concrete action must truly begin, and where we must be able to assess the progress achieved. That is critically important.

On the one hand, there is obviously the vitality of French in scientific institutions as well as the dissemination of science. On the other hand, as a country where French is one of the two official languages, we have a leadership role to play on the global stage.

I think it would be a good idea to have a group, a secretariat, or individuals responsible for this matter. We need to be able to rely on certain people, call upon them, and report back. Personally, I've said that my office would of course be very happy to contribute. In fact, Minister Joly is very invested in this issue. She's already raised it with me and asked for my help. So we are currently in the midst of discussions to determine where to begin.

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

I'm glad to hear that you welcome the recommendation to create a secretariat. I think it will be an important starting point for future developments.

Let's move on to another topic.

Part of your mandate also involves promoting positive dialogue between federal researchers and those in academia, both in Canada and internationally. I would like to discuss that with you.

Can you explain to the committee why science diplomacy is important on the international stage? What concrete benefits does your international work in science diplomacy bring to our country?

[Mona Nemer]

Indeed, science diplomacy is regaining a great deal of interest around the world. Given the current geopolitical situation, I think there is a growing recognition that science remains a bridge between countries and cultures.

Beyond the diplomatic aspect, there is also the issue of international scientific collaboration and the sharing of major research infrastructure, for example. It is therefore quite important to be in the room when decisions are made.

Actually, I recently came across a Statistics Canada report whose findings will allow me to answer your question about the importance of international relationships. The report indicates that over 10% of our research funding comes from abroad. That represents two-thirds of the federal government's contribution to research and development investments in the country. This is by no means insignificant. It is truly quite important.

There is one funding program in particular that we may not have discussed enough in Canada, even though we greatly benefit from it: Horizon Europe. This is, of course, the European Union's framework program—of which Canada has been an associated member for the past two years. Over the past two years, researchers, whether at universities or in the private sector—I want to emphasize that—have already secured over 60 million euros. So, more than $100 million have flowed into the country from the European Union thanks to these science diplomacy efforts.

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

I will continue to discuss the issue of science diplomacy and the connections we can build.

I would like to hear your thoughts on opportunities for Canada to play an even more significant leadership role in science diplomacy. For example, in the context of Canada's bid to host the 2028 Francophonie Summit, what opportunities could we seize between now and then to play a greater role in science diplomacy, particularly within the international francophone community?

[Mona Nemer]

There are many things we can do. Culture, education, science and the economy are at the heart of the francophonie members' interests. Furthermore, many developing countries in Africa and elsewhere are eager for our scientific collaboration, whether for training talent or for participating in global efforts in technology and science.

So, I believe we could assert ourselves even more and play an even greater role thanks to all our strengths in science and technology.

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

I see I have about fifteen seconds left. Is there anything else you'd like to add about science diplomacy that you haven't already mentioned?

[Mona Nemer]

Canada is already doing a great deal. We are welcomed. We have a very good reputation. All I hear from the international community is that people will welcome us even more if we're willing to do more.