Science and Research Committee on Sept. 24th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 44 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research. We are meeting today to resume our study on the report of the external advisory panel on the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

Before we continue, I would ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters. You will also notice a QR code on the card, which links to a short awareness video.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your microphone and please mute yourself when you are not speaking.

For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can make a selection of the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I would like to remind witnesses that committee members may ask questions in either French or English. If you will need interpretation, please take a moment now to prepare your earpiece and select the listening channel you need in advance to take full advantage of the time allotted for questions and answers.

As a reminder, all comments should be addressed through the chair.

For members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. For members on Zoom, please use the “raise hand” function. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can. We appreciate your patience and understanding in that regard.

With that, I would like to welcome our two witnesses for this panel.

We are joined by Linda Cardinal, emeritus professor, University of Ottawa by video conference. We are also joined by Tanja Neimann, executive director, representing Consortium Érudit.

Welcome. Thanks to both of you for joining us today.

Both of you will have five minutes for opening remarks. We will then go to the rounds of questioning.

We will start with Professor Cardinal.

Please go ahead. The floor is yours. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks.

[Linda Cardinal, Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual]

Madam Chair, distinguished members of the Standing Committee on Science and Research, guests and colleagues, thank you for the invitation to testify before this committee.

I appear before you as the former co-chair of the external advisory panel, whose report you are currently studying.

My presentation will include three points and two recommendations. I'm going to briefly go back to the notion of substantive equality, talk quickly about the report's recommendations and then about your work, so the next steps. I will then share my two recommendations.

You are all aware that the notion of substantive equality is a principle of interpretation of language rights that has been enshrined in the Official Languages Act since 2023. It's a principle based on the idea that there are forms of discrimination based on contextual factors. The courts have also pointed out in a number of cases that these contextual factors, whether normative elements or unconscious biases, for example, impose constraints on the possibility of fair treatment for French-speaking people. Here, I would obviously refer you to the DesRochers v Canada (Industry) decision, in the field of employability, which actually led to an initial filter, the forerunner of what is now called the francophone lens.

There are also studies, particularly those led by Acfas and the Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne, that have shown that there are systemic biases against francophone or French-speaking researchers in Canada's research ecosystem.

Data from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council show that, in some cases, the success rate of projects in French is higher than those in English. However, this is inaccurate for research in a francophone minority context, where the success rate, according to the data, is 10% below the average of 42%. In Quebec, for example, only 8.9% of applications are submitted in French, particularly to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and 12% in the case of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. This means that when we talk about higher success rates, we must also remember that, in absolute numbers, the number of applications in French is still clearly inadequate, even if we include those coming from Quebec.

The task force also looked at contextual factors. Looking at the issue of unconscious bias or perceptions of unconscious bias, we saw that those could have harmful consequences for professors' careers, or even for students' future careers and their socialization in the scientific research community. We noted a significant lack of programs in French at postgraduate levels, particularly in minority settings, and that, in general, this bias towards English in research did not allow the country to benefit from French as an official language in its international visibility. It prevents us from contributing to the scientific and professional vocabulary in French or to research heritage.

Cases we have studied have shown that, in many respects, in Canadian research, French is treated as a minor language, not as an official language. This situation distorts the economy and the research ecosystem in favour of a subjective prestige economy with an English bias. You could say this is a situation that is not unique to Canada. However, in Canada, given that French and English are the two official languages, there is reason to be outraged at this situation and to want to change things.

This brings me to my second point: the recommendations in the report.

As you can see, we made three main recommendations, with positive measures for their implementation. Among those recommendations, I would like to highlight a very important one, in our opinion, which is to establish a research in French support and promotion fund investing $40 million Canadian annually to research in French, complimenting existing investments. We also recommend to strengthen governance in official languages by creating a secretariat for research in French. We also recommend that the government set an example.

As a reminder, the $40 million we are requesting represents only 1% of total annual research funding, so it's not unreasonable. It can also be used to create research programs that we've called “francophone missions”—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Can you please wind up your remarks in the next 10 seconds?

[Linda Cardinal]

Yes, I'm at my recommendations.

In closing, I have two recommendations.

First, the Canadian government should accept all the external advisory panel's recommendations and measures to establish a strategy for research in French based on our three key ideas, which are that research in French is a matter of substantive equality, a lever for economic development and a strategic resource for Canada's international visibility.

Second, the Canadian government should publish a road map for the report's implementation, including a timeline for next steps and a list of actions to take.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

With that, we will go to Madame Niemann for five minutes.

[Tanja Niemann, Executive Director, Consortium Érudit]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Members of the committee, thank you for inviting me in my capacity as the executive director of the Consortium Érudit.

Let's use the example of a social worker who supports a family in a francophone minority community. She needs research on this reality, in her language. She will find this type of work in the Canadian Social Work Review.

I have another example: A municipality dealing with climate change will be able to freely consult work published in a scientific journal such as Le Naturaliste canadien.

These two examples show the value of research when it can be made available to those who need it. Every year, Canada invests in the production of new scientific knowledge. For this investment to have a real impact, this knowledge must be communicated and used.

For research in French, this communication is not a given. In an environment largely dominated by English, research can be excellent, but if it's hard to find, it won't be as read and used, and it will have less impact.

Work devoted to francophone or Canadian realities meets real needs, even if it is sometimes of little commercial interest to major international publishers or international journals.

In addition, the challenge has intensified with the advent of AI. If our journals and their content are poorly identified by these tools, Canadian and francophone knowledge may simply be less visible in the results they produce.

The advisory group report recognizes many of these challenges.

Érudit is Canada's digital platform dedicated to research dissemination. It was established by universities and developed with the support of governments and many organizations, including the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canada Foundation for Innovation and the Fonds de recherche du Québec. We want to acknowledge that support, for which we are very grateful.

Today, we publish nearly 400 Canadian scientific journals and more than 250,000 scholarly documents. Every year, more than five million people around the world consult the publications published on our site, erudit.org.

Research in French has its audience: 75% of our consultations come from outside Canada, and in the bilingual Canadian journals we broadcast, articles in French are consulted on average twice as often as those in English.

That said, a digital library like Érudit is more than just a web platform. Behind every article and every book, there is a staff that must prepare the files, add the metadata that will make it possible to find those articles and books and ensure that they remain accessible over time. This often invisible work enables a person, a search engine, a specialized database or an AI tool to properly find and use Canadian research.

In a system largely dominated by English and large foreign platforms, this collective capacity allows us to keep the necessary expertise and governance in Canada while sharing our knowledge with the world.

We particularly welcome the establishment of the post-secondary sector and scientific knowledge in French support fund, by Canadian Heritage.

The report we're talking about today proposes to go further. We support the recommendation to spend at least $40 million a year on research and scientific dissemination in French.

For this investment to fully bear fruit, it must support not only the production of knowledge, but also the journals and tools that make it possible to find, consult and retain it.

However, this work is ongoing, while its funding too often remains ad hoc. Technologies and uses change and needs do not end along with a funding program. We therefore invite you to recognize infrastructure such as Érudit as an essential service in Canadian research and to ensure stable and predictable funding. Discoverability, preservation and adaptation to AI are ongoing responsibilities that require sustainable investments.

By giving our digital infrastructure the stability it needs to evolve, we can maximize the impact of Canada's investments in research while strengthening our scientific and digital sovereignty.

Thank you. I'm happy to discuss this further.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

With that, we will start our rounds of questioning. Our first round of questions is six minutes each. We will begin with MP Godin.

MP Godin, please go ahead. You have six minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Niemann.

Thank you, Ms. Cardinal. I've had the opportunity to work with you on the Standing Committee on Official Languages, so I'm pleased to see you here today.

Actually, I'll start with you, Ms. Cardinal. I know you were the co-chair of the group that wrote the report, so I'd like to hear your answer to the following question: Does Canada support research in French? Did [Technical difficulty—Editor] before and during your research?

[Linda Cardinal]

Thank you for your question, but I need some clarification. When you say “Canada”, do you mean the Canadian government through the research councils?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Actually, Ms. Cardinal, I'm going back to what is in the report you tabled, if I remember correctly. I'll try to find it quickly. You mention…. I can't find it quickly, so you—

[Linda Cardinal]

One could argue that Canada does not support research enough.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes, that's right. In fact, it is set out in the summary of your report.

Is Canada doing enough when it comes to research in French?

[Linda Cardinal]

I think the Canadian government recognized that there was room for improvement. That's why it created our working group and said it was important for the government to adopt a strategy for research in French in Canada. To help the government with this strategy, we gave it a report that you might consider turnkey, a report that contains recommendations and measures that should be implemented so that we can begin to change the culture.

I want to be clear that this is just a start. We want this committee to recommend the implementation of our report and the associated funding. We hope you will agree and that this will be a starting point. We would like to see that in the next action plan, as well as very clear responsibilities for the Department of Industry. We want this to become a starting point for real work in the public service and with the granting agencies, so that there is genuine equality in terms of the advancement of French and English in research. Otherwise, it's not normal.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

No, it isn't.

My understanding is that the Canadian government's order, issued in 2023, was aligned with the modernization of the Official Languages Act. This confirms that it didn't do enough before. That's how I read it.

Am I interpreting that correctly?

[Linda Cardinal]

I think we've been harping on this since at least 2017, Mr. Godin. When we noticed it was included in the action plan and that a working group would be created, we considered that an ultimate recognition that there was work to be done, that it was, in fact, a blind spot for the Canadian government. However, the Commissioner of Official Languages has been talking about it since 2008. It's in our report. It wasn't the first time we saw this. By making this decision, the federal government said it was finally listening to us and moving forward.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes, that's one way of looking at it.

Isn't it more a way of saying we're going to take another action? Let's be honest, for governments, it unfortunately takes a long time to come to fruition. You say it has been raised since 2008. I don't want to play politics, but unfortunately, we create committees, we prepare reports, but what do we do with them? Are they shelved or enforced? That's kind of what I'm afraid of.

I'm going to address the issue more specifically, Ms. Cardinal.

In your report, you recommend a new amount of $40 million, and you say it represents 1% of the total envelope. You know money doesn't grow on trees, so is it better to add $40 million and risk not getting it, or to reduce other amounts from the total envelope and spend that money on research in French?

If we reduce research in English, we will increase the proportion of research in French. The $40 million will therefore be taken from the existing envelope. That may be a quicker, more tangible step.

[Linda Cardinal]

I think that proposal would provoke a backlash from our anglophone colleagues, who will say we're taking their money and giving it to francophones. I can't even imagine how poorly it could be received.

This additional money is not a play, Mr. Godin. The members of the advisory group understood that as the discussions went on. We've had 160 consultations, we've met with people, we've received briefs, and so on. I think it's necessary.

Today, the government finds money for all kinds of things. In research, $1.7 billion was announced for research chairs. The amount we're asking for is not huge.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Forty million dollars is not a lot.

[Linda Cardinal]

I don't think it's complicated. That $40 million is a drop in the bucket right now.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

The drops accumulate and, at some point, it's more difficult for the managers of public funds to manage, but I understand your vision.

In terms of official language minority communities, you talked about a 10% difference in less urban areas. Instead of being in large centres, these francophone communities are more isolated. Do you have a specific recommendation for those regions?

[Linda Cardinal]

In our report, we say that special attention must be paid to the Canadian francophonie. We are seeing, for example, that training the next generation of researchers has emerged as absolutely essential for the future of research in French. In minority communities, these are small institutions. We have the University of Ottawa, but—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Can you please wind up?

[Linda Cardinal]

Are you talking to me?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Your time is up. Please wind up the answer quickly.

[Linda Cardinal]

Minority communities have major needs in terms of master's and doctoral programs, as the next generation must be trained. In our report, it's clear: Research in minority communities and the work we do are done in collaboration with the community. That has an impact on economic development—