Evidence of meeting #6 for Science and Research in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was excellence.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
That's right. We don't need the names of the people. The goal isn't to try to endorse people in this process, but to know the current criteria for allocating funding to see if there are any systemic inequities. That's all it is.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
We will vote on the motion.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0)
With that, this panel comes to an end.
I want to thank all our witnesses today for coming to this meeting. Thank you for the work you have done and for your important testimony.
Go ahead, Mr. Blanchette-Joncas.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
I just want to understand what's happening right now. I was starting my round of questions. I tabled a motion, but normally, the time taken to table a motion isn't counted in the time allotted. Therefore, my time is not up.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Thank you very much.
I'm going to continue asking questions of the witnesses who are with us today. I have a question for Mr. Hébert.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
I have a point of order.
I apologize to my colleague, but that same rule will apply to my colleague, who also had her round of questioning coming up next, as well, after—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
No, the panel has to come to an end because of the time, so this will be the last round of questions. Our time is over. We have to then move to an in camera meeting for our committee business.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
Well, I would suggest, if we could, the courtesy of the committee members to extend the hearing until one more—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
That will be up to all the members. If it is a unanimous decision to go to two other members....
What is the will of the committee members?
Go ahead, Mr. Mahal.
Conservative
Jagsharan Singh Mahal Conservative Edmonton Southeast, AB
I think, Madam Chair, you also mentioned that, after Mr. Blanchette-Joncas, we would have three minutes more, so maybe you want to check.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Let us go ahead, because it was a point of order.
We will go to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Dr. Hébert, a study published in The Lancet in 2019 was based on an experience of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. It revealed that when evaluations focus on the applicant's background rather than on the science, women aren't evaluated as favourably.
How do you justify continuing to introduce non-scientific criteria into your evaluations, and even creating entire scholarships based on those criteria?
President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
I'm having a bit of trouble understanding. Ultimately, our criteria are criteria of excellence. So, basically, we look at the foundation of the research, we note the innovative parts, their importance and all that.
I can answer the question in two ways.
On the one hand, we've done extensive multivariate analyses with the data you're talking about. What all our evaluations show is that we are still having some difficulty in ensuring that women are rated as well as men. Clearly, you are right to say that there is still some bias in the evaluations.
On the other hand, even if it does exist, that bias isn't significant. I'm sure you'd be interested to know that there is no bias in the processing of francophone applications. My point is that we have to be careful when studying the data and ensure that we're comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges. In our evaluations, when we conduct multivariate rather than simple analyses, it appears that there is still a bias that puts women at a disadvantage, which we are trying to correct.
That said, do you know what the biggest priority is, Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas?
President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
It's the region of Canada. The biggest bias, from an intersectoral point of view, is that the Atlantic provinces are neglected more often than the rest of the country, like two other Canadian provinces: Manitoba, in our case, and Saskatchewan.
Two things can explain that. First, there is a geographic element, which is found in our data and which interests us a great deal. We're trying to figure out how to meet that imperative. I'm interested in this because I'm Acadian, and I hear the—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
With that, this panel comes to an end. We will suspend the meeting so that we can go in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]