Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, the parliamentary secretary, for being here tonight to answer these questions.
My question is not about the overall level of funding for research in Canada. It is not about the overall number of research projects that are supported by the federal government. I hope the member opposite does not simply recite those figures again, which is what happened in question period the first time.
My question is about the fact that the current government is moving toward more support for industry-academic partnerships, which is research directed by a particular industry partner that has proprietary interests. By itself, this is okay, but what is happening is that this new support for industry-academic partnerships is coming at the expense of funding basic research. That is what is happening now in the budget of Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and it is happening at the National Research Council.
Game changing discoveries come from basic research. I will give one example of this sort of curiosity-driven research which results in unexpected discoveries that have a lot of economic importance.
The example comes from the University of Sherbrooke. In the late 1980s, it developed something called the algebraic code-excited linear prediction. It is a patented mathematical algorithm for converting sounds, such as voice messages, to digital signals. In fact, it is used in most cellphones around the world today. It is used in Windows Media Player, RealPlayer and QuickTime Player. These are things that are familiar to people who use computers and the Internet today.
This is an example of basic research, which was not conducted with any particular company's bottom line or near or middle-term interests in mind. However, I think the researchers realized that this research had a lot of potential, so they undertook it.
A lot of people would say that Canadian research needs to be more attuned to what the market is saying, what the needs of the market are, and we should be asking the market what research needs to be done. However, this is not always the case and there are some interesting historical examples of where the market has been wrong.
These are some rather famous quotes.
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, said in 1943, “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers”.
Ken Olsen, the president and founder of DEC, Digital Equipment Corporation, said in 1977, “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home”.
One of the Warner brothers said in 1927, “Who the...wants to hear actors talk?”
Steve Jobs said, “A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them”.
The market does not always know a good next step in the development of some technology. Therefore, it is important to support the possibility of unexpected game changing discoveries that are directed by the curiosity of researchers.
Why is the government funding moving away to research where a company decides what a university research does and doing that at the expense of basic research? Again, my question is not about the overall level of spending in research. It is not about the number of projects that are supported. I hope my hon. colleague will answer in that respect.