|
Canadian Alliance Dissenting Report
The Canadian Alliance does support prudent investments in innovation, technology and research. It has called for increasing funding for Canada’s research granting councils: the National Research Council (NRC), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). The Canadian Alliance also supports a competitive peer review process to determine who shall receive grants through these respective councils.
The Canadian Alliance members of this committee would like to emphasize certain recommendations of this report, as well as express some concerns or reservations about other recommendations.
Firstly, the Canadian Alliance strongly supports recommendation 6: “That the Government of Canada establish a more formalized mechanism, in consultation with the provinces and territories, for setting or modifying S&T policy, deciding on funding priorities, and ensuring that they are implemented. Such a framework could include a science advisory body and/or Chief Scientific Adviser that would report directly to Parliament.
We have consistently called for a funding framework for Science & Technology in the 37th Parliament; unfortunately, numerous Secretaries of State for Science and Technology and Ministers of Industry have ignored this advice and failed to establish a framework. We hope that the government will finally act on this recommendation.
We also hope that the government will appoint a Chief Scientist of Canada, who would coordinate science activities in all government departments, help scientists communicate their findings, and help bridge the gap between scientists, bureaucrats and elected officials.
Secondly, the Canadian Alliance is very concerned that over half of the recommendations in this report call for increased funding in one way or another, and do so in a very general way with no specific figures or guidelines attached. From our perspective, to constantly request more funding for every area, group, or agency without attaching specific numbers — or even prioritizing — is fiscally irresponsible for a Parliamentary Committee and not the way in which to build a modern Research & Development infrastructure in Canada.
Thirdly, the Canadian Alliance believes that we should not single out SSHRC for special attention, as is done in recommendation number 3. There was much debate about the perceived inequity in funding for SSHRC vis-à-vis the other granting agencies; however, this perception must be based on some evidence other than statements by the granting agencies themselves. This could certainly be an issue for further study by this committee.
Furthermore, tying increased funding to SSHRC to small universities is a mistake. If small universities are facing extraordinary funding problems, then the government should address this issue separately from the funding of research and development. It should address it through stable long-term funding via the Canada Health & Social Transfer (CHST), rather than setting up separate national programs – such as the recent Trudeau fellowship — which deplete the government’s ability to ensure stable long-term funding.
Fourthly, the Canadian Alliance is concerned that the committee is recommending moving away from merit as the guiding principle to direct research funding. As mentioned with respect to SSHRC, Committee members appear intent on using funding to granting agencies to address fiscal problems facing small universities and colleges. In order to be internationally competitive in science, medical and humanities research, Canada must be guided by merit and excellence in its public funding of Research & Development; and should address the problem of funding for small universities and colleges separately.
The Canadian Alliance members of this Committee are concerned about the implications of funnelling research dollars into every post-secondary institution in Canada. Some committee members seem intent on transforming ever post-secondary institution in Canada into a research-based institution; and in doing so, seem unaware of the dangers this would pose to a true liberal arts education. One of the major crises facing post‑secondary education in the humanities is pressure on professors to focus on research at the expense of teaching and developing the next generation of critical thinking citizens, citizens which are essential to ensuring the long term health of a democratic society.
James Rajotte, Industry Critic
Brian Fitzpatrick
Cheryl Gallant
|