Editorial - 22-10

The release of the federal Expert Panel examining the feasibility of transferring government labs into the academic or private sectors has been one of the most eagerly anticipated developments for public R&D in years. Integrating federal S&T facilities and people with organizations possessing complementary strengths is widely viewed as a prudent avenue worthy of serious exploration.

Now that it's out (the result of an access to information request) and the government has officially responded, the reaction can only be described as one of disappointment. Saddled with a flawed mandate and brutally short timeframe, the Expert Panel did an admirable job under the circumstances, producing a credible framework for S&T integration that can be built on and used for future opportunities.

Uncertainty over the term "transfer" was the first hurdle that the Panel tackled, coming up with a more accurate, if unwieldy, definition (inter-sectoral S&T integration or ISTI). Then there was the challenge of determining which of the 198 non-regulatory federal labs were suitable for ISTI, resulting in a call for proposals that unleashed a major response primarily from the academic sector.

After consulting and analyzing the 56 proposals, the Panel produced a short list of five, only to have the government cut that number to two. It appears that some if not all of the labs included in the other three were not even consulted prior to the proposals being submitted.

Suspicion is mounting that the report will be quietly shelved and filed along with a host of other S&T policy misfires. This is a missed opportunity.