A future for science and innovation?
It's time for Canada's tomorrow

By Paul Dufour

Some years ago in these R$ pages, (December 21/09), I opined that we have yet to see a business card that says Minister for the Future. A recent speech (May 25) by the Australian Chief Scientist refers to himself as an Ambassador for the Future. That's close. CP Snow in his classic 1960 essay on Science and Government made the comment that "scientists have it within them to know what a future-directed society feels like, for science itself, in its human aspect, is just that."

Indeed, in the late 1960s, a great deal of foment and open public debate was underway in capitals around the globe to re-assess where governments stood on planning and investing for the future. More specifically, what role could research and the sciences contribute to mid- and long-term national economic and social goals? As one example, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) — then a 22 member think tank based in Paris — was examining the research systems of different countries. Canada was its 10th target, and in late 1969, the OECD published its results in both official languages.

The 400-page plus volume on Canada followed the usual procedure for such reviews. An international expert panel (from the OECD, France and Japan) was appointed to visit Canada and develop information and data based on specific questions about the national research system. A so-called "confrontation" took place in Paris with selected senior Canadian officials responding to the key findings of the report before its release.

Given current consultations underway by the Trudeau government, it bears remembering some key points in that report. The OECD recommendations included:

* A minster for science without departmental responsibility be established deriving authority from the prime minister;

* A Science Policy Council (of independent experts) to advise the government on scientific matters through a science minister;

* A Government Research Board of various science-based departments represented by their most senior officials to assist in interdepartmental coordination;

* A strengthened, more focussed role for Canadian universities to serve national goals through multi-disciplinary groups; and,

* A single comprehensive granting agency combining the functions of the then Medical Research Council, the Canada Council and NRC (which was then supporting university research as well).

So who says you can't go back to the future? Today, the Minister for Science (imbedded within the Industry portfolio) is contemplating a science advisory structure that will at least include a Chief Science Adviser and is mulling over what to do with a moribund Science, Technology and Innovation Council — perhaps with a new advisory apparatus that will be open and transparent to support the new science adviser.

As Kirsty Duncan meets with the senior levels of science-based departments and agencies, no doubt one topic will be trying to figure out how to better integrate government science within a new ecosystem being built up around science advice, research support and the forthcoming Innovation Agenda.

Additionally, the federal review of funding for research now underway — with help from an Advisory Panel on the Review of Federal Support for Fundamental Science now seeking applicants as members — will be exploring the scale and scope of the granting councils and other agencies and colleges that support the public research ecosystem across this country. Ultimately, however, much of this will have to somehow find its way into the proposed Innovation agenda.

Lessons from the past

Almost 15 years ago, the 2002 two-part policy thrust of the Chrétien Liberal administration tried, but failed, to effectively integrate the skills and learning foundation needed to stimulate innovation. Here's what then PM Chrétien said at the launch of the Toronto National Summit on Innovation and Learning in November 2002.

"First, we must make Canada a learning society; where learning and upgrading are continuous." An early childhood development agreement had been signed with the provinces and the Canada Millennium Scholarships were in full swing.

"Second, we must become a knowledge society that invests in ideas." The Canada Foundation for Innovation, Canadian Institutes for Health Research, Genome Canada and the 2000 Canada Research Chairs had been created and an agreement with AUCC —(now Universities Canada) — signalled a commitment that universities would double the amount of research they performed and triple their commercialization performance.

The PM also announced a revitalized Advisory Council on S&T (ACST) chaired by then minister of Industry Allan Rock who in turn had asked the advisory body to provide guidance on how to simplify and consolidate the research landscape. His predecessor, Brian Tobin, had met in September 2001 with provincial and territorial counterparts in Quebec outlining principles of action to speed up Canada's transition to an innovation and knowledge-based economy.

"Third, we have to improve how we bring ideas to market, creating clusters that link those who produce to those who apply knowledge". The national nanotechnology centre in Alberta had been announced.

"Fourth, we must work together on Smart Regulations that spur innovation." The government established an expert advisory committee on the subject along with a Smart Border Declaration).

"Finally, we need to draw on our Diversity of talent... that will create a quality of life in our communities that is second to none." An urban atrategy was designed; there was increased support for Aboriginal Business Canada and a PM' s Caucus Task Force on Women Entrepreneurs was launched.

Some argue that history rarely repeats, but it does rhyme at times. The closing section of Senator Lamontagne's final report on science policy in 1977 made the case for a Canadian Centre for Future Studies that could help identify aspects of Canadian society, knowledge, technology and economy that were changing most rapidly and how these would impact on Canadians.

This country might well introduce such assets in its policy planning, building on existing think tanks, government networks and academic centres, as we move to an innovative future, and hopefully with a strong and bold vision, for the country in 2017.

Paul Dufour is a Fellow and Adjunct Professor, Institute for Science, Society and Policy, University of Ottawa.