Peter Morand

Priming Canada's innovation engine…finally

By Dr Peter Morand

Canada's continued poor performance in innovation despite much rhetoric by the federal government's policy gurus led to the creation of the Expert Panel chaired by Tom Jenkins of OpenText in the fall of 2010. Its mandate was to "conduct a comprehensive review of federal support for R&D" and to make recommendations on optimizing federal support to make the maximum impact "to innovation and economic opportunities for business and Canadian workers."

The Panel submitted its report (Innovation Canada: A Call to Action) last fall. It was articulate, well-documented and made very specific recommendations — not the kind of vague recommendations we have seen all too often from previous expert panels. What is even more impressive is that Budget 2012 intends to implement some of the Panel's recommendations (changes in the SRED program, increase in IRAP budget). I was also relieved to see that some of the recommendations made by the Panel have not been acted upon. I say this because I differ with some of its recommendations that relate to the National Research Council (NRC), which along with our colleges and universities, is an essential component of Canada's innovation engine.

The Panel has recommended the creation of an Industrial Research and Innovation Council (IRIC) as an arms-length funding and delivery agency with "a clear and sharply focussed mission to support business innovation". The federal government already has in place a number of programs to foster business innovation and there is no doubt a need to improve the coordination and viability of these programs. But do we need an IRIC to achieve these objectives?

In the past, the federal government has invested in the development of mechanisms to help Canada attain commercial success in certain sectors (e.g. nuclear energy, aerospace) but rather than continue to build on these pillars and to adapt them to external changes, they have been abandoned at crucial stages along with all the priceless human capital associated with them.

The NRC is Canada's most valuable asset for developing its knowledge-based economy and for meeting its innovation targets. It has a physical presence in all parts of Canada and has delivered on innovation (laser applications, vaccines, pacemakers) for over a century. Along with our postsecondary institutions and granting councils with their programs promoting innovation, we already have in place the tools to rev up Canada's innovation performance.

To address some of the Panel's recommendations, why not mandate NRC to coordinate federal spending on R&D (R$, November 13/08) and strengthen NRC's focus on business innovation, possibly along the lines already proposed? (R$, May 2/11) And, of course, NRC is already well-positioned to implement "a national commercialization vouchers pilot program, delivered within the suite of existing support mechanisms offered through IRAP" as recommended by the Panel.

On reading the Panel's report, I did not see a rationale for shifting delivery of IRAP from NRC to the proposed IRIC. That being said, there are compelling arguments for keeping IRAP closely integrated within NRC's Canada-wide S&T infrastructure of state-of-the-art equipment and leading-edge experts. I have been closely involved with many technology start-ups that have benefited from the financial support and valuable business and technology advice received from NRC-IRAP. Invariably that support was complemented by access to NRC's specialized facilities and expertise — a key factor in reaching time-sensitive milestones. This kind of synergy is essential for optimizing the innovation process in the race for globally competitive products and services.

The Panel stresses that Canada must act now to improve its innovation performance and offers IRIC as the panacea for achieving this. To embark on the creation of this new entity is certain to delay the resolution of an urgent problem. The broad mandate proposed for IRIC will require buy-in from the provinces and many adjustments and concessions will have to be made to bring IRIC in line with existing infrastructure.

One has to ask whether the IRIC would be able to deliver all the wonderful outcomes anticipated by the Panel or whether it would just become another toothless, bureaucratic layer. It seems incongruous that the Panel has made specific proposals to improve existing innovation-oriented programs along with a game-changing recommendation that has such a high level of risk in achieving its objectives in a critical, time-limited horizon.

Rather than identify a lead minister responsible for innovation as recommended by the Panel, why not consolidate the current Minister of State (Science and Technology) and Minister of Industry positions into Minister of Science, Technology and Business Innovation as a high profile Cabinet position? Our present system of government is flexible enough to do this quickly. Then the challenge would be to appoint a highly qualified and credible person to this new ministerial position. Such an appointee could restructure the Department of Industry into an arm of government that focuses on business innovation — de facto giving it the mandate of the proposed IRIC but with much more clout. The bottom line is to provide leadership for improved business innovation and this has to begin at the political level.

If the right person is identified for what will undoubtedly be a defining role for Canada's economic destiny, he/she could set to work now on addressing the innovation gaps identified in the Panel's report. Some of the Panel's recommendations can be considered for implementation within the federal government's existing infrastructure. But I stress that NRC should continue to play a pivotal role in bringing about the changes needed to improve Canada's performance in business innovation. What is even more important is that this new department would send a message that the federal government is serious about making business innovation the keystone of its economic policies.

Peter Morand is former dean of science and engineering, University of Ottawa, past president, NSERC and past president & CEO, Canadian Science & Technology Growth Fund. petermorand@rogers.com

Other R$ articles on innovation by the author

1. Optimizing the commercialization of university research (R$, June 6/06).

2. Looking beyond universities in a knowledge economy (R$, Feb 5/07).

3. Optimizing Canada's knowledge base for a sustainable economy (R$, Jul 23/07).

4. Making federal government R&D more effective (R$, Nov 13/08).

5. Is the National Research Council on the right track? (R$, May 2/11).