The Socio-Economic Importance of Scientific Research To Canada

The Socio-Economic Importance of Scientific Research to Canada Page 37© David A. Wolfe and Ammon SalterSSHRC 12.9 per cent (CAUT, 1997, p. 11). The magnitude of these reductions undeniablyrepresented a significant blow to the scientific community in Canada. In light of the numerouslong–term benefits of investing in basic research documented above, we are tempted to invokethe analogy of a government desperately eating its seed corn to cope with its current fiscalstraits!The last remaining hope for the research community was the S&T Review itself. However, aswe noted at the outset, the review was posed a number of questions at its inception withtroubling implications for that community. The review process itself was complex andinvolved. In addition to the numerous consultations held by the Secretariat, there were fourinterdepartmental committees at work, each of which produced an internal report, as well as areport issued by the National Advisory Board on Science and Technology. 24 One of the fourinterdepartmental committees dealt with some of the issues considered in this report. Itsconclusions were clear. The principle recommendation made in the final report of theinterdepartmental task group on the Advancement of Knowledge accentuated the importance ofadequately funding the research base in the post–secondary sector and the research intensivehospitals.The Task Group takes as its basic premise that Canada needs and must maintain astrong capability in fundamental research. . . . The Task Group therefore urges thegovernment to accord a high priority to ways and means of strengthening theuniversity research base in Canada (Government of Canada 1994d, p. 17).The federal S&T Review has been the subject of much discussion and some criticism, bothduring the period of its existence and since the release of its report. Part of the reason for theintense scrutiny to which it was subjected was the high expectations that it engendered in thescience and technology research community. The consultation itself was very inclusive,involving twenty-nine local meetings, five regional meetings and a final national meeting witha total of twenty-five hundred participants. There were few parts of this community notinvolved in the process to some degree. The inclusiveness of the process sustained the beliefthat the 1995 budget was a temporary step backwards and that the government intended achange in policy direction towards the goals articulated in its campaign platform of 1993 (de laMothe 1996, pp. 409-10).24 For a more detailed discussion of the review process itself and an assessment of the results, cf. de la Mothe1996.37