On 6 November, the committee heard testimony from the following witnesses: Nobina Robinson, Chief Executive Officer, and Ken Doyle, Director of Policy, from Polytechnics Canada;  Emechete Onuoha, Vice-President, Citizenship & Government Affairs, and Patricia Hawkins, Business Manager, Research Agreements & Innovation Services, from Xerox Canada;  Tom Brzustowski, retired Professor, Telfer School of Management, Ottawa University; and Robert J. Currie, Associate Professor, Schulich School of Law, Law & Technology Institute, Dalhousie University. Nobina Robinson voiced concern over the lack of a coherent, collaborative and responsive innovation within the market ecosystem. She argued that clear definition of the roles of universities and colleges is needed along with reallocation of funds by the government to industrial applied research to increase market competitiveness. To solve the imbalance between discovery research and commercialization support, Ken Doyle suggested investing in programs which solves industry identified problems (e.g the innovation program administered by NSERC) and introducing a national form of voucher program for late stage commercialization support. Mr Onuoha further commented on how strategic investment and applied research in commercialization are critical for the success of innovation. Information communication technology companies like Xerox drive nearly 35% of all private sectors research and development spending annually in Canada and thus can extend the impact of established value added R&D investment. Mr. Brzustowski emphasized the importance of having a strong first patent for market exclusivity; this is a useful protection tool especially where patent disputes and litigations are involved. Robert J. Currie elaborated on how the unofficial use of official marks have been used by public authorities for revenues at the expanse of tax payers; he suggested reforming the trademark act (section 9, subsection 1, paragraph N, subparagraph 3) to limit the authority scope of official marks.

The meeting this week was short as one of the committee members, Mme LeBlanc, moved that a study of the criteria, including national security, defining the “net benefit to Canada” that apply to the review of foreign acquisitions of natural resources by foreign state-owned enterprises be undertaken by the committee. The committee then proceeded to sit in-camera to deal with the motion. To see if the motion passed, see the Minutes.

The post Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology (INDU) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The Green Party advocates changes that would enhance both teaching and learning.  We have called for a universal, child-care program for pre-schoolers.  We also have policies relating to the growing number of youths dropping out of school with no job prospects.  And, while education is a provincial matter, we believe the federal government should provide funding to increase the number of spaces at post-secondary institutions along with needs-based scholarships and bursaries to reduce financial barriers for potential students.  (Too many of our young graduates are facing terrible debt.)  We also support lifelong-learning programs.

Canada is transitioning into an information-based society – and, if the majority of Canadians have their way, a green economy.  These require research, creativity, and innovation.  They also depend on well-trained and respected teachers.  The Green Party thanks and salutes our teachers!

The post Teachers Day Statement appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I am unhappy with the fact that this bill is continually described as though it will do great things for jobs and the economy, while we have failed as parliamentarians to examine the ways in which Bill C-38 is a threat to jobs and our economy.

I am taken by the fact that many Conservative members have spoken tonight about the importance of competitiveness, research and development, and innovation, yet all the best studies in the world on competitiveness—I mentioned, for example, Michael Porter at Harvard University—have said that when the rigour of environmental regulations is reduced, the result is less competitiveness and fewer innovations.

This is the one area where Canada is really lagging, R and D and innovation. Would my hon. friend comment on whether he agrees with me that this so-called budget implementation bill will actually undermine Canada’s competitiveness and reduce our ability to come up with the research and innovation to stay ahead?

David McGuinty: Mr. Speaker, the member’s question is spot on.

In the 21st century, we should not be racing to compete with jurisdictions that can dig up minerals, cut forests, harvest fish and move into the natural resources industry that Canada used to excel at in the early 20th century. This is not Canada’s role for the future.

Where is the investment and venture capital? Why are we discussing new start-ups for Canada? Why is the Sustainable Development Technology foundation being robbed of capital to capitalize and partner with our private sector to give rise to new green technologies?

The race is on for energy efficiency all over the planet. Every jurisdiction knows this. Canada should be leading this race, but unfortunately I do not think the Prime Minister has a pair of running shoes.

The post Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act (Bill C-38) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

An idea floated during the ongoing Industry, Science and Technology Committee meetings was the establishment of carbon-neutral server farms, with the added benefit of co-generated heat that could be used in communities.  “Competition for hosting these facilities has already begun,” said May. “Our vastness and cold climate make Canada potentially attractive, but surveys show confusion about Canada’s legislative frameworks and applicable policies.”

Experts suggest that Canada needs strong privacy laws, including anti-spam regulations, tougher enforcement measures, and court oversight for mandatory personal information disclosure. Canada also needs to invest more heavily in research and development, including incentives to invest in equipment and technology. Another serious impediment: the talent pool of Canadian professionals in relevant fields is not keeping up with rapidly growing demand.

“Canada is the last among OECD countries for R&D spending.  Our universities are struggling with lack of funds.  Government programs should encourage more partnerships and provide more long-term, stable funding.  Datacentres can be part of a strong economy for the future if it is nurtured and encouraged,” said May.

The post Canada Could Be Leader In Carbon-Neutral Datacentres appeared first on Elizabeth May.

An idea floated during the ongoing Industry, Science and Technology Committee meetings was the establishment of carbon-neutral server farms, with the added benefit of co-generated heat that could be used in communities.  “Competition for hosting these facilities has already begun,” said May. “Our vastness and cold climate make Canada potentially attractive, but surveys show confusion about Canada’s legislative frameworks and applicable policies.”

Experts suggest that Canada needs strong privacy laws, including anti-spam regulations, tougher enforcement measures, and court oversight for mandatory personal information disclosure.  Canada also needs to invest more heavily in research and development, including incentives to invest in equipment and technology. Another serious impediment: the talent pool of Canadian professionals in relevant fields is not keeping up with rapidly growing demand.

“Canada is the last among OECD countries for R&D spending.  Our universities are struggling with lack of funds.  Government programs should encourage more partnerships and provide more long-term, stable funding.  Datacentres can be part of a strong economy for the future if it is nurtured and encouraged,” said May.

The post Canada Could Be Leader In Carbon-Neutral Datacentres appeared first on Elizabeth May.