2015 Federal Election Questionnaire

The last few years have seen increasing public concern with the state of Canadian science. In response to these concerns, Evidence for Democracy posed the following questions to the leaders of major political parties. Their responses are presented here in full. No response was received from the Conservative Party of Canada.

Evidence-based decision-making

Background

The case for evidence-based decision-making is compelling. Governments see advantages from moving towards processes that ensure that decisions are based on the best available evidence, from appropriately considering and communicating scientific uncertainties, and making explicit both the scientific and non-scientific elements of decisions. To ensure they receive the best possible science advice, governments have established external science and technology committees that provide independent, arms-length science and technology advice and capacity, ensuring that the best available scientific evidence is appropriately represented and considered.

Question 1a: What do you see as the value of scientific evidence for informing decision making at the federal level in Canada?

Green Party of Canada

We live in an information age. Governments are both uniquely placed and democratically mandated to make full use of available scientific evidence in service of the public good. Yet, despite the unprecedented accessibility of current scientific evidence, our government persists in decision-based evidence-making.

Scientific evidence should be the foundation of federal decision-making. Scientific research should not be influenced by partisan considerations, nor should it be subject to across-the-board austerity measures. We must restore and expand our scientific capacity. Scientific evidence will always serve as a non-partisan check on authority. Its integration into government activities must be assured. Our democracy depends on it.

Liberal Party of Canada

The Liberal Party of Canada knows that evidence-based policy-making is necessary for governments to develop sound policy and programs that meet the needs of Canadians and provide other levels of government, businesses, and civil society with the tools to enrich our national life. Without evidence, the government makes arbitrary decisions with the potential to negatively affect the daily lives of Canadians. A Liberal government will ensure this does not happen and that the federal government rebuilds its capacity to deliver on evidence-based decision-making.

Further, we value the contributions of Canada’s scientists and researchers, without whom the government is unable to make well-informed policy and program decisions to ensure the safety of Canadians, the protection of the environment, and the growth of our economy.

New Democratic Party of Canada

The Conservative government has waged an ideological war on the scientific community. Tom Mulcair and the NDP support Evidence for Democracy’s strong defense of public science. We believe that all Canadians benefit when governments solicit, collect and use the evidence and expertise needed to make smart policy decisions that safeguard the health, safety and prosperity of Canadians. New Democrats support actions that invest in public-interest science; ensure open, honest and timely communication of scientific information; and make public the evidence considered in government decisions.

For instance, New Democrats have consistently defended the need to obtain better and more accurate labour market information to help government craft policy and programs attuned to Canada’s real labour market challenges. Lack of up to date and reliable labour market information, for one, has made it impossible to manage the Temporary Foreign Worker Program. New Democrats believe we need to bolster the independent, environmental assessment process in order to independently assess the impact of natural resource development projects on the health, safety and environment of Canadians and the communities in which they live.

New Democrats have worked hard to make the voices of the scientific community heard in Ottawa. We have opposed the government’s reckless cuts to research funding while defending the need for true scientific integrity and evidence based decision making.

Question 1b: How do you propose to ensure that government decisions are based on the best available evidence?

Green Party of Canada

To access the best available evidence, we need to invest in the best available science. The Green Party believes we must renew our commitment to public science by reinvesting in in our in our federal scientific capacity. We must also defend and promote “Discovery Science,” or basic research. Funding for curiosity-driven research is scarce in Canada. Instead of funding scientific inquiry, we are subsidizing the profit-driven research & development of large corporations. The health of basic research in Canada must be restored.

Liberal Party of Canada

In order to ensure that government decisions are based on the best available evidence, a Liberal government will ensure that scientists—public and private—can once again pursue pure research and innovation and have the freedom to speak and discuss their ideas and findings publically, both nationally and internationally.

To this end, we have already committed that a Liberal government will revoke the rules and regulations that muzzle government scientists and allow them to speak freely about their work, with only limited and publicly-stated exceptions. We need scientists to conduct research for the public good and share their findings free from political interference. In doing so, we also ensure that policy-makers have the right facts so they can best serve Canadians.

We will also work collaboratively with stakeholders and other levels of government to develop policy that takes into account the best science and evidence available. Fundamental to this will be restoring the mandatory Long Form Census.

New Democratic Party of Canada

Tom Mulcair and the NDP have fought to make the voices of the scientific community heard in Ottawa. We have tabled The Parliamentary Science Officer Act, Bill C-558 to end the muzzling of government scientists. The Bill is a first practical step to mend the relationship between scientists and politicians, and will give public science a more robust voice in the federal government. The Parliamentary Science Officer would have a mandate to assess the state of scientific evidence relevant to any proposal or bill before Parliament; conduct independent analysis of federal science and technology policy; raise awareness of scientific issues across government and among Canadians; and encourage coordination between departments and agencies conducting scientific research.

We have also tabled Bill C-346 to reinstate Statistics Canada’s long-form census and increase the independence of the Chief Statistician.

Question 1c: How would you go about strengthening the role of scientific evidence in federal decision-making in Canada?

Green Party of Canada

The best available evidence is only as good insofar as it informs government decision-making. The Green Party will strengthen the role of scientific evidence in federal decision-making by implementing several key reforms.

We will start by bolstering the science-based decision-making capacity of the executive and legislative branches. The foolish cuts made by the Harper Conservatives must be reversed and the position of the National Science Advisor to the Prime Minister restored. As many experts have called for, we must establish an independent Parliamentary Science Officer to provide Parliamentarians and the public with independent scientific analysis on the issues of the day. The Green Party will also build a mandatory evaluation of the evidentiary foundations of any proposed legislation into the federal legislative process. This means establishing that the evidence is transparent, rigorous and ethically-produced; that there is an open flow of information; that the evidence is preserved and easy to access and understand; and that the evidence used is the best available information and free from political manipulation. The evidentiary basis for all of our laws should be evaluated regularly and laws revised as needed.

The Green Party will also commit to unmuzzling our federal scientists. Public science belongs to the people. It is not for the communications specialists in the Prime Minister’s Office to decide what publicly funded information becomes known. In June, 2015, Elizabeth May introduced the Public Access to Science Act to make all publicly funded scientific research publicly accessible by law. As Ms. May said at the time: “My bill will ensure that no prime minister can ever bury government science again. While this problem is not new, the Harper years have seen a shocking burial of evidence into places where Canadians will never see it. The work our scientists do is too important to be hidden from view, simply because it is inconvenient to the Prime Minister’s agenda. The challenges we face require an open and transparent engagement with the facts.”

We need to lift the cloud of darkness recently placed on the federal public service, where scientists have been forbidden from sharing their findings with the public. The challenges we face are existential. We need all the evidence we can muster to design the best possible policies to meet them. It is irresponsible to hide evidence because it is inconvenient. 

Liberal Party of Canada

A Liberal government will prioritize evidence and good policy over ideology in our decision making. We will also implement a number of measures in addition to those mentioned elsewhere in this survey, including:

  • releasing key information that informs decision-making.
  • devoting a fixed percentage of program funds to experimenting with new approaches to existing problems, instilling a culture of measuring results, innovation, and continuous improvement in how government serves the needs of Canadians.
  • stopping funding initiatives that are no longer effective and invest program dollars in those that are of good value.

More details on our commitment to the federal government functioning with evidence-based decision-making are available on RealChange.ca.

New Democratic Party of Canada

Tom Mulcair and New Democrats have opposed the government’s reckless cuts to research funding while defending the need for true scientific integrity and evidence based decision making. Political interference in the communication of science undermines our researchers and democracy as a whole. Along with our plan to create the office of the Parliamentary Science Officer. The NDP also tabled a plan to ensure communications officers, elected officials, and Ministerial staff could no longer restrict public access to government scientists. Motion-453 on scientific integrity called for federal departments and agencies conducting scientific research to identify, develop, and implement communication policies that empower rather than hinder the ability of federal scientists to share their research with the public. The NDP also supports making it easier for the public to have access to government funded research and science.

Maintaining federal capacity for public science

Background

Public interest science informs programs policies, and supports drafting laws designed to promote healthy minds, bodies, communities, environments and economies. In Canada, funding of in-house government science shrank from 0.19% of GDP in 2006 to 0.15% in 2013. This level of funding is considerably lower than the 2013 OECD average of 0.27%. $596 million (in constant 2007 dollars) were cut from federal S&T budgets between 2008 and 2013, along with the equivalent of 2,141 full-time employees mostly scientists and technical personnel. These reductions resulted in a loss of scientific programs devoted to public health, safety, weather and the environment.

Question 2a: Do you believe that current levels of federal support for public science are sufficient to meet the federal government’s responsibilities?

Green Party of Canada

No, the Green Party does not believe that current levels of federal support for public science are sufficient to meet the federal government’s responsibilities. Over the past nine years, the Harper administration has waged a war on science. Many programs have been eliminated, while others have been so severely slashed that civil servants can no longer work effectively. Despite these cuts, the size of the federal bureaucracy has grown. In fact, the number of people working in the federal civil service has never been greater. Yet fewer civil servants work in basic research or in key areas of environmental research and monitoring. The scientists who remain have been muzzled and gagged.

Restoring robust capacity in federal science will take more than reversing Harper era cuts. The deep budget cuts by the former Liberal Government coincided with a widespread fixation on ‘smaller government’ and a managerial fetish in the civil service. Many experienced scientists took early retirement on very favourable terms. Managers from other departments, without any scientific background, moved into key positions in departments such as Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans. Policy expertise has been superseded by generic management experience.

While Greens do not favour big government for its own sake, it is penny-wise and pound-foolish to allow government policy to be starved of solid in-house scientific expertise. Operating with a ‘leaner’ civil service means that much of the work ends up being ‘out-sourced’ at a higher cost than if the government had its own scientific strength.

Greens believe that the federal government must signal to the civil service that it values and supports a strong scientific capacity for the Government of Canada. That includes regularly seeking scientific advice at all levels of environmentally-related decision making. We decry the destruction of core scientific capacity. Without federal scientific expertise and consistent and reliable monitoring of key ecological indicators, we are flying blind.

Liberal Party of Canada

We believe that that Conservative government’s cuts to science funding over the last decade have severely damaged the federal government’s capacity to do their job, including protecting the environment and the health and safety of Canadians.

New Democratic Party of Canada

New Democrats have worked hard to make the voices of the scientific community heard in Ottawa. We have opposed the government’s reckless cuts to research funding while defending the need for true scientific integrity and evidence based decision making. While the Conservatives claim to have invested record amounts in research and innovation, in reality they have slashed over $1.1 billion and eliminated 4000 federal researchers since forming a majority in 2011 – according to the latest figures from Statistics Canada. Conservatives have cut funding to over a dozen research programs and organizations, across the departments of Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Library and Archives Canada, National Research Council Canada, Statistics Canada, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; and to the National Council of Welfare and the First Nations Statistical Institute. Additionally, they have limited the government’s ability to gather data and evidence through eliminating the long form census.

Canadians that rely on a public servants and researchers to be equipped with the tools and information available to help them offer high-quality services deserve better.

Question 2b: If not, what will you do to increase public science capacity at the federal level?

Green Party of Canada

The Green Party will rebuild scientific capacity in the Government of Canada with particular attention to departments that have incurred the most devastating losses – Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans, Parks Canada, and Health Canada. Priority areas for immediate action include restoring the Ocean Contaminants & Marine Toxicology Program, renewing and increasing capacity in the Canadian Coast Guard (particularly in the areas of emergency response and spill prevention), and reversing cuts to climate adaptation programs.

In addition, the Green Party will take the following steps to increase public science capacity at the federal level:

  • Direct the Clerk of the Privy Council to reform the civil service to elevate core competence over management culture
  • Include $75 million annually in the federal budget to be used for adding knowledgeable scientific staff to Environment Canada, Health  Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans, thereby increasing their competency
  • Re-establish the post of Ambassador for the Environment and Sustainable Development, a position that was eliminated by the Conservatives in 2006
  • Ensure that scientists in the federal government are free to publish their research and to speak to the media and public about their findings, without interference from multiple levels of management bureaucracy
  • Reinstate federal funding to the Experimental Lakes Area to assist the Ontario government and the International Institute for Sustainable Development with management of the 58 inland lakes and their unique research
  • Re-establish the adaptation research group within Environment Canada and restore funding to climate science through the Canadian Climate Forum
  • Re-establish the Marine Mammals Contaminants Monitoring Program within the Department of Fisheries and Oceans
  • Establish a task force with expertise from science librarians, the Royal Society of Canada, and others with library and archives experience to review the closing of federal science libraries during the Harper era. A full review needs to be undertaken to determine whether the federal law protecting our documentary heritage was violated, to assess damage, and make recommendations for restoring scientific library capacity within the federal government. This review should be expeditious, with a mandate to report findings within 12 months.
  • Ensure the independence of the Commissioner for the Environment and Sustainable Development, through a stand-alone piece of legislation allowing the Commissioner to report directly to the House of Commons and serve as an Officer of Parliament;
  • Create a robust and independent National Academy of Sciences that builds on the independent not-for profit Council of Canadian Academies, bringing together the Royal Society of Canada, the Canadian Academy of Engineering, and the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences. Among other things, this would provide lawmakers with direct access to objective science on medicine, energy, the environment and more for evaluating the evidentiary foundations of any proposed legislation.

Liberal Party of Canada

A Liberal government will ensure that federal scientists have the stable, predictable funding they need to exercise their mandates. We know that investments in research, technology and innovation are investments in Canada and Canadians’ current and ongoing success.

We have made extensive commitments to restore the credibility of environmental assessments by ensuring that decisions are based on science, facts, and evidence, in order to serve the public’s interest, and detailed how a Liberal government would take action on climate change, invest in clean technologies, create clean jobs and investment, and more. We will restore $25 million in science funding to our National Parks and reverse the Conservative cuts to ocean science and monitoring programs.

Over the course of this campaign, we will be making additional commitments to strengthen the middle class and grow our economy, including new investments in post-secondary education, research and innovation, and measures that create the jobs of today and lay a foundation so that the jobs of tomorrow are created here in Canada. We look forward to sharing those with you in the days and weeks to come.

New Democratic Party of Canada

The NDP is committed to supporting public science and research. We have opposed the government’s reckless cuts to research funding while defending the need for true scientific integrity and evidence based decision making. Political interference in the communication of science undermines our researchers and democracy as a whole. Along with our plan to create the office of the Parliamentary Science Officer. The NDP also tabled a plan to ensure communications officers, elected officials, and Ministerial staff could no longer restrict public access to government scientists. Motion-453 on scientific integrity called for federal departments and agencies conducting scientific research to identify, develop, and implement communication policies that empower rather than hinder the ability of federal scientists to share their research with the public. The NDP also supports making it easier for the public to have access to government funded research and science.

Encouraging business investment in scientific research and development

Background

Business investment in scientific research and development is an important component of both the science enterprise and the Canadian economy. In 2013, Canadian business investment in scientific research and development amounted to about 0.82% of GDP, down from 1.11% in 2006, and about half the OECD average of 1.64%. During the same period, business investment in research and development (as a percentage of GDP) has increased in most other G7 countries. The decline in Canada has occurred despite a federal science, technology and innovation strategy designed specifically to increase business investment in scientific research and development.

Question 3a: Do you believe that the investment by Canada’s business sector in scientific research and development is sufficient?

Green Party of Canada

Investigation at small universities is disappearing and there is no longer a balance between basic and applied science. By starving the source of creativity and discovery, we are rapidly losing our capacity for long-term innovation. Funding that was previously destined for curiosity-driven research in many labs across Canada has been shifted into partnerships with industry, with a concentration in large research-intensive universities. This is bad policy, both for enhancing scientific research and for the education of highly qualified scientists across the country. 

Liberal Party of Canada

A Trudeau Liberal government will make the critical investments in innovation, science, and data needed to create the jobs of tomorrow.

According to the OECD, Canada used to rank in the top-ten countries for total investments in R&D. Not anymore. This is the result of the Harper government’s decade of closing research facilities and cutting support for science.

In addition to restoring the Labour Sponsored Venture Capital Tax Credit, we will work with innovators in biotech, IT, and cleantech. We will bring the 3Es of energy, environment, and the economy together to restore Canada’s environmental reputation and make Canada a global leader in the green economy.

In the age of meta-data, smart governments and smart businesses invest massively in getting the best information in order to make the best possible decisions. I can only think of one organization in the world that over the last ten years has chosen deliberately to reduce both the quality and quantity of data it gathers from which to make decisions. That organization is the Harper government. They got rid of the long-form census and replaced it with a voluntary national household survey that manages to be both more expensive and less reliable.

We will support private sector innovation and research by investing $200 million more annually to create sector-specific strategies that support innovation and clean technologies in the forestry, fisheries, mining, energy, and agricultural sectors. These strategies will be developed in collaboration with the private sector, government, and research institutions, with the objective of producing real innovations that can be deployed in our natural resources sectors, commercialized, brought to scale, and exported.

New Democratic Party of Canada

Under Stephen Harper, Canadian manufacturing companies have cut investments in innovation-boosting research and development. As a consequence, Canada has fallen from 18th position to 25th out of 41 countries for the total business investments in research and development as a proportion of our GDP, according to the Science, Technology and Innovation Council’s 2012 State of the Nation report. Instead of supporting innovation in our manufacturing sector, Conservatives cut hundreds of millions in support for business investments in R&D. This included eliminating capital expenditures from eligibility under Canada’s Scientific Research and Experimental Development Tax Incentive Program. These cuts further weakened business innovation and put capital-intensive sectors like manufacturing at a major disadvantage and distorted economic activity.

Question 3b: If not, what would you do to increase it?

Green Party of Canada

Ultimately, governments cannot direct how businesses choose to spend on R&D. That is why the Green Party is dedicated to raising taxes on the profits of large corporations and direct tax dollars to science in the public interest. 

Liberal Party of Canada

See 3a.

New Democratic Party of Canada

To repair the damage done by Stephen Harper, an NDP government led by Tom Mulcair will create an Innovation Tax Credit for businesses that invest in machinery, equipment and property used in innovation-boosting research and development. This plan will save Canadian businesses making these critical R&D investments approximately $40 million each year. We have also committed to making targeting investments to support our manufacturing sector which is the largest spender on research and development, according to Statistics Canada.

Federal science communication and open data

Background

At the heart of democracy is the concept that citizens can make informed decisions regarding the actions and performance of their elected officials. This can only happen if citizens are provided with the information they need in an open and transparent manner. Openness implies a clear articulation of how decisions are made and what evidence was considered in making these decisions. Transparency requires that information underlying policy decisions (scientific evidence and analysis other than proprietary information) be published and disseminated widely so that the public has easy and timely access to the findings of scientists, and that effective and appropriate access to information legislation exists and is followed.

Which – if any - of the following actions will your government commit to in support of open science communication (more than one option can be chosen)?

  1. development and implementation of a federal science communication policy that allows federal government scientists to communicate their science freely, openly and in a timely manner unless there are compelling privacy, safety, or security reasons for doing otherwise;
  2. free, online publication and dissemination of all research reports and papers produced by federal government scientists in the natural, physical and social sciences;
  3. publication and dissemination of all scientific evidence and analysis taken into consideration in policy decisions;
  4. strengthening and maintaining effective access to information legislation and processes, as well as providing independent oversight to ensure that the legislation and processes are followed.

Green Party of Canada

All of the above.

Liberal Party of Canada

A Liberal government will be committed to evidenced-based policy and transparency. We agree that scientists must be able to communicate freely and openly unless there are compelling privacy, safety, or security reasons for doing otherwise. We are committed to re-establishing a respectful relationship with government scientists and making their publicly-funded research accessible to Canadians. The current partisan-designed communications policy for members of the civil service means that scientists are prevented from speaking openly about their work, publishing their findings, and working collaboratively with other experts from around the world. A future Liberal government will end the suppression of science and muzzling of scientists.

Further, we will ensure that transparency becomes a fundamental principle across the Government of Canada. We will consolidate government science so that it is easily available to the public at-large through a central portal. We will amend the Access to Information Act so that all government data and information is made open by default in machine-readable, digital formats. In the rare instances where information cannot be disclosed, the individual making the request would receive a written explanation within 30 days. We will also eliminate all fees associated with the Access to Information process, except for the initial $5 filing fee. We will also strengthen and expand the role of the Information Commissioner, while expanding the Act to include the Prime Minister’s and Ministers’ Offices.

New Democratic Party of Canada

The NDP has tabled a plan to ensure communications officers, elected officials, and Ministerial staff could no longer restrict public access to government scientists. Motion-453 on scientific integrity called for federal departments and agencies conducting scientific research to identify, develop, and implement communication policies that empower rather than hinder the ability of federal scientists to share their research with the public.

The NDP also supports making it easier for the public to have access to government funded research and science. An NDP government would strive for the maximum transparency and accountability practical given the circumstances with respect to the scientific evidence used in policy decisions. The mandate of the Parliamentary Science Officer, as defined in Bill C-558, would allow MPs to ask for independent analysis of scientific evidence used to develop government policies. Lastly, the NDP has practical ideas to strengthen Access laws and defend citizens’ right to know.

The NDP has proposed urgent reforms, including extending Access to Information laws to cover the House of Commons and Senate administration; giving the Information Commissioner order-making powers; and empowering the Information Commissioner to examine cabinet documents.

Statistics Canada and the federal long-form census

Background

National censuses are important tools for tracking social, health, economic and environmental conditions. As such, they are critical data-gathering tools for all levels of government, from municipal to federal, as well as for business and the academic community. The national mandatory long-form census was eliminated in 2010 and replaced with a voluntary National Household Survey (NHS). There have been major concerns with the reliability of the data collected via through NHS and, as a result, many of these results have not been released.

Question 5a: Will you commit to reinstating the federal mandatory long-form census?

Green Party of Canada

The Green Party calls for the restoration of the long-form census as an essential step to ensure Parliament has the necessary and accurate information to guide appropriate and effective action in the Canadian national interest. Replacing the census with the National Household Survey seriously undermines efficient governance, which depends on solid data. The damage has become all too evident after five years without the long-form census. Researchers interested in tracking poverty, immigration and public health in Canada know less and less about Canadians as time progresses. Municipalities can no longer rely on census data to plan the provision of services such as public transit, emergency response, and affordable housing. It is essential for the government to understand the people it is serving. We need to restore the mandatory long-form census. 

Liberal Party of Canada

The Liberal Party of Canada is committed to evidence-based policy. In order to develop this evidence-based policy, the federal government—in addition to other levels of government, civil society, and the Canadian public—must have access to reliable and trustworthy data. Therefore, a Liberal government will immediately restore the mandatory long-form census and make Statistics Canada independent. The short-sighted decision to cancel the long-form census and replace it with the optional National Household Survey has seriously compromised data quality and means that the data cannot be compared with earlier census data, so that we can no longer see trends in Canada.

A Liberal government will make Statistics Canada fully independent with a mandate to collect data needed by the private sector, other orders of government, not-for-profits, and researchers, in order to support good decision-making. We will consult broadly and work with a strengthened Statistics Canada to make available additional data needed by businesses, municipalities, the not-for-profit sector, and the public. This would include more detailed labour market information, child development data, and statistics on natural capital. The Chief Statistician will be able to operate free of political interference over matters related to data sources, methodology and professional standards. The Chief Statistician and other federal scientists will be able to freely apply scientific and ethical best practices as they advise the government of the day, so that the government can make the best possible decisions for the country.

New Democratic Party of Canada

The NDP believes that good data is essential to make government work. It allows government to effectively target and evaluate programs, thus, improving service quality and lowering costs. The NDP fought tooth and nail to prevent the Conservatives from eliminating the long-form census. The NDP believes that the long-form census must be restored to provide social scientists, governments, and businesses the data they need. We have also tabled Bill C-346 to reinstate Statistics Canada’s long-form census and increase the independence of the Chief Statistician.

Question 5b: What additional or alternative steps would you take to ensure the ability of Statistics Canada to collect and publish high quality social, health, economic and environmental data?

Green Party of Canada

Greens would ensure that Statistics Canada is given the funding and support required to fulfill its mandate to collect, compile, analyse, abstract and publish information on the conditions of Canada’s economy and people. Providing this invaluable public service requires stable funding and independence from government interference. 

Liberal Party of Canada

See 5a.

New Democratic Party of Canada

The NDP has tabled Bill C-346 to reinstate Statistics Canada’s long-form census and increase the independence of the Chief Statistician. The NDP bill only allowed for the Minister of Industry to appoint past, rather than present public servants, to the search committee for the Chief Statistician to avoid the potential for ministerial interference. The NDP’s bill to reinstate the long-form census was also clear that the census questionnaire must be submitted to at least 20 % of all households, and it must resemble substantively the questionnaire used in 1971. This means that there is a stronger guarantee that new information obtained through the census will be comparable over time. Furthermore, in June 2011, the NDP introduced a motion (M-70) calling on Statistics Canada to consult stakeholders on expanding census questions to document unpaid activities – an important women’s issue. Finally, we have called for better labour market information to enable government to make informed decisions about the extent of existing shortages of skilled employees in key sectors.

Chief Science Advisor (CSA)

Background

In Canada, the position of Chief Science Advisor was first created in 2003 and, in 2004, Dr. Carty was appointed CSA. This position was eliminated four years later in 2008. Of the 12 best economically performing countries in the world (in terms of GDP), Canada is the only one that either doesn’t have a CSA, or is not moving towards developing the position. In a recent white paper (https://rsc-src.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/PP_SA_EN_0.pdf), the Royal Society of Canada makes a compelling case for CSAs, even in countries where Science and Technology Advisory Committees (such as the Canadian Science, Technology and Innovation council - STIC) exist. The role of the CSA might be to:

  1. ensure that policy decisions are scientifically robust and defensible,
  2. provide a strong coordinating presence for science in cabinet,
  3. facilitate coordination of science across federal departments to improve efficiencies through inter-departmental science initiatives, and/or
  4. ensure that Canada’s science voice is heard in global affairs.

Question 6a: Do you commit to reinstating the position of Chief Science Advisor (CSA)?

Green Party of Canada

Yes.

Liberal Party of Canada

We will create a Chief Science Officer whose mandate would include ensuring that government science is freely available to the public, that scientists are able to speak freely about their work, and that scientific analyses are appropriately considered when the government makes decisions.

New Democratic Party of Canada

The Conservatives shamelessly attacked the integrity of the Chief Science Advisor as a political cover to eliminate the position.

The NDP believes in the importance of having a Chief Science Advisor capable of delivering the highest quality advice to senior members of cabinet and to ensure strong coordination across federal departments.

Question 6b: If so, what role do you foresee the CSA playing in your government and where should that position best be placed to ensure its independence?

Green Party of Canada

Yet again, Canada finds itself lagging behind our international counterparts. The position of the CSA could provide objective and independent advice to the executive branch. It could further lead the coordination and implementation of inter-departmental scientific objectives. As a resource for all cabinet ministers, not merely the Prime Minister, the CSA would ensure scientific rigour is applied to all high-level policy decisions. 

Liberal Party of Canada

See 6a.

New Democratic Party of Canada

See 6a.

Parliamentary Science Office (PSO)

Background

A number of countries, notably the United Kingdom, have a well-resourced Parliamentary Science Officer (PSO) charged with providing independent analysis to parliament on the state of public interest science. In Canada, such an office might provide the parliamentarians with an objective analysis of the current state of scientific understanding on a range of policy and legislative issues and, perhaps most importantly, synthesize and evaluate the scientific evidence relevant to policy or management alternatives. As a service operation, a PSO could provide background information and briefs to members of both the House of Commons and Senate, assisting them in fulfilling increasing public expectations of science-informed decision-making.

Question 7a: Do you support the creation of a Parliamentary Science Office?

Green Party of Canada

The Green Party enthusiastically supports the creation of a Parliamentary Science Office. The politicization of science in the legislative process is a permanent challenge, from public illiteracy regarding climate change to the muzzling of government scientists. Scientific literacy is underrepresented among politicians. The Public Policy Forum determined that only 4.2% of MPs with post-secondary education hold degrees in the sciences or engineering, compared to 21% of post-secondary graduates in the general population. A science watchdog could objectively advise MPs on the merits of legislation in a way accountable to all Canadians. 

Liberal Party of Canada

Our commitment to ensuring that scientists can speak freely to the public regarding their research and findings, and creating a Chief Science Officer, will help ensure that parliamentarians have access to the federal government’s scientific research. We will also ensure that the existing Officers of Parliament are truly independent, properly funded, and answerable only and directly to Parliament.

New Democratic Party of Canada

Two years ago, the NDP’s Opposition Science & Technology Critic MP Kennedy Stewart tabled The Parliamentary Science Officer Act, Bill C-558, to end the muzzling of government scientists. The Bill is a first practical step to mend the relationship between scientists and politicians, and will give public science a more robust voice in the federal government. Modeled on the current Parliamentary Budget Officer, the UK’s Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology, and the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy, the Parliamentary Science Officer would be established as an independent agent of Parliament. It would have a legislated mandate to assess the state of scientific evidence relevant to any proposal or bill before Parliament; answer requests from Committees and individual Members for unbiased scientific information; conduct independent analysis of federal science and technology policy; raise awareness of scientific issues across government and among Canadians; encourage coordination between departments and agencies conducting scientific research.

Question 7b: If not, what steps will you take to ensure that members of the House of Commons and Senate have on-going access to the highest quality science advice?

Green Party of Canada

See 7a.

Liberal Party of Canada

See 7a.

New Democratic Party of Canada

See 7a.

National Science and Technology (S&T) Policy

Background

In 1994, Canada’s auditor general noted that "our audit has shown that an effective, highly-focused, national science and technology strategy is critical to survival and growth in today’s high-technology economic environment." Canada had a national science and technology policy in 1987 detailing a national science agenda that was shared and endorsed by federal, provincial and territorial governments. This policy has been superseded by the 2015 federal S&T strategy that focuses exclusively on federal support for university and private sector scientific research and innovation. A properly formulated national science and technology policy should provide: (i) a robust framework for federal-provincial and federal-territorial agreements on investment in public interest science; (ii) an outline of the role of scientific evidence in decision-making, in areas of shared authority or interest; and (iii) clear principles and practices for open and effective science communication.

Question 8a: Do you believe that, at this time, Canada needs a new or updated national S&T policy?

Green Party of Canada

Yes.

Liberal Party of Canada

Science and technology have been neglected for far too long by the Conservative government.

Canada used to rank in the top-ten countries for total investments in R&D. Not anymore. That’s the result of closing research facilities and cutting support for science. Our country needs scientists to conduct research for the public good and share their findings free from political interference. A Liberal government will be committed to re-establishing a respectful relationship with scientists.

Liberals believe in the ability of government to be a force for good in society. We know that investments in research, technology and innovation are investments in Canada and Canadian’s current and ongoing success. Over the course of this campaign, we will be making additional commitments to strengthen the middle class and grow our economy that impact your goals, including new investments in post-secondary education, research and innovation, and measures that create the jobs of today and lay a foundation so that the jobs of tomorrow are created here in Canada. We look forward to sharing those with you in the days and weeks to come.

New Democratic Party of Canada

New Democrats believe that Canadians can’t have confidence in a science strategy that emerged out of an opaque and unnecessarily restrictive consultation process. But that was exactly the broken process the Conservatives put in place to reboot their science and technology strategy. New Democrats would consult widely with Canadians to build a strategy that adequately encompasses the views of all science stakeholders. That is why in February of 2013, NDP science and technology critics wrote a letter to the Minister of State (Science and Technology) to express serious concerns over the integrity and scope of the process of Industry Canada’s public consultations on the Conservatives’ updated Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy. We noted that the time-frame was impossibly short to encourage robust participation from the public, that the four-page discussion paper was unnecessarily restrictive and impeded a balanced discussion of science, technology and innovation policy. Tellingly, not a single question in the paper touched on the value of scientific research in the public interest or the need to incorporate scientific knowledge in government decision-making. Clearly the Conservatives were looking for validation of their unbalanced approach to science rather than input from Canadians.

Question 8b: If so, how will you go about developing and implementing one?

Green Party of Canada

The Green Party’s National Science & Technology strategy is comprised of the many policy commitments made herein. A Council of Canadian governments could bring federal, provincial, territorial, Indigenous and municipal governments to the table to develop inter-jurisdictional approaches to collective S&T challenges. We would work to ensure any S&T strategy is transparent, accountable, and based on the best evidence available. 

Liberal Party of Canada

See 8a.

New Democratic Party of Canada

An updated science and technology strategy should include a number of key principles like sustained and predictable investments to support research excellence across Canada. It should recognize the unique needs of distinct disciplines and respect the delicate balance between basic and applied research. It should support industrial R&D with robust investments to bolster Canada’s weak productivity and create middle-class jobs – as well as the curiosity-driven research that drives groundbreaking advancements and long-term innovation. It is imperative that the government no longer marginalizes public interest science, including research conducted within federal departments and agencies, which contributes to our democratic debate and ensures policy decisions are based on the best evidence available. To do so, New Democrats would undertake a fair, public, comprehensive and rigorous review of the federal government’s Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy. We would provide all stakeholders – including federal scientists, academic researchers, industry partners, universities, colleges and polytechnics – adequate opportunity to reply to this improved call for participation.