Cutting research and education will hurt Canada’s competitiveness: RIM president

By Debbie Lawes

Canada’s future economic prosperity will suffer if the federal government follows through on its proposal to cut the budgets of the three research granting councils, warns Mike Lazaridis, president and co-CEO of Research In Motion Ltd. In a November 9 keynote address in Ottawa, the creator of the BlackBerry handheld spoke passionately about the continuing need for highly skilled researchers and students to fuel innovation and competitiveness. It was a view expressed by several industry executives at the 4th Annual RE$EARCH MONEY Conference, “Commercialization: What’s Working, What’s Not.”

“For 10 years, we’ve had inspired leadership, inspired investment and we understood the value of university research and education,” he told delegates, referring to the $13 billion Canada has injected into its science base during that period. “What was the outcome of that? An $8-billion surplus, one of the strongest economies in the world, a very strong Canadian dollar and very high hopes.”

But there are concerns that Canada’s investments in R&D could be levelling off, or even receding, as government attempts to shave $1 billion each year from its spending, and re-prioritize another $12 billion over five years (R$, Nov.9/04). The first cuts take effect immediately, with Science and Engineering Research Canada (NSERC), Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council collectively losing $41 million, $36 million and $14 million respectively in FY04-05. The payments will be made from surplus funds from the Canada Research Chairs, but the concern is that any future clawbacks will come from the councils’ A-base budgets. That could effectively reverse the $90 million in new A-base funding the three agencies collectively received in the government’s 2004 Budget (R$, April 6/04).

STUDENTS KEY TO COMMERCIALIZATION

Lazaridis, who is also a member of NSERC’s governing council, was one of several industry executives who questioned the rationale behind the cuts, insisting that investments in research infrastructure, students and highly qualified faculty are fundamental to commercialization.

Nortel Network’s CTO Brian McFadden said he doesn’t oppose governments reigning in spending, but suggests any cuts to university research be based on “educated decisions about what we’re doing as opposed to just cutting or redirecting dollars.”

“There may be a logical reason behind this,” said McFadden. “There may be good views as to why that money has not been effective or won’t be effective in the future. But before we can know, we need to get it on the table for everyone to discuss.”

Motorola Canada president Frank Maw stressed the importance of funding basic research and described the proposed granting agency cuts as both surprising and wrong. “That’s like building a racing car, then cutting off the gas supply,” he told delegates. “The recession is over. We’re seeing a great upswing in the economy. Let’s not blow it.”

Lazaridis contended that the single most important contributor to commercialization is highly trained students. Over the past 20 years, for example, RIM has hired more than 5000 co-op students, interns, graduate students and post-docs.

“Students are the most prolific, most efficient, most practical form of commercialization known to man.” he said. “How do you get the very best students? By teaching them with the best professors and researchers. And how do you get the best professors and researchers — by funding their labs and their research. That’s the way it works.”

Mark Chamberlain, former CEO of Wescam Inc, said if Canada wants to have a positive impact on commercialization, it should focus on students. “Hiring students who have experience in doing R&D, that’s what is critical for industry.”

Lazaridis said he hopes the cuts can still be averted. He is sharing his concerns with industry colleagues from across the country to rally support for the granting councils.

“If we go into this naively and change the system, it could take 10 years before we notice it and have a chance to put it back on track. In 10 years, Canada will fall so far behind in the international marketplace, I don’t think we would ever recover.”

R$