Harper Eliminates Funding for Big Science

[urbandreamer]

It's a recession, some programs have got to go. This program will be back, probably with a new name and characters, when the economy picks up.

At any rate, I reckon the people benefitting the most from this outfit weren't even scientists!

ps, there's always the tsx venture to raise money.

 

[kEiThZ]

There's a bit of over reaction here. Genome Canada has a multi-year funding commitment in place that takes it to beyond the current fiscal year. Just because they weren't metioned in the budget speech does not mean that anyone should assume that funding has been cut. They will likely get it renewed in next year's budget. This is simply the media trying to blow up a non-story.

 

[afransen]

It's a recession, some programs have got to go. This program will be back, probably with a new name and characters, when the economy picks up.

At any rate, I reckon the people benefitting the most from this outfit weren't even scientists!

ps, there's always the tsx venture to raise money.

Apparently the program will have to start winding down at the end of the fiscal year. Once it's gone, it'll take many years to build it back up. Think shutting down the TTC, firing all the employees, then trying to restart it a couple years later. You can't just push the 'On' button and have it work like it has until now.

 

[Hipster Duck]

What the hell are we spending our money on? Our military spending is relatively small... so what is it?

Those tax cuts where the government loses a gazillion dollars in revenue and the average taxpayers walks away with about an iPod nano's worth of extra cash at the end of the year.

 

[lordmandeep]

what the hell are we spending our money on? Our military spending is relatively small... So what is it?

health care!!!

 

[unimaginative2]

Canadian governments spend less on health care than American governments do, both per capita and as a percentage of GDP, though the Canadian system covers 100% of the population while the American system covers barely a third.

 

[urbanboom]

^
Compared to the US, Canada only spends a fraction of their cost. Even the US Government spends more money on Health Care per capita than we do, and they have a "private" system! I don't know why the Dems. don't try to sell universal health-care from a cost perspective, since most of the money is eaten up by health insurance angencies and other middle-men.

http://www.epi.org/page/-/old/webfeatures/snapshots/archive/2007/1205/snapshot20071205-750.gif

Edit: Unimaginative beat me to it.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Canadian governments spend less on health care than American governments do, both per capita and as a percentage of GDP, though the Canadian system covers 100% of the population while the American system covers barely a third.

yet you hear conservatives say they wish our health care was modeled like the US system. wtf!

 

[lordmandeep]

those guys are fools ^^^

The system really needs a few enhancements really.


Like why is everyone in an ER room funneled through the same lengthy process.


They should just have a nurse fixing small things like cuts and such on the side.
Really people treat the ER like a walk in clinic, so either stop people from doing that or accommodate.

 

[cacruden]

those guys are fools ^^^

The system really needs a few enhancements really.


Like why is everyone in an ER room funneled through the same lengthy process.


They should just have a nurse fixing small things like cuts and such on the side.
Really people treat the ER like a walk in clinic, so either stop people from doing that or accommodate.

I have not heard Canadian conservatives say that we should adopt the US system..... so from what I can tell ... is that you fell for a "strawman arguement" (pretend something is true - then rip it down).

I have heard arguments that we should not ban private clinics etc., so if it matches up to any countries system - it is basically arguing that we should adopt the same system from most western countries that have socialized medicine.

 

[kEiThZ]

Getting back to the topic...should we be worried if science funding is temporarily scaled back. I am an engineer. I am deeply concerned about the state of scientific and technological development in this country. But I am also deeply concerned about the current state of the economy. I would much rather see the government put that cash into infrastructure or making commercial R&D 100% tax deductible than use it to raise base funding for the big 3 at this time (and it should be noted that only 2 of the 3 do hard science research). That would have a greater effect on creating jobs for engineers and technicians (and the workers who support them) than creating a few cushy spots for phDs at univerisities.

Basic research is important, but creating support for that requires far more than government funding. Where are our philanthropists? Look at the endowments that the Ivy League schools have in the US and it gives you a good idea why they are good at what they do. 100 million more to Genome Canada will not and cannot compete with that, recession or not. I hardly know anybody that donates to their alma mater. I am the only one among my circle of friends that does so. And yet we wonder why Canadian institutions lag behind....

 

[unimaginative2]

Well, for one thing Canadian universities are public while the Ivy League is private. Sure their endowments are huge, but that has to cover a lot more of their expenses, including extensive scholarship programs to allow lower-income people to afford their outrageous tuition.

Our health care system is more or less on a par in terms of outcomes with the best in the world. It's also one of the most inexpensive in the world, though a few places do manage to spend less and obtain the same good outcomes. A lot of it can be explained by the language factor. France, Germany and Quebec get away with paying their doctors a lot less than English Canada, because the pull of astronomical salaries in the States is a lot weaker when English isn't your first language.

 

[kEiThZ]

Well, for one thing Canadian universities are public while the Ivy League is private. Sure their endowments are huge, but that has to cover a lot more of their expenses, including extensive scholarship programs to allow lower-income people to afford their outrageous tuition.

If the discussion is about the quality and quantity of research undertaken than comparisons with American Ivy League institutions is entirely relevant. Many of them are the pre-eminent research focused institutions of the US. And they often hold that status because of their ability to raise funds privately. Of course government funding is important but it's not the whole story. It is those endowments which attract the best and the brightest (students, profs and researchers). By contrast, government funding often supplements their activities by directing their efforts towards more focused research projects (as opposed to following their own academic interests) while they continue to pursue wider interests funded by the institution.

Then there's the multitude of agencies that fund research in the US. As one example, let's not forget that a massive portion of academic research in the US is also funded by the US DOD. DRDC by contrast barely engages with Canadian universities.

Finally, the cornerstone of American technical prowess is the corporate R&D sector....Microsoft, IBM, Xerox, Rand, etc. The strong support for corporate R&D is what makes a definitive difference in the relative strengths of American R&D vis-a-vis the rest of the world.

All this is relevant when shrill scaremongering comes into effect about the state of our R&D sector without talking about our societal lack of interest in supporting academic research. It's quite extreme to translate the non-announcement of continued funding for one project well beyond it's already funded mandate in a budget bill concerning the next fiscal year to "Harper Eliminates Funding for Big Science". Where was the concern when the Liberals made large cuts to NSERC in '94? And that was a cut of 5%, 9.8% and 14% over three years, far more drastic cut than what today's Conservative government has put forward. Did anyone cry then that Jean and Paul were axing off scientists?

These are tough times. Revenue is scarce. I expect any government in power to use money wisely and to use it immediately. Committing funds for a program to use well beyond the next fiscal year so it can sit in a bank account now and make the relevant program director feel important is not my idea of a wise use of money. Put that money to work building infrastructure, providing EI, paying for worker retraining.

Had they cut funding for Genome Canada at the height of the surpluses, that would be a different story. As it stands, this is a non-story.

 

[Hydrogen]

I'm not sure I buy the "if the Liberals did it then the Conservatives can do it too" line with respect to cutting research funding. Genome Canada was set up as a non-profit organization to implement a national strategy to support genomics and proteomics research in Canada. The organization already has centres in a number of provinces - including Ontario (located at MaRS) - as well as international agreements for cooperation.

I see this area as a crucial sector for development - not only because of the R&D - but because Canada could benefit greatly in many different sectors from the products derived from such research effort - everything from medicine to pharmaceuticals to agriculture. Cutting this effort at a time when the Americans will be investing means a potential loss of skilled workers and researchers. Our national effort in (re)building R&D in this country is still relatively fresh, and we risk losing all momentum gained over the last eight years by such questionable funding.

 

[afransen]

If the discussion is about the quality and quantity of research undertaken than comparisons with American Ivy League institutions is entirely relevant. Many of them are the pre-eminent research focused institutions of the US. And they often hold that status because of their ability to raise funds privately. Of course government funding is important but it's not the whole story. It is those endowments which attract the best and the brightest (students, profs and researchers). By contrast, government funding often supplements their activities by directing their efforts towards more focused research projects (as opposed to following their own academic interests) while they continue to pursue wider interests funded by the institution.

Then there's the multitude of agencies that fund research in the US. As one example, let's not forget that a massive portion of academic research in the US is also funded by the US DOD. DRDC by contrast barely engages with Canadian universities.

Finally, the cornerstone of American technical prowess is the corporate R&D sector....Microsoft, IBM, Xerox, Rand, etc. The strong support for corporate R&D is what makes a definitive difference in the relative strengths of American R&D vis-a-vis the rest of the world.

All this is relevant when shrill scaremongering comes into effect about the state of our R&D sector without talking about our societal lack of interest in supporting academic research. It's quite extreme to translate the non-announcement of continued funding for one project well beyond it's already funded mandate in a budget bill concerning the next fiscal year to "Harper Eliminates Funding for Big Science". Where was the concern when the Liberals made large cuts to NSERC in '94? And that was a cut of 5%, 9.8% and 14% over three years, far more drastic cut than what today's Conservative government has put forward. Did anyone cry then that Jean and Paul were axing off scientists?

These are tough times. Revenue is scarce. I expect any government in power to use money wisely and to use it immediately. Committing funds for a program to use well beyond the next fiscal year so it can sit in a bank account now and make the relevant program director feel important is not my idea of a wise use of money. Put that money to work building infrastructure, providing EI, paying for worker retraining.

Had they cut funding for Genome Canada at the height of the surpluses, that would be a different story. As it stands, this is a non-story.

Keith, it is a profound waste of all the money spent thus far to shut down the programme at this point. Canada has invested hundreds of millions to build a cluster in genome research, and we're going to shut it down with a budget that has millions for cruise ships on the Saguenay, tax credits for hockey skates, and hundreds of millions more for cultural programmes? I don't think that Genome Canada is a frill. It is an investment in our economic future, and it's plain stupid to shut it down.