The Fall economic statement by the government wasn’t meant to be a mini-budget but it was particularly worrying in terms of lack of investment in science.

There has been funding for Covid-19 projects and the government has provided support for researchers /1

These include an injection of the equivalent of 3 months salary funding for tricouncil grantees and the related Canada Research Continuity Emergency Fund for non-federally funded research staff. These were important supports. /2

Neither of these supports were extended (despite their cognates such as the CEWS being renewed). But what’s more concerning (to me) is that we seem to have learned little, even as science is the tool which is bringing forward the end date to the pandemic & return to normalcy. /3

Indeed, most of the world still treats science as a useful but otherwise unpredictable uncle fiddling in the garage with things few understand. There are occasional attempts to reinvigorate the sector (such as http://sciencereview.ca ) but the reaction is usually performative. /4

And Canada is by no means usual in this regard. Just look at the FUBAR in Australia which has otherwise done a remarkable job during the pandemic ( https://theconversation.com/covid-has-left-australias-biomedical-research-sector-gasping-for-air-145022). The exception is the US, which, despite the efforts of the orange one to undermine it, NIH thrives. /5

NIH has bipartisan support because of the demonstrable benefits of its function (in spite of a healthcare system that millions of Americans can’t afford, or are bankrupted by if they become sick). But back to Canada…, specifically our NIH “equivalent” @CIHR_IRSC /6

CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC receive annual increases which largely reflect inflation. A boost in 2017 caught up some of the prior years of stagnation but it did little to affect the sector. There was no budget or increase in 2020. /7

What about the 3 month salary support? Important, thankful, but one-off. Given the massive deficits being faced, it’s likely these science agencies will feel the pinch, along with other sectors. So why should they be considered any differently? /8

Anyone still questioning the value of prevention and capacity to develop new responses to emerging threats to health and society needs help. Yet it’s amazing (to me) that the pace of ingenuity and promise of new discoveries is so starved of resource, relatively speaking. /9

So, what was really missing from the Fall statement was recognition that a successful future needs far greater focus on finding solutions to our biggest problems: emerging disease, climate change, energy sources, etc. Covid-19 highlighted our gaping holes. Don’t ignore them. /end