The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad - Diversity, Inclusion, & Equity in Science-Full Testimony @ The House of Commons (The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad_887)

00:00:00.000 I would like to make few comments for the benefit of the new witnesses.

00:00:07.100 Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking.

00:00:11.120 For those participating by videoconference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic.

00:00:19.180 And please mute yourself when you are not speaking.

00:00:22.060 For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation,

00:00:28.160 either floor, English, or French.

00:00:30.900 For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

00:00:35.240 A reminder that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

00:00:39.040 I would like, for this panel, I would like to welcome our witnesses.

00:00:43.880 We are joined by Dr. Nadia Hassan, Assistant Professor, School of Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Study, York University.

00:00:51.940 And she is joining us by videoconference.

00:00:53.940 Professor Eric Kaufman from University of Buckingham by videoconference.

00:01:01.360 Special thanks to you for joining from all the way from there.

00:01:05.800 We are joined by Gap Saad, Visiting Scholar, Declaration of Independence Center for the Study of American Freedom,

00:01:14.640 University of Mississippi by videoconference.

00:01:16.980 Thank you.

00:01:17.480 And our fourth witness for today is Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship being represented by their president,

00:01:26.080 Mr. Robert Thomas.

00:01:27.980 All the witnesses will have five minutes for the opening remarks.

00:01:32.840 And we will start with Mr. Saad, because he requested to start first.

00:01:38.860 So please go ahead.

00:01:39.900 The floor is yours.

00:01:40.580 You will have five minutes for your opening remarks.

00:01:43.960 Okay, here we go.

00:01:45.260 Many thanks for the invitation to participate in this important discussion.

00:01:50.060 Meritocracy is the sole operative ethos when judging research excellence.

00:01:54.400 Scientific quests have a singular goal to better understand the world and its wondrous mysteries.

00:02:00.760 Science is not an empathy party meant to elevate and celebrate so-called marginalized groups.

00:02:06.980 The use of diversity, inclusion, and equity when allocating research funds is an affront to individual dignity and to research excellence.

00:02:16.400 A 2025 report by the Aristotle Foundation found that 97.5% of academic job postings at Canadian universities reference diversity, inclusion, and equity.

00:02:28.740 I will discuss briefly three such examples from my chapter in the War on Science.

00:02:34.120 First example, the University of Waterloo's School of Computer Science recently advertised for two open NSERC Tier 1 Canada Research Chairs.

00:02:43.880 And I quote their call.

00:02:46.320 Position one in all areas of artificial intelligence.

00:02:49.520 The call is open only to qualified individuals who self-identify as women, transgender, gender fluid, non-binary, or two-spirit.

00:02:59.700 Second position, in all areas of computer science.

00:03:02.980 The call is open only to qualified individuals who self-identify as a member of a racialized minority.

00:03:09.160 Close quote.

00:03:09.700 Second example from the University of British Columbia for a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Oral Cancer Research.

00:03:18.300 Quote, the selection will be restricted to members of the following federally designated groups.

00:03:23.420 People with disabilities, Indigenous people, racialized people, women, and people from minoritized gender identity groups.

00:03:31.480 Close quote.

00:03:32.700 Third example from my own university, Concordia University.

00:03:36.300 Researchers there obtained a New Frontiers in Research grant to decolonize light.

00:03:43.140 On their website, they explain, quote,

00:03:45.820 the Decolonizing Light Project explores ways and approaches to decolonize science,

00:03:52.620 such as revitalizing and restoring Indigenous knowledge and capacity building.

00:03:57.660 Close quote.

00:03:58.260 The Decolonize Light Project is congruent with the five-year strategic plan of Concordia University

00:04:04.340 to decolonize and indigenize the entire curriculum and pedagogy.

00:04:10.880 Apparently, science has suffered for too long from a whiteness problem. 0.90

00:04:16.260 Canadian medicine has also succumbed to this parasitized ideological capture,

00:04:20.660 as I discuss in my forthcoming book, Suicidal Empathy.

00:04:23.920 The Anti-Racism Expert Working Groups of CanMeds, which develops evolving training codes for physicians and surgeons in Canada,

00:04:34.300 concluded that, quote,

00:04:36.140 a new model of CanMeds would seek to center values such as anti-oppression, anti-racism, and social justice,

00:04:43.920 rather than medical expertise.

00:04:46.560 Close quote.

00:04:47.120 If you suffer from an aggressive cancer, it might be comforting to know that your oncologist is trained to, quote,

00:04:54.660 combat the historical and ongoing struggles, structures of racism, white supremacy, settler colonialism,

00:05:03.020 heteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism, classism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and more.

00:05:10.280 Close quote.

00:05:10.860 I end by quoting from my book, The Parasitic Mind.

00:05:15.360 Quote,

00:05:15.960 Science is or should be an apolitical process.

00:05:20.000 Scientific truths and natural laws exist independent of researchers' identities.

00:05:26.840 The distribution of prime numbers does not change as a function of whether the mathematician is a white heterosexual Christian man

00:05:34.360 or a transgendered Muslim obese individual.

00:05:37.620 The periodic table of elements is not dependent on whether a chemist is a Latinx queer or a cis-normative Hasidic Jew. 1.00

00:05:47.280 Oh, you are a non-binary bisexual chemist?

00:05:50.920 Well, this completely changes the atomic numbers of carbon, palladium, and uranium.

00:05:56.940 Close quote.

00:05:58.160 Ideological activism is anathema to research excellence.

00:06:02.720 Meritocracy is all that matters.

00:06:05.480 Thank you.

00:06:05.900 Thank you, Mr. Saad.

00:06:10.620 Now we will proceed to Dr. Nadia Hassan.

00:06:13.020 Dr. Hassan, you will have five minutes for your opening remarks.

00:06:15.760 You can please go ahead.

00:06:19.080 Thank you for inviting me to speak today.

00:06:21.400 As mentioned, my name is Dr. Nadia Hassan, and I'm an assistant professor at the School of Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies.

00:06:26.940 I'm also the director of the Islamophobia Research Hub at York University in Toronto.

00:06:32.240 I have nearly 20 years of experience working at the intersection of academic and community-based research through both non-profit organizations and post-secondary institutions.

00:06:41.000 Today, I want to talk about two things.

00:06:44.040 First, the importance of funding research that deepens our understanding of and helps us combat racism, hate, and discrimination in all its forms.

00:06:52.560 And second, how federal funding can strengthen meaningful partnerships with communities.

00:06:57.400 We're having this conversation in a troubling global context.

00:07:02.120 First, in the United States, the targeting of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives has brought with it a dismantling of academic freedom itself.

00:07:10.180 This has led to restrictions so sweeping that terms such as climate, woman, peanut allergies, safe drinking water, have made their way onto banned words lists in federal agencies, according to outlets like the New York Times, The Washington Post, and PEN America, who also report that this has already resulted in failed or rescinded research grants.

00:07:32.860 This type of political censorship undermines democracy, limits innovation, limits innovation, and stifles critical scholarship.

00:07:40.000 It is a cautionary tale for Canada and a reminder that our federal agencies, and this committee in particular, must resist these chilling trends.

00:07:50.780 Let me begin with my first point.

00:07:52.940 Why Canada must continue to fund research that addresses racism and discrimination.

00:07:57.220 The evidence is strong that diversity in research ecosystems results in more innovation and better research impact.

00:08:04.360 So, for example, research on Black maternal health, an area that has been long ignored in the research community, uncovered systemic inequities that led to new initiatives reducing infant and maternal mortality.

00:08:16.580 Indigenous-led scholarship has revealed the devastating impacts of colonial violence, language locks, cultural erasure, implications for health and safety, while pushing institutions towards truth-telling and action.

00:08:32.300 These examples, however incomplete, show how rigorous research does more than describe problems.

00:08:39.700 It has saved lives, changed systems, and built paths to justice.

00:08:43.820 This work is not easy, and at times that it requires courage, though it should not have to.

00:08:50.900 Consider the recent stabbing of a gender studies professor and students during a lecture at the University of Waterloo.

00:08:57.020 The attacker admitted to deliberately targeting the class, and in his manifesto, expressed support for the gunmen who live-streamed the killing of 51 people at mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

00:09:07.560 He also referenced the massacre of 69 young people in Norway carried out in the name of xenophobic and Islamophobic ideologies.

00:09:15.320 In this climate, professors in gender studies all over Canada and related fields increasingly fear for their safety.

00:09:23.060 Many, including me, are now advised to avoid publicly posting our office or classroom locations and implement safety plans and trainings.

00:09:31.700 This is not a healthy environment for fostering intellectual curiosity, open debate, or the free exchange of ideas.

00:09:38.280 In my own work at the Islamophobia Research Hub, I strive to create methodologies that empower impacted communities.

00:09:45.820 So, for instance, we're working with policymakers, labor organizers, service providers, and Muslim communities to study systemic barriers to the economic integration of Muslims in Canada.

00:09:54.960 We're also examining the impacts of Islamophobic violence, such as the fatal attack on the Upsil family in London, Ontario, and the Quebec City Moss shooting, on the mental health and identity of young Muslims.

00:10:06.660 These projects center community-based knowledge, where lived experiences become a foundation for evidence-based change.

00:10:13.920 However, this kind of research is not easy to sustain under current Tri-Council funding structures.

00:10:19.620 This leads me to my second point.

00:10:22.240 Federal funding must be structured in ways that make community-academic partnerships more accessible, efficient, and sustainable.

00:10:29.420 Community partnerships are heavily encouraged, but the support mechanisms are often inadequate.

00:10:34.500 As someone who has been both a community partner and now a university researcher, I have seen both sides of this struggle.

00:10:42.020 So, for example, with community partners, I co-wrote a 53-page SSHRC application for a $23,000 connections grant that was meant to focus on the experiences of Muslim women accessing shelters.

00:10:55.020 We did not receive the grant, but what stayed with me was the enormous uncompensated labor I had to request from partners already overstretched and underfunded women's shelters.

00:11:04.180 While SSHRC now allows salary research allowances for community partners, streamlining the application and modernizing its outdated portal are crucial to fostering meaningful partnerships.

00:11:16.320 The bottom line is this.

00:11:18.260 Canada should fund good research.

00:11:20.420 It should enable partnerships and reduce barriers, and it should do so without bias or political interference.

00:11:25.960 At a time when academic freedom is under threat elsewhere, we have an opportunity and a responsibility to strengthen it here.

00:11:33.600 Thank you.

00:11:34.180 Thank you.

00:11:36.340 We will now proceed to Mr. Thomas.

00:11:38.600 Mr. Thomas, you will have five minutes.

00:11:40.240 Please go ahead.

00:11:42.320 Thank you.

00:11:43.540 Good afternoon, and thank you for having me speak today.

00:11:46.000 My name is Robert Thomas, and I'm the president of the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship,

00:11:51.500 a scholarly society founded in 1993 in Ontario to advocate for academic freedom and the merit principle in Canadian academia.

00:11:59.820 I'm also an academic librarian at the University of Regina, where my work focuses primarily on the academic academic freedom.

00:12:03.820 This is primarily in the humanities and social sciences.

00:12:06.420 Today, I'd like to give arguments in support of two criteria that we believe are essential for a successful and principled national research environment.

00:12:13.860 The first of these is a merit-based research funding and hiring decisions in Canadian research chairs and funded research.

00:12:21.340 It is important to base decisions in a way that supports and encourages the most promising and meritorious research agendas.

00:12:31.220 Canada needs, for instance, the best cancer business and political science research.

00:12:37.700 What Canada does not need is research where mariotocratic excellence has been eclipsed by other government policy goals, whether or not these have laudatory aims.

00:12:48.260 In particular, I refer to funding and hiring decisions where identity factors such as sex, gender, and race can displace the focus on the individual's work itself.

00:13:00.140 SAF provides two arguments to this point.

00:13:02.240 The demographics of faculty in any particular discipline does not generally reflect the population at large, and outside of sex ratios is not always accurately known.

00:13:15.480 As an example, engineering researchers are more likely to be male than our nursing ones. 0.99

00:13:23.200 Demanding both disciplines have the same sex ratios flies in the face of reality.

00:13:32.920 The other argument we make is a moral one.

00:13:35.140 A scholar should be valued for his or her individual contribution.

00:13:38.920 We believe that there is something dehumanizing about being funded or hired, either fully or in part, because of identity group factors.

00:13:48.840 I will share a story about a colleague of ours, Augie, who works in sociology on the East Coast,

00:13:54.720 and wrote a piece in the SAF's newsletter a few years ago.

00:14:03.240 Sorry.

00:14:03.760 So he was talking to an unnamed colleague, trying to convince him in the importance of merit as a principle of academic choice, academic merit.

00:14:15.800 And the unnamed colleague talked to Augie and said, you know, when we were hiring you for this job, one of the things that we really liked about you is that you were gay and that it would bring more diversity to the department.

00:14:29.920 This did not impress Augie because, as he said in the article, he was hoping that his colleagues appreciated him as a competent sociologist and not as a competent homosexual.

00:14:43.120 A second point is academic freedom and how it's affected by EDI statements and research.

00:14:51.200 So the final point I'd like to make around equity, diversity, inclusion statements.

00:14:54.800 In our view, forcing researchers to voice support for EDI principles in their funding applications in the form of political and ideological attestation that should be considered anathema in a free society and is an extraneous criteria for funding.

00:15:08.600 Some researchers may no doubt write such statements in good conscience.

00:15:12.260 Others will have to outright lie or at least hide their real opinions in order to get the funding that allows them to the work that they have passion for.

00:15:20.500 Those in the middle will feign enthusiasm for a commitment to EDI that does not exist.

00:15:24.920 I believe that this is detrimental both because it infringes on the moral autonomy of researchers, but also because it creates a false idea of broad agreement and assent which may not well exist.

00:15:34.240 Turkish-American academic Timur Karan has written much about preference falsification, where individuals falsify their beliefs due to social pressures to conform.

00:15:43.760 Many other people in these groups will follow suit, falsifying their beliefs as they see the buy-in by their colleagues as proof of the widespread acceptance of the official perspective.

00:15:56.380 As Curran's research shows, buy-in can face grave problems as people inevitably discover that many in their circles are not actually true believers, but indeed are themselves obfuscating their actual beliefs.

00:16:11.060 Long-term buy-in to contentious beliefs like EDI requires that people have the moral autonomy to dissent without risking censure, career, suicide.

00:16:19.900 Suicide. Mandating EDI statements of any kind in our view is unhealthy as it impinges on moral autonomy, but also self-defeating for EDI's proponents as it helps bury the arguments that need to be had for long-term acceptance.

00:16:35.460 For these reasons, we believe that making funding decisions and hiring decisions based on identity factors and the requirement of EDI statements should not have any part in research funding criteria in Canada.

00:16:45.580 Thank you.

00:16:47.600 Thank you. We will now proceed to Professor Kaufman.

00:16:52.420 Professor Kaufman, please go ahead. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks.

00:16:57.220 Members, there are some technical issues and the interpreters will not be able to do the translation for Mr. Kaufman.

00:17:06.520 So the solution which I have proposed is that as Mr. Kaufman has emailed us his opening remarks,

00:17:14.540 he will read the opening remarks and those are with the interpreters and they will read that in the French.

00:17:22.000 And in regards to the questions by the members, the solution is that the members can ask the question to Mr. Kaufman

00:17:31.260 and if he can send the written reply, I think that's the solution we can work on.

00:17:37.060 Yes, Mr. Noor-Mohammad.

00:17:38.020 Madam Chair, just from a timing standpoint, can you give us a sense of how late we're going to go or what the plan is?

00:17:44.740 Let me start, Mr. Kaufman.

00:17:45.480 I will work on, like, see what the resources are available and some witnesses have to leave also.

00:17:50.840 So based on that, I will let you know.

00:17:53.220 So without delay, I will ask Mr. Kaufman to go ahead.

00:17:56.620 You will have five minutes.

00:17:57.660 Please go ahead.

00:17:58.500 Okay.

00:17:58.780 I wish to raise concern over several aspects of research funding in Canada that fall under the rubric of EDI.

00:18:06.800 The main point I wish to make is that EDI, as practiced by the research councils, reflects a left-wing worldview I term cultural socialism.

00:18:16.040 Cultural socialism consists of two tenets.

00:18:18.940 First, diversity and equity, which means rather than equalizing outcomes by class, as in, say, Marxist socialism, outcomes should instead be equalized by race and sex through discrimination against, say, white men.

00:18:34.140 Second, inclusion, I, that minority groups must be protected from emotional harm, even if this requires censoring free speech and limiting the pursuit of truth. 0.90

00:18:44.320 This aspect of EDI underpins what's known as cancel culture.

00:18:48.940 EDI is political, not neutral.

00:18:52.000 When I asked a representative sample of 1,500 Canadians in September 2023 whether they approve of flying the pride flag on government buildings, those who identified as left-wing approved 63 to 24, while those who identified as right-wing disapproved 74 to 15.

00:19:10.240 Centres also disapproved by a more modest 42 to 35.

00:19:14.180 The point here is that EDI questions expose wide political divides.

00:19:18.940 Therefore, DEI is political.

00:19:21.000 EDI is a dominant ethos of Canadian research funding councils, evidence in both diversity statements on application forms and naked race and sex discrimination in hiring and funding calls.

00:19:33.000 I'll make three points here about EDI.

00:19:35.520 The first, most Canadians do not support it.

00:19:38.720 I found that 59% of Canadians favoured a colour-blind approach to, quote, combating racism by treating people as individuals and trying not to see race, unquote, as against just 29% for a colour-conscious approach involving, quote, combating racism by being made aware of race in order to better notice inequalities, unquote.

00:19:59.680 Quote, in the U.S., a majority of people, including black and Hispanic respondents, support the Supreme Court decision banning race preferences in university admissions.

00:20:08.820 Second point is that DEI reduces research excellence.

00:20:12.680 Richard Sander famously showed that admitting black students to law schools with lower entrance scores correlated with those students achieving lower grades.

00:20:22.240 More recently, data collected for a 2024 study in the journal Nature showed that female academics had significantly lower numbers of citations than men, even when controlling for field of study and years in the profession.

00:20:35.640 Black and Hispanic scholars had substantially fewer citations than whites and Asians, though the gap was not as large as for gender.

00:20:41.680 This may reflect a form of societal inequality, but artificially narrowing the talent pipeline at award stage does not rectify this problem.

00:20:51.360 It merely prioritises equity over excellence.

00:20:55.140 Third is that DEI creates the conditions for delegitimising research funding.

00:20:59.660 Confidence in higher education in the United States has fallen from nearly 60% in 2015 to just 36% by 2024,

00:21:06.960 among Republican voters from 56% in 2015 to 20% in 2024.

00:21:13.580 In Canada, the trust remains higher, but it is at risk.

00:21:16.840 For instance, I find just 49% of conservatives trust social science and humanities professors compared to 69% of those supporting the liberal NDP and Green parties.

00:21:28.980 This is still higher, conservative support of 49% is still higher than the 34% trust I find among U.S. Republican voters.

00:21:37.920 But this shows that once a sector becomes left-coded, it loses the confidence of conservative voters.

00:21:43.280 Consider that only a quarter of Canadian conservative voters now trust the media,

00:21:48.020 and that's approaching U.S. levels and support for established institutions such as the CBC is in sharp decline.

00:21:54.760 Why isn't this recognised?

00:21:57.060 Well, 75% to 90% of Canadian academics, according to surveys, are on the left, with a quarter identifying as far left.

00:22:04.380 As William Deserowicz writes, they're therefore insulated from public opinion.

00:22:08.760 This is why EDI heavily shapes grant assessment and hiring, despite being opposed by most voters.

00:22:14.700 As the U.S. pattern shows, this is not sustainable.

00:22:17.040 Public reaction to scenes on campus, especially since October 7th, which have been informed by Cultural Socialism's outrider of settler colonialism,

00:22:25.900 will only make this more salient.

00:22:28.360 I strongly advise Canadian research councils to abandon their current focus on Cultural Socialism, or EDI, if they wish to retain public support.

00:22:38.320 Thank you.

00:22:39.120 Thank you.

00:22:44.140 We will now start with our round of questioning.

00:22:45.940 Before I go ahead, we have the resources available until 6.45, so we will have to end the meeting at 6.45.

00:22:53.160 So I'll start with Mr. Balginelli.

00:22:55.620 Mr. Balginelli, you will have six minutes.

00:22:58.180 Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for being with us this afternoon.

00:23:03.160 Dr. Saad, I'll begin with you.

00:23:05.660 In your book, The Parasitic Mind, How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense, you write this.

00:23:12.820 For decades now, a set of idea pathogens, largely stemming from universities, has relentlessly assaulted science, reason, logic, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, individual liberty, and individual dignity.

00:23:25.680 If we want our children and grandchildren to grow up in free societies, as we have done, then we have to be assured in our principles and stand ready to defend them.

00:23:36.640 Earlier, we had Dr. Snow discuss some of his concerns.

00:23:41.300 He had mentioned about an activist agenda having been embedded in funding applications, primarily in the social sciences and the humanities.

00:23:49.620 So essentially, you're telling those looking for research to accept the narrative to get the funding.

00:23:56.200 Should science not be about discovery and not accepting the narrative that some government bureaucrat or some university bureaucrat puts forward?

00:24:06.380 And do you agree that we need to change this, and how?

00:24:09.660 Thank you for that question.

00:24:14.120 Yes, of course, I think that we should change it.

00:24:16.620 Look, the pursuit of truth is a deontological mechanism, meaning you don't say, I believe in truth, but, right?

00:24:25.460 There is no consequentialist ethic when it comes to the wonder of discovery, the wonder of science, right?

00:24:34.280 For example, in soccer, there's only been eight countries that have won the World Cup, even though there are 200 countries that compete.

00:24:41.000 Should we say that we should create more equitable outcomes?

00:24:45.440 In marathon running, Ethiopia and Kenya have won most of the Boston marathons for the past 35 years.

00:24:52.100 Jews have won nearly 25% of Nobel Prizes, even though they make up 0.2% of the world's population.

00:25:00.280 So there are certain human endeavors that are organized along a meritocratic ethos.

00:25:08.160 Science is one such endeavor, and we should do away with all this diversity, inclusion, and equity stuff because it harms science.

00:25:16.960 I come from a very rough background.

00:25:19.180 If there's ever anybody who's had a victimology story, it's me, and yet I stand before you proud in that I've overcome my rough childhood.

00:25:28.520 I don't need the help of someone to be a dignified individual.

00:25:32.940 That's what makes me meritorious, and I only wish that Canada would re-adopt that stance.

00:25:38.020 Thank you so much.

00:25:39.460 Dr. Kaufman, thank you for your comments.

00:25:42.420 And you had also appeared at a committee here on November 28th and 2024.

00:25:48.060 You had also appeared at the same time as Christopher Dummett, and some of the concerns that both of you had raised were with regards to the lack of viewpoint diversity.

00:25:58.480 And in your testimony then, you had talked about, I would like to see the councils get ahead of the problem and move to a colorblind merit approach.

00:26:06.320 Can you expand on that and what you would like to see and what recommendations you would make?

00:26:12.600 Yeah, I mean, there are two issues here.

00:26:15.440 I mean, one is the question of meritocracy, that is, non-discrimination on the basis of race and sex, which we've heard a lot about.

00:26:22.280 There's also a point called viewpoint diversity, which is, I mentioned that 75 to 90 percent of academics in Canada,

00:26:28.360 according to Chris Dummett's survey and Zach Patterson, were on the left.

00:26:33.940 And so you have almost no, very few conservative voices from academia.

00:26:38.140 We're seeing in the United States the implications that that has or may have for the health of the higher education sector.

00:26:45.380 If you create a hostile environment for certain beliefs, such as conservatism, then you are going to essentially force those people not to go down the academic pathway

00:26:56.380 and therefore deprive, particularly the social sciences and humanities, politicized disciplines that need viewpoint diversity in order to arrive at the correct answer.

00:27:06.300 They're not going to get that viewpoint diversity, and so you're going to get all kinds of research that's going to go way off track.

00:27:11.420 Mr. Thomas, for the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship, on the website, it indicates many universities have policies that are discriminatory

00:27:23.160 to the extent that they favor groups of students or faculty on the basis of race, sex, etc.

00:27:28.760 Such preferential treatment is unfair, is damaging to academic excellence, and stigmatizes the very groups so favored.

00:27:36.780 So how does our university systems, the tri-council agencies, how do we go about fixing that?

00:27:44.300 I think we have to focus on merit, we have to focus on excellence, and do away with the privileging of identity factors.

00:27:54.820 So increasingly within universities in Canada, people, there are advertisements, which you may have heard of from other witnesses,

00:28:02.320 that if you want a particular position, you need to have a particular race, you have to be black, you have to be indigenous, you have to be a woman, 0.99

00:28:12.980 instead of focusing on an individual's abilities to best meet the needs of that science.

00:28:23.300 So focusing on excellence on their actual production as an individual, instead of focusing on something that they, by an accident of fate,

00:28:34.960 they are a particular race, a particular background, that they bring nothing, people don't bring that to the table per se,

00:28:43.140 that it's just something they are, rather than what they focus on with their work,

00:28:47.140 which should be, that excellence should be, should be the benefit we're looking for.

00:28:54.580 I think two seconds.

00:28:56.020 Two seconds.

00:28:57.360 We will allow the seat to MP Noor Mohamad.

00:29:00.580 MP Noor Mohamad, please go ahead, you will have six minutes.

00:29:04.360 Thank you, Madam Chair, and maybe I'll start with you, Professor Saad,

00:29:07.420 because I really did enjoy your book, The Sad Truth About Happiness,

00:29:10.300 and sometimes in this profession I think we live in some of those, we live in some of those times.

00:29:14.860 You know, listening to you today, I guess one of the questions that came to mind that I'd love if you could share with us

00:29:20.920 is any empirical studies that you can cite that show that diversity initiatives actually harm the quality or objectivity of scientific research?

00:29:32.300 Thank you for your kind words.

00:29:33.920 It's lovely to hear that people in the committee are reading my work, so thank you for that.

00:29:38.400 I mean, I can certainly try to, I don't have the citations in front of me,

00:29:45.000 but there is no conceivable reason why diversity along my sexual orientation or my skin color

00:29:53.640 or whether I'm two-spirit or non-binary is going to improve our capacity to map the human genome

00:30:01.240 or better understand the distribution of prime numbers.

00:30:05.120 Science liberates us from the shackles of our personal identities.

00:30:09.800 It's an epistemological tool that democratizes our capacity to seek science.

00:30:17.980 So by definition, science should be free of all that stuff.

00:30:24.160 But if you want references, I can certainly try to whip some up for you.

00:30:27.580 I would love some because in looking at the empirical data that I have seen,

00:30:31.200 it shows that diverse teams tend to produce more innovative and higher impact research.

00:30:35.680 And that's evidence.

00:30:36.560 So, you know, that evidence means something.

00:30:38.820 And so I'm trying to understand what the methodological problem there would actually be.

00:30:43.420 So you're right that there is some metrics of diversity that improve research quality.

00:30:49.620 So, for example, interdisciplinarity, where you're getting diverse expertise joining together to solve a problem,

00:30:58.980 does lead to better outcomes.

00:31:00.620 Some of the biggest and most important breakthroughs in science come at the intersections of disciplines.

00:31:07.520 So interdisciplinary diversity does improve science.

00:31:11.780 Whether on my team I have people that are exclusively homosexual or heterosexual or self-identify as Latinx or not,

00:31:21.400 does not help me solve the distribution of prime numbers.

00:31:24.740 It almost seems laughable that in the 21st century I would have to make that point.

00:31:30.440 So intellectual diversity does improve science.

00:31:34.460 All of the other metrics of diversity don't.

00:31:36.860 Okay, so on to the basis of merit, a lot of what you're saying is meritocracy should trump all.

00:31:44.060 And as somebody who has spent most of my life making sure people didn't identify me or promote me

00:31:49.460 or put me in positions because of my religion, my name, the color of my skin, etc.,

00:31:53.440 I'm a big believer in meritocracy.

00:31:55.700 One of the challenges, though, that we've seen in Canada and in other parts of the world

00:31:59.600 is that it's much harder to measure merit in systems where access to education,

00:32:04.260 to funding and networks has historically been unequal.

00:32:06.860 So how do we overcome that so that you are, in fact, getting exactly what you said,

00:32:11.500 which is the widest diversity of viewpoints, such that you were able to do high-quality research?

00:32:17.020 Thank you. That's a great question.

00:32:19.380 That's the tension between, which I'm sure you're familiar with, equality of outcomes and equality of opportunities.

00:32:26.140 Any time that we find that there are lacking equality of opportunities,

00:32:31.300 then we should intervene and try to solve these, right?

00:32:34.360 A hundred years ago, we didn't have women in medical schools. 1.00

00:32:37.840 Today, we have more women than men. 1.00

00:32:39.840 A hundred years ago, most universities were populated by men.

00:32:43.500 Now, at the bachelor's, master's, and doctoral level in the United States,

00:32:47.920 women outnumber men across five racial categories. 0.97

00:32:50.760 So wherever we see that there are truly systemic barriers to entry for any group,

00:32:57.660 then we need to eradicate those.

00:32:59.580 But that doesn't come from saying that only queer people who are non-binary

00:33:05.980 get to be a professor of artificial intelligence at the University of Waterloo.

00:33:12.580 I mean, imagine how insane that makes us look globally.

00:33:16.060 Artificial intelligence is one of the hottest areas.

00:33:20.400 One of the elite universities in Canada is going to choose its chaired professors

00:33:25.080 based on whether they are Latinx or queer.

00:33:28.800 So let's just dig into this piece of it,

00:33:31.220 because I want to make sure that what we're not saying is that—

00:33:36.140 and maybe we are.

00:33:36.800 I mean, I'd love to hear from you and then Professor Coffin,

00:33:38.880 depending on how much time I have.

00:33:40.120 Are we saying that by having diverse academics or people that are hired

00:33:46.820 where those criteria also exist, that we are abandoning the merit principle?

00:33:50.200 And if so, has research, research quality, research outcomes actually diminished

00:33:54.880 because more diverse people have entered academia?

00:33:58.060 If the manner by which we've achieved diversity within those research groups

00:34:03.940 stems from non-meritocratic ethos,

00:34:06.960 then by definition the quality of the research goes down.

00:34:10.740 I wouldn't mind if every one of my postdocs were two-spirit, 1.00

00:34:15.160 if they are the best people possible.

00:34:17.600 If none of them are two-spirit, so be it. 0.99

00:34:20.020 But I guess my question more is,

00:34:21.220 are you seeing that academic outcomes and research is diminished

00:34:26.400 because those types of individuals who come from quote-unquote equity-seeking backgrounds

00:34:31.100 are now producing research?

00:34:32.900 Or is the research quality the same or better?

00:34:35.720 I mean, I don't have the empirical evidence,

00:34:38.280 but surely we can just argue it philosophically, right?

00:34:41.180 I mean, how could it be that University of Waterloo

00:34:44.200 is looking for chaired professors in artificial intelligence

00:34:47.940 based on the gender orientation of the computer scientists? 0.97

00:34:53.160 My question is more, have you seen evidence,

00:34:56.960 have you seen examples of where people have been hired to do high-quality research

00:35:00.620 that are less good because diversity criteria were applied?

00:35:03.880 I mean, I couldn't give personal anecdotes because I don't use those metrics.

00:35:09.560 As a matter of fact, if I may share...

00:35:10.880 Sorry for interrupting, time is up for Mr. Noor Mohamed.

00:35:13.960 We will now proceed to Mr. Blanchet-Yonker.

00:35:17.160 Please go ahead, you will have six minutes.

00:35:18.840 Thank you, Madame la Présidente, je salue les témoins qui sont avec nous.

00:35:21.260 Thank you, greetings to witnesses here for this important study.

00:35:24.380 My first question goes to Dr. Saad.

00:35:26.320 You talked about the ideological parasitization of universities

00:35:30.580 when we talk about federal grants.

00:35:32.540 Is this not transforming funding organizations into political instruments?

00:35:37.240 Is this not undermining the trust of the public?

00:35:39.360 I didn't have my translation thing on, but I speak fluent French, so no problem.

00:35:45.560 Of course, it affects the trust that the public has in us, right?

00:35:50.900 I mean, I've sat on committees, on SHIRP committees for graduate funding

00:35:55.480 where every single grant application in important fields in the social sciences

00:36:00.580 is about queering this and indigenizing that.

00:36:05.360 How could that make sense?

00:36:06.400 I teach evolutionary psychology and psychology of decision-making.

00:36:10.280 What does it mean to indigenize and decolonize the study of psychology of decision-making?

00:36:15.280 It's absolutely laughable, right?

00:36:17.700 Science liberates me from my sexual orientation.

00:36:22.240 It liberates me from my skin color. 0.97

00:36:24.340 It liberates me from my sexual orientation.

00:36:26.860 That's what makes science beautiful.

00:36:28.580 So, of course, the trust of the public and the taxpayer is damaged

00:36:32.580 when we allow these parasitic ideas to infect our university ecosystems.

00:36:39.200 It's grotesque.

00:36:40.040 It's tragic.

00:36:41.460 Vous avez travaillé des deux côtés de la frontière.

00:36:43.580 On sait que plusieurs...

00:36:44.460 We know that many American states have started abolishing DI policies.

00:36:49.800 But even before the election of Donald Trump,

00:36:52.160 are we seeing any positive impact on research there?

00:36:55.420 Would Canada not find itself in trouble if it insists on the policy?

00:37:01.760 Of all this diversity, inclusion, equity stuff in the United States,

00:37:05.420 certainly the election of Donald Trump has accelerated that.

00:37:09.680 I see no autocorrection taking place in Canada. 0.96

00:37:12.560 If anything, I see the doubling down of all of the parasitic nonsense in Canada.

00:37:17.200 Again, I can't cite you specific empirical studies that point one way or to the other.

00:37:22.320 But again, science is a fully meritocratic thing.

00:37:26.340 Nobody gives a damn about your identity markers.

00:37:29.280 The best people should be doing the best science, period.

00:37:33.360 In the U.S., we've seen a drop in DI policies,

00:37:38.940 whereas we're doing the opposite here in Canada.

00:37:41.380 Does this not risk isolating our research and affecting our young people?

00:37:46.480 At the time when meritocracy remains the standard,

00:37:50.080 you who are here are good examples.

00:37:51.940 As a matter of fact, I've taken a leave from Concordia University,

00:37:55.100 and I'm currently at the University of Mississippi,

00:37:57.500 at a center that is rooted in American freedom,

00:38:00.520 precisely for that reason.

00:38:01.980 I stopped applying for research grants

00:38:04.140 and applying for a chaired professorship in 2018

00:38:06.900 because I wasn't willing to play the game

00:38:09.500 of doing a diversity, inclusion, and equity statement.

00:38:12.640 I can't be the guy who wrote the parasitic mind,

00:38:14.980 and then when nobody is looking, play along.

00:38:18.080 And so I've not had any research funds for seven years.

00:38:21.400 I've now left to the United States,

00:38:23.440 precisely because of all these parasitic ideas.

00:38:26.120 So if you could imagine that both myself

00:38:27.900 and Professor Kaufman have left,

00:38:29.880 you could imagine that many other people

00:38:31.520 who should be staying in Canada 1.00

00:38:33.000 will decide to go elsewhere

00:38:34.640 where they can pursue their research

00:38:36.860 free of identity markers.

00:38:40.740 Prof. Saad, une étude publiée par la Fondation Aristophanes

00:38:42.860 est terminée à montrer que 28% des annonces d'emploi...

00:38:45.480 Prof. Saad showed that some studies in Canada

00:38:48.440 had DEI criteria in Canada,

00:38:50.280 sometimes mandatory.

00:38:51.880 If in employment,

00:38:52.820 we see that the DEI policy

00:38:54.460 is becoming a condition of employment,

00:38:56.640 by imposing the same conditions on funding,

00:38:59.280 are we not displacing

00:39:00.580 what scientific excellence is supposed to be?

00:39:02.940 I quoted this in my opening remarks.

00:39:04.960 It's 97.5% of job applications,

00:39:08.280 academic job applications,

00:39:09.580 have DEI as a central feature of the application.

00:39:13.060 Again, that is grotesque.

00:39:14.280 I know for a fact that at one point

00:39:16.520 I was applying for a renewal of my chaired professorship.

00:39:19.500 I held a university-wide chair for 10 years at Concordia.

00:39:23.420 When it came time to reapply,

00:39:25.780 someone told me confidentially that,

00:39:27.840 sorry, we couldn't give it to you

00:39:29.160 even though you would be easily deserving of it

00:39:31.340 because it had to go to a woman.

00:39:33.240 How do you think that makes me feel?

00:39:34.680 I've worked 32 years as a professor.

00:39:36.560 I lose because I don't ovulate.

00:39:38.780 Does that strike you as fair?

00:39:41.080 In the same study,

00:39:43.820 we hear that the British Columbia University

00:39:45.900 limits positions to erase

00:39:49.720 a group identity or an enemy group.

00:39:52.720 Is this the opposite of meritocracy?

00:39:54.940 Is there no danger here

00:39:56.660 that we could find this logic

00:39:59.000 in funding of research by Ottawa?

00:40:02.280 Research granting process

00:40:04.080 or in the job application process,

00:40:06.420 even the tenure decision

00:40:08.000 has been fully parasitized by all of this nonsense.

00:40:10.700 There was a professor at UBC

00:40:12.620 that didn't get tenure

00:40:14.400 because she hadn't published much.

00:40:16.560 She then went ahead to the Human Rights Tribunal

00:40:19.900 and argued that she is Indigenous

00:40:21.760 and she comes from an oral tradition.

00:40:24.800 So, you know,

00:40:25.500 forcing her to write things

00:40:27.220 as a publication

00:40:28.380 went against her culture.

00:40:30.420 Imagine that this is something

00:40:31.980 that the Human Rights Tribunal

00:40:34.140 actually listens.

00:40:35.800 It's unbelievable.

00:40:37.500 And the quicker we get...

00:40:38.600 Now, look,

00:40:38.980 I want to live in a bigot-free society.

00:40:41.840 I come from Lebanon

00:40:42.700 where I faced a lot of bigotry.

00:40:44.300 So I understand what bigotry is.

00:40:46.320 But the way to solve bigotry

00:40:48.120 is not to impose reverse bigotry.

00:40:52.380 When we see DI criteria

00:40:55.140 becoming mandatory

00:40:56.620 for employment and funding,

00:40:58.120 are we not creating a closed circle

00:41:01.540 instead of putting value on this?

00:41:06.700 It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, right?

00:41:08.940 For example, professors,

00:41:10.140 as Professor Kaufman said,

00:41:11.780 don't usually hire anybody

00:41:13.820 that has any political position

00:41:16.180 that is contrary to theirs.

00:41:17.800 That's why in some disciplines,

00:41:19.880 and these studies have been done,

00:41:21.400 and I can share you those references,

00:41:23.360 in the activist social sciences,

00:41:25.960 you are more likely

00:41:27.100 to run into a unicorn

00:41:28.640 than to run into a Republican

00:41:30.960 or conservative sociologist.

00:41:33.020 You're more likely

00:41:33.860 to run into a horse

00:41:35.040 that has wings

00:41:35.980 than to run into

00:41:37.220 a Republican psychologist.

00:41:39.360 That's not a good thing.

00:41:40.840 There are very good ideas on the left.

00:41:42.760 There are very good ideas

00:41:43.800 on the right.

00:41:44.900 Our students would benefit

00:41:45.980 from hearing the totality of ideas.

00:41:52.540 Lots of researchers say

00:41:54.240 that there are grants.

00:41:57.460 Sorry for that.

00:41:59.040 Now we will proceed to Mr. Ho.

00:42:00.880 Mr. Ho, you will have five minutes.

00:42:02.960 Please go ahead.

00:42:03.580 Thank you, Madam Chair.

00:42:05.540 My question is for Professor Saad.

00:42:08.580 It's an honor to have you here

00:42:09.780 on this committee.

00:42:12.160 You mentioned that

00:42:13.320 DEI is an affront

00:42:15.260 of individual dignity.

00:42:17.640 So I was just wondering

00:42:18.180 if you could elaborate

00:42:19.720 on that a little bit more

00:42:20.800 and whether you agree

00:42:21.980 that DEI is a form

00:42:23.580 of government-sponsored,

00:42:26.040 top-down ideology.

00:42:26.980 I mean, absolutely.

00:42:29.360 What greater manifestation

00:42:32.580 of ideological,

00:42:35.320 top-down stuff

00:42:36.140 than DEI, right?

00:42:37.180 I mean,

00:42:37.720 I present myself

00:42:38.940 to the world

00:42:39.560 as God-sad.

00:42:40.840 Part of me being God-sad

00:42:42.440 is I have green eyes.

00:42:43.720 Part of me being God-sad

00:42:44.940 is I come from Lebanon.

00:42:46.400 Part of me being God-sad

00:42:47.680 is I'm a certain height.

00:42:48.800 I've got some merits.

00:42:49.760 I've got some faults.

00:42:50.980 So I am an individual

00:42:52.320 and I ask you to judge me

00:42:53.900 as an individual first.

00:42:55.840 The reason why I love science

00:42:57.400 is because when I do my science,

00:42:59.400 I'm trying to discover

00:43:00.320 something interesting

00:43:01.120 about the world

00:43:01.820 and that phenomenon

00:43:03.160 that I'm studying

00:43:04.160 exists independently

00:43:06.180 of my identity.

00:43:07.460 That's what makes science beautiful.

00:43:09.400 It liberates us

00:43:10.420 from our shackles.

00:43:11.320 So that's what I mean

00:43:12.180 when I say it's an affront

00:43:13.260 to individual dignity.

00:43:14.700 All of the members

00:43:15.620 of this committee

00:43:16.400 are worthy individuals

00:43:18.240 because they are

00:43:19.320 individuals.

00:43:20.480 So I'm first God-sad

00:43:21.960 and then I'm a member

00:43:23.480 of a group.

00:43:24.180 So nothing could be worse

00:43:25.980 than to create

00:43:27.080 collective tribalism

00:43:28.500 in the pursuit of science.

00:43:31.300 Well, thank you.

00:43:32.340 And we've seen DEI

00:43:33.780 essentially replace

00:43:34.780 meritocracy

00:43:35.520 and this liberal

00:43:37.880 top-down ideology

00:43:39.000 in federal research

00:43:40.660 which is, by the way,

00:43:42.020 funded by taxpayers.

00:43:43.500 So it's essentially

00:43:44.500 a government-sponsored ideology

00:43:47.380 that's being implemented

00:43:48.400 onto our

00:43:49.000 public institutions.

00:43:51.640 So do you think

00:43:53.360 this has an effect

00:43:56.000 of censoring

00:43:56.600 academic freedoms

00:43:57.440 and has the effect

00:43:59.260 of being

00:43:59.720 reverse discriminatory

00:44:01.620 on groups

00:44:04.900 that are considered

00:44:06.060 not adhering to DEI?

00:44:11.180 It has a huge effect

00:44:13.340 on censorship.

00:44:14.300 The most dangerous

00:44:15.160 censorship

00:44:15.640 censorship

00:44:16.200 is self-censorship.

00:44:18.100 So I receive

00:44:18.820 thousands of emails

00:44:20.760 that always

00:44:22.400 say the exact same thing.

00:44:24.560 Dear Professor Saad,

00:44:25.680 there's a bunch

00:44:26.200 of compliments

00:44:26.740 and at the end

00:44:27.540 it's if you decide

00:44:28.800 to read this email

00:44:30.720 on your show,

00:44:31.900 please don't mention

00:44:32.700 my name.

00:44:33.280 And the person

00:44:33.800 who writes it

00:44:34.480 is a postdoc,

00:44:35.800 is a doctoral student,

00:44:37.320 is a professor,

00:44:38.460 all of whom

00:44:39.440 are happy

00:44:40.800 that I have the courage

00:44:42.080 to say what I say.

00:44:43.000 They would love

00:44:43.860 to say it

00:44:44.480 but they know

00:44:45.240 that if they do

00:44:46.000 they will lose

00:44:46.860 their position

00:44:47.420 in the lab,

00:44:48.360 they will lose

00:44:48.900 their position

00:44:49.500 for funding

00:44:50.160 and so on

00:44:50.620 and so forth.

00:44:51.420 This is not Yemen.

00:44:52.820 This is not North Korea.

00:44:54.480 This is not

00:44:55.180 communist China.

00:44:56.120 This is happening

00:44:56.880 in Canada

00:44:57.560 and the United States.

00:44:58.880 This is grotesque.

00:45:01.820 Yeah, I mean

00:45:02.420 let's go into the basics.

00:45:03.500 DEI is supposed

00:45:04.200 to be something

00:45:05.560 purportedly

00:45:06.140 supposed to create

00:45:06.640 a fair,

00:45:07.460 inclusive environment

00:45:09.380 that's supposed

00:45:10.020 to address

00:45:10.500 historical marginalization

00:45:12.420 but it sounds

00:45:12.820 like it's creating

00:45:13.220 the opposite effect.

00:45:14.160 It's unfair,

00:45:15.540 it's exclusionary

00:45:16.780 and it's actually

00:45:18.000 marginalizing those

00:45:19.220 who have differing

00:45:20.380 viewpoints

00:45:20.820 which again

00:45:21.300 goes against

00:45:22.020 the purpose

00:45:23.520 of academic research

00:45:24.660 is the pursuit

00:45:25.480 of knowledge

00:45:25.940 and knowledge creation.

00:45:28.980 Would you agree

00:45:30.420 that this is

00:45:31.280 affecting Canadians' 0.93

00:45:33.900 trust in public institutions?

00:45:35.500 We've seen

00:45:35.900 the lack of public trust

00:45:38.320 by Canadians

00:45:39.160 in public institutions

00:45:40.500 at an all-time low

00:45:41.440 and it's no coincidence

00:45:42.680 that after 10 years

00:45:44.640 of liberal top-down

00:45:45.780 ideology being

00:45:46.640 implemented

00:45:47.040 on public institutions

00:45:47.840 so do you think

00:45:48.600 it hurts our

00:45:49.240 reputation globally?

00:45:51.480 Of course it does,

00:45:52.440 right?

00:45:52.680 I mean

00:45:52.880 one of the reasons

00:45:54.540 why I've been able

00:45:55.500 to build the

00:45:56.400 I'm thankful

00:45:57.400 to have built

00:45:57.960 such a large platform

00:45:59.120 is because the message

00:46:00.460 that I share

00:46:01.340 with the wider audience

00:46:02.660 is one that resonates

00:46:03.940 with people, right?

00:46:04.840 So when I exist

00:46:06.120 in the rarefied ivory tower

00:46:08.560 then I'm viewed

00:46:09.580 as a pariah, right?

00:46:10.760 Because I don't say

00:46:11.760 the things

00:46:12.160 that I'm supposed to say

00:46:13.040 but the larger audience

00:46:14.460 the trucker

00:46:15.560 the corrections officer

00:46:17.500 the police officer

00:46:18.640 they're all writing

00:46:19.740 to me and saying

00:46:20.440 oh my god

00:46:21.000 I wish my son or daughter

00:46:22.220 had you as a professor

00:46:23.420 Look, being a professor

00:46:24.800 is a privilege

00:46:25.620 it's a place

00:46:26.440 where you can be

00:46:27.180 a free thinker

00:46:28.440 the reality though

00:46:29.820 it's an Orwellian

00:46:31.320 Kafkaesque world 1.00

00:46:32.320 where everybody

00:46:33.080 is afraid to utter

00:46:34.240 one syllable

00:46:35.040 out of place

00:46:35.820 lest they might be fired

00:46:37.680 or somebody might find out

00:46:39.180 that they don't love

00:46:39.940 Justin Trudeau

00:46:40.780 or that they love

00:46:41.700 Donald Trump

00:46:42.300 this is not what

00:46:43.540 we want in our academics

00:46:44.660 we want them to be

00:46:45.640 free thinkers

00:46:46.340 And this liberal government

00:46:47.240 is doubling down

00:46:48.120 it sounds like

00:46:48.660 it's actually

00:46:49.060 making it even worse

00:46:50.280 so what has DI actually achieved

00:46:52.760 what do you think

00:46:54.140 has it destroyed

00:46:55.180 more than it's actually built

00:46:56.280 I mean a thousand percent

00:46:58.720 right

00:46:59.020 I could show you

00:47:00.180 tons of emails

00:47:00.920 where someone wrote to me

00:47:02.160 saying

00:47:02.460 I was thinking

00:47:03.460 of going to academia

00:47:04.640 but I know that I am

00:47:06.140 Sorry for interrupting

00:47:06.220 time is up for Mr. Hu

00:47:07.780 we will now proceed

00:47:09.420 to MPJESIC

00:47:10.160 for five minutes

00:47:10.920 please go ahead

00:47:11.780 Thank you so much

00:47:12.680 Chair

00:47:13.080 Dr. Hassan

00:47:14.720 I would like to bring you

00:47:16.000 into this conversation

00:47:17.340 you've obviously heard

00:47:19.700 the other panelists

00:47:21.140 during this hour

00:47:22.380 and perhaps you heard

00:47:23.760 some of the earlier

00:47:24.980 testimony

00:47:25.880 when we started today

00:47:28.240 there has overall been

00:47:32.240 I would say

00:47:33.120 through the course

00:47:33.780 of the study

00:47:34.340 some agreement

00:47:35.140 that in terms

00:47:36.160 of study design

00:47:37.440 diversity

00:47:38.680 in terms of EDI

00:47:40.260 is actually useful

00:47:42.500 in terms of the content

00:47:44.480 of the research

00:47:45.420 and also to a certain extent

00:47:47.460 that having

00:47:48.560 diverse teams

00:47:50.240 is also of value

00:47:52.380 in terms of training

00:47:53.440 new researchers

00:47:54.300 and so on

00:47:54.940 a lot of the conversation

00:47:57.040 seems to be

00:47:57.960 today

00:47:58.900 related very much

00:48:00.240 to the Canada

00:48:00.880 research chairs

00:48:01.960 and various equity targets

00:48:04.920 and so on

00:48:05.420 do you have some thoughts

00:48:07.320 on

00:48:07.920 the current situation

00:48:11.060 as it relates

00:48:12.660 to Canada research chairs

00:48:14.200 yeah thank you so much

00:48:18.120 for the question

00:48:19.140 I guess I want to

00:48:20.860 kind of start off

00:48:21.720 by

00:48:22.200 just reminding

00:48:24.880 everyone

00:48:26.700 that the reason

00:48:27.940 why these programs

00:48:29.520 have come about

00:48:30.240 regardless of how imperfect

00:48:31.640 they are

00:48:32.160 is that they're trying

00:48:33.060 to solve a problem

00:48:33.900 and that problem

00:48:35.500 is pretty well documented

00:48:36.720 so there

00:48:37.720 I have a list of studies

00:48:38.840 that I can cite

00:48:39.520 if you

00:48:39.960 I'm happy to submit them

00:48:41.320 to you

00:48:41.760 after the fact

00:48:43.460 but there's studies

00:48:44.140 about gender biases

00:48:45.200 and research funding awards

00:48:46.800 there's studies

00:48:47.880 about

00:48:48.360 biases against people

00:48:51.060 who are racialized

00:48:52.940 in research studies

00:48:54.580 and also the experiences

00:48:56.260 of faculty

00:48:57.860 from marginalized communities

00:48:59.260 postdoctoral

00:49:00.060 fellows

00:49:01.140 from marginalized communities

00:49:02.320 that document

00:49:03.560 how

00:49:04.440 you know

00:49:04.880 there is

00:49:05.720 was

00:49:06.300 continues to be

00:49:08.260 a problem

00:49:08.980 of bias

00:49:11.020 and prejudice

00:49:11.620 in some of our

00:49:13.320 funding programs

00:49:14.600 in Canada

00:49:16.620 so

00:49:17.740 these are coming about

00:49:19.040 in the spirit

00:49:20.120 of solving a problem

00:49:21.580 now I agree

00:49:22.960 that there are

00:49:24.360 like I'm absolutely

00:49:26.320 against anything

00:49:27.300 that tokenizes

00:49:28.300 or would tokenize me

00:49:29.960 for example

00:49:30.560 as you know

00:49:32.120 a South Asian Muslim woman

00:49:33.220 but I'm also against

00:49:35.900 things that are performative

00:49:37.720 and that don't actually work

00:49:39.440 the reality is

00:49:41.820 and the research shows

00:49:43.480 the evidence

00:49:44.100 very clearly shows

00:49:45.480 that diversity

00:49:47.020 in research

00:49:48.740 produces

00:49:49.740 better impact

00:49:52.220 in research studies

00:49:53.220 it produces

00:49:54.000 better innovation

00:49:55.560 it widens

00:49:57.460 our epistemology

00:49:59.840 it widens

00:50:00.660 the way we think

00:50:01.540 it widens

00:50:02.200 the way

00:50:02.640 people address problems

00:50:04.280 and it widens

00:50:06.020 the way

00:50:06.480 we include

00:50:07.400 more and more

00:50:07.940 people

00:50:08.380 we're trying

00:50:09.260 to address

00:50:09.920 an issue

00:50:10.360 of exclusion

00:50:11.180 here

00:50:11.680 and a pretty

00:50:13.160 serious one

00:50:13.940 that is very

00:50:14.660 well documented

00:50:15.540 and I don't

00:50:18.460 think that

00:50:19.580 having Canada

00:50:21.120 research chairs

00:50:21.760 that are dedicated

00:50:22.400 to certain

00:50:23.160 areas of research

00:50:24.120 is that unusual

00:50:25.420 we have

00:50:26.720 like focused

00:50:27.340 grants on

00:50:28.040 things like

00:50:28.780 cancer research

00:50:29.780 we have focused

00:50:30.340 grants on

00:50:30.840 things like AI

00:50:31.560 we have focused

00:50:32.840 grants on

00:50:34.000 things like

00:50:34.740 cancer survivorship

00:50:37.060 cannabis usage

00:50:39.080 there's so many

00:50:40.120 areas where

00:50:41.460 you know

00:50:41.860 the research

00:50:42.400 community decides

00:50:43.380 through various

00:50:44.940 processes

00:50:45.440 what are some

00:50:47.120 of the pressing

00:50:47.980 problems of our

00:50:48.920 time and how

00:50:49.700 can we leverage

00:50:50.480 research to try

00:50:51.660 to solve them

00:50:52.360 so I don't see

00:50:54.260 anything wrong

00:50:54.940 with Canada

00:50:55.540 researchers that

00:50:56.280 are focused

00:50:56.740 on specific

00:50:57.400 issues

00:50:57.840 I think it's

00:50:59.000 helpful to start

00:51:00.000 building research

00:51:00.720 communities on

00:51:01.360 specific topics

00:51:02.100 that require

00:51:02.700 urgent attention

00:51:03.680 are you aware

00:51:05.760 of any peer

00:51:06.760 reviewed studies

00:51:07.740 that show that

00:51:08.860 diversity initiatives

00:51:10.320 actually harm

00:51:11.840 research quality

00:51:12.960 I am not aware

00:51:15.200 of any peer

00:51:15.760 reviewed studies

00:51:16.360 that that

00:51:18.660 demonstrate that

00:51:19.560 in fact I know

00:51:20.400 more studies

00:51:22.160 have shown

00:51:22.860 the opposite

00:51:23.680 and I know

00:51:24.280 you've heard

00:51:24.740 from Dr. Melinda

00:51:25.560 Smith who was

00:51:26.240 here a few

00:51:27.560 days ago

00:51:28.180 and testified

00:51:28.960 in front of

00:51:29.440 this committee

00:51:29.920 but she has

00:51:31.120 done incredible

00:51:31.640 work in

00:51:32.960 on this topic

00:51:35.020 and figuring

00:51:36.400 out like how

00:51:37.320 we understand

00:51:38.120 the role of

00:51:39.000 diversity in

00:51:39.860 research

00:51:40.300 thank you so

00:51:41.760 much for that

00:51:42.460 and perhaps

00:51:44.620 you could

00:51:45.520 elaborate a

00:51:46.320 little bit

00:51:46.760 further

00:51:47.220 on some

00:51:49.560 of the

00:51:50.280 benefits of

00:51:51.180 actually

00:51:51.680 establishing

00:51:52.420 targets

00:51:53.820 our

00:51:55.460 analysts

00:51:56.100 our analysts

00:51:56.120 have given

00:51:56.860 us some

00:51:57.440 of the

00:51:57.760 information

00:51:58.320 as it

00:51:58.780 relates

00:51:59.140 to Canada

00:51:59.740 research

00:52:00.340 chairs

00:52:00.800 and over

00:52:02.920 time

00:52:03.620 they seem

00:52:05.700 to show

00:52:06.260 that there

00:52:08.520 are various

00:52:09.220 groups that

00:52:10.020 have been

00:52:10.420 underrepresented

00:52:11.820 in terms

00:52:12.860 of research

00:52:14.300 chairs

00:52:14.680 actually increasing

00:52:16.320 in numbers

00:52:17.020 could you speak

00:52:18.460 a little bit

00:52:19.020 to some of

00:52:19.620 those groups

00:52:20.060 sorry for

00:52:20.500 interrupting

00:52:20.800 time is up

00:52:21.540 if I can

00:52:22.780 request Dr.

00:52:23.460 Hassan to

00:52:23.880 please respond

00:52:25.260 to this

00:52:25.700 question

00:52:26.160 by submitting

00:52:28.900 the answers

00:52:30.220 and we will

00:52:30.720 then circulate

00:52:31.340 to all the

00:52:31.740 members

00:52:32.060 we will end

00:52:33.120 this panel

00:52:33.760 with Mr.

00:52:34.740 Blanchet-Jonka

00:52:36.160 for two and a half

00:52:37.140 minutes

00:52:37.440 please go ahead

00:52:38.240 Senator

00:52:38.640 President

00:52:38.960 Professor

00:52:39.480 Sade

00:52:40.000 when Ottawa

00:52:41.920 is talking

00:52:42.420 about

00:52:42.900 inclusive

00:52:43.580 excellence

00:52:44.160 is this

00:52:44.900 not

00:52:45.160 contradiction

00:52:45.960 in the

00:52:46.320 use of

00:52:46.660 terms

00:52:47.040 are we

00:52:47.960 not

00:52:48.400 taking out

00:52:49.360 excellence

00:52:49.820 from its

00:52:50.460 primary

00:52:51.080 definition

00:52:51.780 by relying

00:52:53.280 on this

00:52:53.660 ideological

00:52:54.160 basis

00:52:54.920 please

00:52:59.260 you are

00:52:59.540 on mute

00:52:59.940 I was

00:53:02.180 going to

00:53:02.360 say

00:53:02.540 you're

00:53:02.840 absolutely

00:53:03.220 right

00:53:03.600 the term

00:53:04.080 excellence

00:53:04.660 and

00:53:04.920 inclusion

00:53:05.380 don't

00:53:05.760 belong

00:53:06.040 in the

00:53:06.300 same

00:53:06.520 sentence

00:53:07.020 again

00:53:09.200 some

00:53:10.220 people

00:53:10.500 on this

00:53:10.820 panel

00:53:11.040 have

00:53:11.220 said

00:53:11.440 that

00:53:11.660 there

00:53:11.840 is

00:53:12.540 unequivocal

00:53:13.380 evidence

00:53:13.840 that

00:53:14.120 supports

00:53:14.540 the

00:53:14.740 fact

00:53:15.000 that

00:53:15.320 diverse

00:53:16.160 research

00:53:17.260 or

00:53:18.320 teams

00:53:18.740 leads

00:53:19.220 to

00:53:19.400 better

00:53:19.680 outcomes

00:53:20.180 it

00:53:21.240 depends

00:53:21.660 again

00:53:21.960 how

00:53:22.420 you

00:53:22.640 measure

00:53:23.080 diversity

00:53:23.800 as

00:53:24.460 I

00:53:24.600 mentioned

00:53:24.940 earlier

00:53:25.320 if

00:53:25.680 you

00:53:25.820 measure

00:53:26.240 diversity

00:53:26.920 as

00:53:27.360 for

00:53:27.540 example

00:53:27.920 interdisciplinarity

00:53:29.440 then

00:53:29.940 that

00:53:30.380 form

00:53:30.740 of

00:53:30.920 diversity

00:53:31.400 does

00:53:31.960 improve

00:53:32.580 scientific

00:53:33.140 outcomes

00:53:33.640 because

00:53:34.100 you're

00:53:34.360 getting

00:53:34.560 people

00:53:35.000 that

00:53:35.220 have

00:53:35.620 different

00:53:36.460 areas

00:53:36.940 of

00:53:37.140 expertise

00:53:37.660 that

00:53:37.980 are

00:53:38.120 joining

00:53:38.480 together

00:53:39.000 to

00:53:39.440 solve

00:53:39.780 a

00:53:39.960 common

00:53:40.220 problem

00:53:40.720 but

00:53:41.320 I

00:53:41.540 would

00:53:41.780 challenge

00:53:42.240 anybody

00:53:42.640 on this

00:53:43.140 committee

00:53:43.460 to

00:53:43.780 tell

00:53:44.060 me

00:53:44.260 how

00:53:44.740 whether

00:53:45.740 I

00:53:46.060 am

00:53:46.260 queer 0.99

00:53:46.700 or

00:53:47.000 not

00:53:47.400 will

00:53:47.920 help

00:53:48.280 me

00:53:48.460 improve

00:53:49.160 quantum

00:53:50.040 computing

00:53:50.620 I'm

00:53:51.240 open

00:53:51.600 to

00:53:51.840 hearing

00:53:52.180 that

00:53:52.480 explanation

00:53:54.100 but

00:53:54.860 until

00:53:55.200 you

00:53:55.420 show

00:53:55.640 me

00:53:55.820 how

00:53:56.140 my

00:53:56.440 sexual

00:53:56.880 orientation

00:53:57.720 affects

00:53:58.620 my

00:53:58.900 understanding

00:53:59.560 of the

00:54:00.000 distribution

00:54:00.520 of prime

00:54:01.080 numbers

00:54:01.500 I don't

00:54:02.160 think

00:54:02.400 that

00:54:02.580 those

00:54:02.820 metrics

00:54:03.240 affect

00:54:03.720 research

00:54:04.140 excellence

00:54:04.580 and

00:54:05.080 they should

00:54:05.480 be made

00:54:06.040 null

00:54:06.940 imposing

00:54:10.780 ideological

00:54:11.400 criteria

00:54:12.140 in

00:54:12.520 employment

00:54:13.140 and

00:54:14.320 research

00:54:15.720 could

00:54:16.080 this

00:54:16.600 undermine

00:54:17.340 the image

00:54:18.440 of Canada

00:54:19.120 because

00:54:19.460 it's giving

00:54:19.940 us the

00:54:20.380 idea

00:54:20.780 that

00:54:21.280 we're

00:54:21.620 giving

00:54:22.300 priority

00:54:22.780 people

00:54:23.280 people

00:54:23.300 who

00:54:23.560 written

00:54:23.920 to

00:54:24.200 me

00:54:24.440 who

00:54:24.900 thought

00:54:25.240 hey

00:54:25.460 should

00:54:25.680 I

00:54:25.820 come

00:54:26.040 to

00:54:26.240 Canada

00:54:26.600 what

00:54:26.940 I

00:54:27.140 you

00:54:27.240 know

00:54:27.320 I've

00:54:27.560 read

00:54:27.760 your

00:54:27.980 stuff

00:54:28.320 Professor

00:54:28.740 Saad

00:54:29.080 I've

00:54:29.340 read

00:54:29.500 your

00:54:29.660 material

00:54:30.120 is it

00:54:30.760 as bad

00:54:31.200 as it

00:54:31.460 as people

00:54:32.280 say that

00:54:32.860 it is

00:54:33.080 I say

00:54:33.320 look

00:54:33.600 there are

00:54:34.460 wonderful

00:54:34.820 things in

00:54:35.300 Canada

00:54:35.580 there are

00:54:35.940 amazing

00:54:36.360 researchers

00:54:36.780 in Canada

00:54:37.240 but yes

00:54:37.980 we are

00:54:38.620 an ultra

00:54:39.600 woke

00:54:39.960 country

00:54:40.360 we do

00:54:40.840 suffer

00:54:41.200 from

00:54:41.480 stage

00:54:41.880 four

00:54:42.160 suicidal

00:54:42.680 empathy

00:54:43.120 and

00:54:43.920 if you

00:54:44.380 are

00:54:44.580 white

00:54:44.940 if you

00:54:45.360 are

00:54:45.500 heterosexual 0.84

00:54:46.200 if 0.79

00:54:47.000 you

00:54:47.160 are

00:54:52.300 not

00:54:52.640 words

00:54:53.020 that

00:54:53.200 I

00:54:53.300 should

00:54:53.480 ever

00:54:53.780 be

00:54:54.040 uttering

00:54:54.560 anybody

00:54:55.200 should

00:54:55.600 be

00:54:55.820 able

00:54:56.080 to

00:54:56.320 participate

00:54:56.880 in

00:54:57.480 the

00:54:57.660 democratic

00:54:58.280 pursuit

00:54:58.800 of

00:54:59.020 science

00:54:59.460 thank

00:55:05.820 you

00:55:06.120 and

00:55:06.840 with

00:55:07.200 that

00:55:07.380 I

00:55:07.560 would

00:55:07.720 like

00:55:07.940 to

00:55:08.160 thank

00:55:08.520 all

00:55:08.740 the

00:55:08.980 four

00:55:09.300 witnesses

00:55:09.720 sorry

00:55:10.220 for

00:55:10.540 some

00:55:10.820 technical

00:55:11.260 issues

00:55:11.820 but

00:55:12.520 thank

00:55:13.460 you

00:55:13.620 for

00:55:13.940 joining

00:55:14.480 us

00:55:14.860 and

00:55:15.320 I

00:55:15.820 know

00:55:15.980 it's

00:55:16.220 like

00:55:16.440 almost

00:55:16.700 close

00:55:17.000 to

00:55:17.160 midnight

00:55:17.560 for

00:55:18.040 Mr.

00:55:18.280 Kaufman

00:55:18.720 so

00:55:19.280 thank

00:55:19.620 you

00:55:22.300 you

The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad - September 26, 2025

Diversity, Inclusion, & Equity in Science-Full Testimony @ The House of Commons (The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad_887)

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript