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

Length

55 minutes

Words per Minute

149.06833

Word Count

8,256

Sentence Count

444

Misogynist Sentences

6

Hate Speech Sentences

11


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

In this episode, we discuss the need for diversity and inclusion in science, and the lack of it in Canada's universities. We discuss the role of science as a tool for white supremacy, white privilege, and white supremacy as tools for white privilege.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,
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.
00:32:37.840 Today, we have more women than men.
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.
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,
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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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'
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
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
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
00:54:46.200 if
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