Publication Search

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, witnesses, for being here.

It's certainly been a very interesting discussion.

I'd like to pick up on one of the points that I think some of you have already raised. It's to do with small businesses and IP. I think we've invested a lot of money into research and a number of good ideas are sitting on the shelf without being promoted, etc. Some very intelligent Ph.D.s having raised that.

How can this government do something to assist small and medium-sized business in protecting their IP and making sure that their IP is protected, because that's a fundamental step in their progressing to getting into bigger companies and bigger organizations, etc. How can industries like Bombardier and some of the bigger companies assist some small companies in going through this process of getting the IP established so they can move forward?

Maybe we can start with Madam Hutchinson, since you're government relations.

I agree fully with that, but the question is how this government can help small businesses make sure they secure the IP that will allow them to actually get to the next level of growing their businesses, getting more jobs, doing all the things that would make that possible.

Let me phrase my question slightly differently. Should the government provide funding for small businesses to secure their IP with the hope of actually getting that money back once they've taken that IP and developed their business?

To develop the IP, if you have to patent it, it's tens of thousands of dollars. For a small business that could be quite difficult.

Okay.

Let's go to the nuclear side of things. There are disruptive technologies coming along, such as thorium salt reactors. What are your comments about that in terms of the nuclear industry and power generation?

Thank you, witnesses, for being here.

Mine is probably a little bit of a weird question. Madame Dubé, you talked about the social need, and as a government we need to look forward and see what's happening, and we have all these disruptive technologies. Where do you think our society should be going, or is it going to be determined by these disruptive technologies? How will we as a society move forward in terms of training and making sure we have the skills to support these disruptive technologies in the future?

I hope you can all have a go at answering that.

Let's start with Mr. Horgan.

IBM is unique in the sense that they actually invest so much back into research and development in their own company.

That's not the case in many other companies, frankly.

Madam Dubé, do you have any comments?

Thank you.

Dr. Sullivan, do you have any comments?

Thank you.

Madam Gagné, do you have any comments?

Thank you, folks, for being here.

I'm going to take a slightly different tack. Obviously disruptive technologies is a wonderful area in which we can grow our economy and grow our processes and technologies, etc. It's also at the leading edge. When you have some of these technologies, your companies have explosive growth.

One of the things that comes to mind is how you are dealing with getting the right people in your workforce, in your circumstances, and in terms of dealing with colleges, universities, etc., to get some of the basic skills. Are you developing those skills in-house, so you have the workforce you need for the future?

That question is for anybody.

I'm reading between the lines in saying to you that people are not the problem. You can get enough people to grow your businesses with these disruptive technologies, with the right sorts of skills that you need.

I've gone beyond that. This is now your business.

When we look at these disruptive technologies, it's always looking back. They've already been successful. You have a successful company. Various nanomaterial products and services are now coming and are under way. Looking to the future, what do you think the next disruptive technologies are going to be in Canada?