Current Issues

Updated December 21, 2007

CFBS Ninth Annual Strategic Planning Meeting

Lord Elgin Hotel, Laurier Room
Ottawa, ON
November 17, 2007

Time: 9:30 AM -12:30 PM

Jump to: Background | Strategic Planning Meeting Summary | Strategic Planning Meeting Minutes

Background

The 2007 Annual Strategic Planning Session of the CFBS was held Saturday November 17, 2007 at 9:30 AM, Lord Elgin Hotel, Laurier Room, Ottawa, ON.

Representatives from CFBS Member & Life Sciences societies, Government VIPs, Granting Councils & Agencies were invited to participate. The main theme of the Strategic Planning Session was "Knowledge Translation". How to institute Knowledge Translation in concert with the Granting Agencies and the Parliamentary Library.

Dr. Bruce Sells, CFBS Executive Director Emeritus, met late October 2007 with the Program Director of the Parliamentary Library (PL) and two of her colleague to discuss CFBS Knowledge Translation Proposal. This proposal has been shared with several of the Federal Research Agencies (NSERC, CIHR and SSHRC) in addition to CFI and Genome Canada. Helpful comments have been received. Dr. Sells spent over an hour with PL discussing the Knowledge Translation Program. He again emphasized that this program was not to be perceived as advocacy/lobbying but more an effort to provide independent advice regarding scientific issues of interest to parliamentarians and their constituents.

The Library of Parliament is undergoing a significant process of renewal, during which it will be evaluating the services that it provides to its parliamentary clientele and how best it can provide these services in a rapidly changing environment.

The Library of Parliament recognizes that as an important part of this renewal process, it needs to develop relationships with the academic community to help enhance the services it provides its Parliamentary clients.

The Library of Parliament expressed interest in exploring with the Canadian Federation of Biological Societies, how they might collaborate on soliciting papers from the scientific community for the Library of Parliament "Occasional Paper" program. In addition to providing useful information to Parliamentarians, such collaboration may also help the Library of Parliament to identify and resolve issues of concern as it works on developing a more comprehensive framework for a relationship with the broader academic community.

For further information about efforts made by Dr. Bruce Sells, CFBS Executive Director - Emeritus to discuss the "Knowledge Translation" activity with the Parliamentary Library and various granting agencies, please refer to: Science Policy - Knowledge Translation Report

In 2005 CFBS formed a partnership with the Library of Parliament to develop a series of Life Science seminars. These seminars were designed to provide information that could be of interest to parliamentarians when considering new legislation. For further information: News - Library of Paliament Seminars

Strategic Planning Meeting Summary

I. Introduction:

The CFBS Strategic Planning Meeting was held on November 17, 2007 at the Lord Elgin Hotel in Ottawa. Those Attending were: Jim Cheetham, CCUBC, Katherine Gray-Donald, CSNS, Cathy Chan, CPS, Ric Devon, CAANCB, CFBS Treasurer, Ken Fisher, CFBS Secretary, Genevieve Bondy, STC, Albert Clark, CSBMCB, Tom Moon, CSZ, Tim Lougheed, President Canadian Science Writers Association, Alvin Shrier, CPS, Nigel Lloyd, NSERC, Kate Swan, Genome Canada, Tarik Bhatti, SSHRC, Richard Snell, CIHR, Danica (Dana) Stanimirovic, NRC, Bruce Sells, CFBS E. D., Wafaa Antonious, CFBS Manager.

The Canadian Federation of Biological Societies (CFBS) ninth strategic planning session focused on assisting Parliamentarians in their understanding of particular aspects of sciences (physical, social and life sciences), when legislation involving science is being considered.

Over the past several years a partnership has developed with the Library of Parliament (LOP). This partnership has taken the form of CFBS providing the Library with names of individuals in the life sciences, who are able to present seminars on topics of interest/importance to legislators. This partnership has previously been reported see website:News - Library of Paliament Seminars

To enhance our ability to be of service to Parliamentarians and speak to issues that require some scientific understanding CFBS has had a number of discussions with the LOP in an attempt to expand the current arrangement. This expanded program would take the form of establishing a presence on the LOP website. The conversation with the LOP has resulted in an agreement to proceed with this initiative.

II. The strategic planning session:

The Session was an attempt to obtain input on the CFBS proposal on Knowledge Translation from those attending:

As introduction to those attending, an outline was provided for debate and the following discussion focused largely on:

Final Comments:
One of the most important suggestions to arise from the session was to propose that the LOP acts through its website, as a clearing house for items related to the scientific underpinnings for legislation. In our upcoming discussion with LOP we will include the offer to have CFBS provide links on the LOP website that relate to issues/topics that the LOP believe will be useful. This could also function to provide answers to questions that may arise from the written seminars. This will be suggested along with the written submissions.

Finally the benefit of this initiative in having the LOP host the website is to give credibility to submissions and at the same time generate a useful source of expert opinions from the broad scientific community.

Strategic Planning Meeting Minutes

Minutes

All in attendance: Jim Cheetham, CCUBC, Katherine Gray-Donald, CSNS, Cathy Chan, CPS, Ric Devon, CAANCB, CFBS Treasurer, Ken Fisher, CFBS Secretary, Genevieve Bondy, STC, Albert Clark, CSBMCB, Tom Moon, CSZ, Tim Lougheed, President Canadian Science Writers Association, Alvin Shrier, CPS, Nigel Lloyd, NSERC, Kate Swan, Genome Canada, Tariq Bhatti, SSHRC, Richard Snell, CIHR, Danica (Dana) Stanimirovic, NRC, Bruce Sells, CFBS E. D., Wafaa Antonious, CFBS Manager.

Bruce Sells: For several years we tried to consider ways to get information to the Parliamentarians. We are involved through The Partnership Group for Science and Engineering (PAGES) and Canadian Consortium for Research (CCR), and they consider that as advocacy. The CFBS has tried to focus more on science policy and solutions to problems, which we felt might be helpful to MPs and their staff. Some ideas were having a scientist on the Hill, Peter Adams (Caucus Chair for Post-Secondary Education and Research) suggested contacting the speaker of the house; his office transferred him to the Library of Parliament (LOP). They suggested arranging for speakers who can speak to specific issues. Richard Pare, emphasized that it could not be lobby related, mainly educating. The list of Symposia organized is available on CFBS website. Current Symposia topics in the works include: Obesity, monitoring pharmaceutical products, and nano medicine.

Bruce Sells felt that there is a need for more involvement. Having the LOP involved gives us greater credibility. Have information available to the general public and MPs. Bruce Sells referred to the Knowledge Transfer Strategy and asked the group for feed back. Tom Moon asked about the role of the LOP. Bruce explained that when MPs need information they send their staff to the LOP to collect information. In addition a number of seminars are presented by LOP and are then archived. Ministers can have access to them whenever needed. Tariq Bhatti, asked if the LOP is the best vehicle. Alvin asked if that initiative will replace the Breakfast on the Hill. Bruce Sells said he would still participate in Breakfast on the Hill. The Knowledge Transfer initiative is an extra effort CFBS is undertaking to convey information. Nigel Lloyd thinks it is an excellent initiative and asked if it is limited to the biological science. Bruce Sells replied that we would like to ensure that we have the breadth of knowledge, thus we need the potential partners. There are other associations that we still need to contact.

Bruce Sells asked: what will the granting agencies feel would be the best way to get to the parliamentarians? Tariq Bhatti: There is a group of people who are trying to collect the best information about science. CIHR has done that. SSHRC is starting to get into this area. Knowledge synthesis activities in CIHR are related to grant competition. With CIHR, the process takes a bit of time, and often it does not happen as fast (week or two) as MPs need the information. Tariq Bhatti: if you respond to the legislation and quickly provide information, you can be effective.

Bruce Sells: is it reasonable, if there is an issue identified, would the federal agencies respond quickly to it. Richard Snell, some times it can take a year.

Tariq Bhatti: what the agencies can do is refer you to the expert who can provide the information, as they have access to lists.

Bruce Sells: Genome Canada: how do you get the information out? Kate Swan: it tends to be in the form of request of additional funds to industry Canada, they also have something like Breakfast on the Hill, and it is well attended.

Ric Devon: where does Health Canada fit in this? Health Canada could be involved in generating information. Most government departments have their conduits to MP. Genevieve Bondy: we are occasionally approached to provide information.

Nigel Lloyd: there are a couple of issues regarding providing information. Because of the privacy act, we cannot provide you with the contact information. We can only provide you with the name of the person. And have to get their OK before providing information. Also, we would either have to be either so involved that we would have peer reviews or totally distanced because of imposed regulations.

Topic Identification
Bruce Sells: we need to see how the LOP wants to identify the topics. But also if the granting agencies may wish to advise us about topics they feel MPs need to know about. Nigel suggested having some kind of committee responsible for identifying topics. The societies could and should have input into this process.

Bruce Sells: When we were speaking to one of the MPs he suggested that the best avenue for obtaining information is from the parliamentary committees, if we can do that it will be helpful. The MP suggested that the expert can also be asked to appear before the parliamentary committees.

Website
If material is going to appear on the website, how it should appear. Tim Lougheed suggested once an expert has been identified he (Tim) can either edit what has been written, or interview the expert. We can have the paper in PDF as it was written, but it is not much help for the MPs. Tim Lougheed recommended the interviews as it helps bring the flavor. He commented about a talk given by an astronaut. MPs picked up on some points and through that they arrived at a message of concern. Tim felt that it was important to give the MPS good information so that they can identify the issues. They do or need or want lists of musts and shoulds.

Nigel Lloyd noted that this initiative will cost and will demand funds. Bruce Sells: CFBS does not have the funds, it will not be free, and we will have to solicit funds.

Bruce Sells: once the submissions have been prepared, Nigel Lloyd suggested that there should be a monitoring committee, one of which should be from the LOP, to ensure it is not being misused, if the science comes from the expert, the granting council can review it. Nigel Lloyd recommended standing committees. Tariq Bhatti: asked if CFBS will be seen as the owner of the document or it is just presenting the point of views. Ric Devon suggested that this information have to be dated, and we need to consider how long it would stay on the website.

Bruce Sells: asked about what should we provide for the parliamentarians: develop a blog on the CFBS website? Have the societies contribute a paragraph or few about how the research affected and benefited the society? What could help the parliamentarians? Is it already done in NSERC and CIHR? Nigel Lloyd: it is a very interesting idea, you have to allow people to search by keyword; the other issue would be what the benefit of science is. We have to measure impact and benefit, which is different form success stories.

Bruce Sells: in terms of how the parliamentarians become aware of what is on the website, make a list on a regular basis on what is on the website, and have it available on the “Hill Times”. Blog: Ric Devon: you should have a webmaster, or on the LOP website (Nigel Lloyd suggested). Cathy Chan suggested a video clip; it might catch their attention.

Bruce Sells: are there other ways in getting the attention of the MPs? Tariq Bhatti: we need to show financial benefits. Bruce Sells: many efforts have and are being made to address this question, often nobody believes in the assumptions, and the final estimates. Tariq Bhatti, the best way to get discussion is to have an editorial in the global mail, Tim Lougheed: as soon as the MPs feel there is something they can be involved in and make a difference, they become interested. Tim Lougheed recommended against blogs. He also suggested that you refer to the success stories posted on CIHR, NSERC. A blog is the moldy basement of information. Blog people knock the information off and it is not edited. You need a reputable clearing house. Ric Devon: suggested a news alert, Parliamentarians can subscribe by inserting their email. Bruce Sells: who would develop a clearing house, Tim Lougheed suggested having the LOP post it on the web. Tim Lougheed: I live off what I receive from CIHR and NSERC and scan the science literature. The more interesting stuff is often below the radar screen. Tariq Bhatti: as an organization which is trying to generate the material, you will be like the lighting rod that will try to highlight what others are doing, Tim Lougheed will play like a monitoring vehicle, pick up whatever has been missed.

Ric Devon: what sort of time frame knowing what the topic would be and when it will be discussed in the house? Is that an issue that we need to formalize? Bruce Sells: it is an issue that has been raised; we need to carve a niche for us. Tim Lougheed: the CBC is doing a spin on the nature of things.

Ken Fisher: it is easy to identify what is going on. However, it is more important to educate the MPs on what is the relation of research and its effects. Is there a way in this mechanism to help in that education? .

Tom Moon: satisfy the need for legislation, and also educating the MPs, they are equally important, but are two separate issues. Make sure they have examples they can tell their tax payers when they go home. Ken Fisher: Being an MP it is like having an undergraduate program; they come in naïve; by the time they leave you hope that they have learned something. Then you repeat the cycle again with a new person.

Tim Lougheed: how can you sell this to the LOP. If you make the LOP one of their portals that is well written with sufficient links it can succeed. Societies should provide us with what they feel it is important, Alvin: what about one on one interaction? MPs suggested having the experts to speak on parliamentary committees. Tim Lougheed: have two way interaction, informing the scientist of what is going with parliamentarians to see if they can be involved.

Ric Devon: there is a cost of doing this, it will not be free; the societies need to know what the cost is. Bruce Sells I have not provided a budget, as I do not know what the budget will be. It will have its impact on the Executive Director’s time, and cost.

How can we measure impact, Nigel Lloyd suggested counting website hits, (Tim increase in the Government funding). Nigel Lloyd: if it leads to more national stories, they discussed the success stories; economic impact. Bruce said: we will continue use the seminar program that was initiated with the LOP. CFBS will try to do things in sequential fashion, try to serve the LOP with information that might be of help to them in government’s legislation, and also indicate the benefits of science. The clearing house suggestion is a good idea. There are issues of short term responses, if it is within a week might be difficult. Katherine Gray-Donald: short term responses are like briefing notes. Genevieve Bondy: agreed it sounds like briefing notes. The topics come to them through bureaucracy. So provide the MPs with short and longer versions.

Tariq Bhatti: SSHRC got $11,000,000 from the government. Thus the Federation can get something to be the link between scientist and the government. This is one of the highest priorities of the government.

What is the path forward? Bruce Sells will meet with the LOP, and he will convey the result of this meeting to them.

Meeting adjourned.