Harper Conservatives 'stifling' innovation

[waldo]

following the board admin/moderator/facilitator request for greater attention to "thread drift", I've pulled the following post from another currently running thread... in any case, the post itself got immediately buried.

the referenced (latest) report from the, 'Science, Technology and Innovation Council':

State of the Nation 2012

.

if anything... Harper Conservatives discourage innovation. Setting aside their 'war on science', and the shift away from basic/academic research with the accompanying shift of available Harper Conservative R&D funding toward short-term commercial pursuits, the Science, Technology and Innovation Council in its latest "State of the Nation 2012", declared that:

- in measuring Canada's, 'science, technology and innovation (STI)' performance, Canada has dropped in rank from 16th to 23rd in overall expenditures on research and development relative to GDP compared to other economically developed countries.

- as a recommendation, the government should put more emphasis on direct government support for industry-driven research instead of indirect support in the form of tax credits.

- Canada’s gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) declined from their peak in 2008 and, when measured in relation to gross domestic product (GDP), since 2001. In contrast, the GERD and GERD intensity of most other countries have been increasing. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has pushed its rank down from 16th position in 2006 to 17th in 2008 and to 23rd in 2011 (among 41 economies).

- Canada’s performance is particularly poor on measures of business enterprise expenditures on research and development (BERD)—that is, the R&D performed by firms. Although preliminary data suggest that BERD in Canada increased very slightly in both 2011 and 2012, BERD intensity (i.e., BERD as a percentage of GDP) has been in almost continuous decline for the past decade. Canada’s rank among comparator countries on BERD-to-GDP fell to 25th in 2011 (of 41 economies).

- on the international measure of information and communications technologies (ICT) investment intensity (i.e., ICT as a percentage of non-residential gross fixed capital formation), Canada still ranks in the middle among countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Of particular concern, Canada’s ICT investment gap with the United States (U.S.) is increasing—ICT investment intensity in the business sector in Canada averaged only 42 percent of U.S. levels over the period from 2000 to 2010. Canada also performs poorly on venture capital investment as a share of GDP, ranking 15th out of 27 comparator countries.

[Shady]

Just more scientists looking to get more out of the government tit.

[On Guard for Thee]

 

Just more scientists looking to get more out of the government tit.

 

And of course Harper doesn't need any of that nagging old science stuff. He has the Christian and Missionary Alliance to guide him.

[cybercoma]

Just more scientists looking to get more out of the government tit.

why publicly fund scientists when we have corporations to tell you what to think, eh Shady?

[ReeferMadness]

Harper doesn't need scientists to tell him to give tax breaks to wealthy corporations. The Fraser Institute does that for nothing.

[August1991]

So... Harper is a superstitious, religious, dinosaur-denying fanatic who is anti-science.

I understand that the Toronto Star, Suzuki, CBC 20% of the English-Canadian population are currently obsessed with this idea, fad-of-the-day

But for Harper-haters in general, good luck with that meme.[/irony]

----

For starters, for most people (French or English), Harper appears to be a nerd.

Edited January 16, 2014 by August1991

[Mighty AC]

A Lego haired, ruthless, innovation stifling nerd, who places ideology ahead of facts and retention of power ahead of everything.

[August1991]

A Lego haired, ruthless, innovation stifling nerd, who places ideology ahead of facts and retention of power ahead of everything.

Key word: nerd.

Everyone knows that Harper is a nerd. This Suzuki English CBC "anti-science" meme won't stick to Harper.

I suspect that before the 2015 election, the CBC crowd will drop it for another meme. Harper as Wife beater?

Edited January 16, 2014 by August1991

[jacee]

Harper doesn't need scientists to tell him to give tax breaks to wealthy corporations. The Fraser Institute does that for nothing.

Harper is neglecting ... no ... actively suppressing the infrastructure of progress.

We're all going to pay for that.

.

[Shady]

Innovation comes from the private sector. Not climate scientists sucking from the government tit.

[waldo]

Innovation comes from the private sector. Not climate scientists sucking from the government tit.

huh! "Climate scientists"??? Why are you singling out any category of scientists? Just how limited is your grasp of this subject in order to recognize the roles government should/can/must play in helping to enable/facilitate/motivate and support innovation?

why not have a read of the OP linked report. Granted, it might cut into your time for that Ben Gazzi guy, but it might save you further embarrassment!

[Accountability Now]

.

waldo, on 14 Jan 2014 - 1:07 PM, said:

if anything... Harper Conservatives discourage innovation.

Wait a second. You are going to use a report from the STIC to make the claim that Harper has discouraged innovation? Do you know who created the STIC in 2007.....yup.....the Harper government. So the group that Harper created specifically to encourage innovation finds five areas where Canada can improve and you equate that to Harper himself discouraging it. Does your hypocracy have no end?

waldo, on 14 Jan 2014 - 1:07 PM, said:

- in measuring Canada's, 'science, technology and innovation (STI)' performance, Canada has dropped in rank from 16th to 23rd in overall expenditures on research and development relative to GDP compared to other economically developed countries.

- Canada’s gross domestic expenditures on R&D (GERD) declined from their peak in 2008 and, when measured in relation to gross domestic product (GDP), since 2001. In contrast, the GERD and GERD intensity of most other countries have been increasing. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has pushed its rank down from 16th position in 2006 to 17th in 2008 and to 23rd in 2011 (among 41 economies).

I see you took this from the summary table on Page 18. Perhaps if you would have looked at the actual funding amounts over the two respective periods (2006 to 2011), you would notice that the Federal Goverments portion actually increased from 5.2B to 5.8B. The only differnce is that the Canadian ecomony did remarkably well as the GDP actually increased in this time frame which I trust other countries can't say the same. Overall, the increase in federal funding couldn't be matched by the increase in GDP thus reducing this percentage from 2% to 1.74%. So I guess its Harpers fault that the GDP rose....right?

Of course you also seem to ignore that the largest funder to Canada's GERD is in fact Business itself as it provides 3x the funding to this equation compared to the Feds. The fact that their contributions to funding decreased over these periods is no suprise due to the recession.

Now if you want to compare Harper to say past Liberal governments, then lets look at Figure 3-3 on page 29 which shows the historical federal funding for R&D and see it has steadily increased from the Liberals. Of course, look again at the historical business funding and you will see increases right until 2008 and then a major drop which brings down the toal GERD.

waldo, on 14 Jan 2014 - 1:07 PM, said:

- as a recommendation, the government should put more emphasis on direct government support for industry-driven research instead of indirect support in the form of tax credits.

The same summary table shows that direct funding increased from 0.02% to 0.03% where as indirect funding remained the same. Now you do realize that having a higher indirect support bracket means that industry (largely oil and gas) are putting some skin into the game. If you change it to direct, then the funds will most likely be appropriated to the industries per GDP which will then largely go to oil and gas. I know how much you complain about subsidies for oil and gas....so how would you like that scenario. At least the indirect method keeps the business with some risk.

waldo, on 14 Jan 2014 - 1:07 PM, said:

- Canada’s performance is particularly poor on measures of business enterprise expenditures on research and development (BERD)—that is, the R&D performed by firms. Although preliminary data suggest that BERD in Canada increased very slightly in both 2011 and 2012, BERD intensity (i.e., BERD as a percentage of GDP) has been in almost continuous decline for the past decade. Canada’s rank among comparator countries on BERD-to-GDP fell to 25th in 2011 (of 41 economies).

This is a measure of businesses and how they are investing in R&D....not the Federal government. Please explain how Harper or any prime minister has any control over this one. Again...did you actually expect businesses to increase their exepditures on R&D during the recession. Yikes.

The report (which again was created by Harper's committee) is an excellent tool to track progress and point out areas that need improvement. The fact that Harper set up such a committee is another sign of his experience and leadership abilities.

[waldo]

Canada's (Acts of Parliament created) federal granting agencies... the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)Natural Sciences and the Engineering Research Council (NSERC):

Canada continues to lag in private sector investment in innovation and transferring knowledge into the marketplace, as well as deploying our STI talent to best advantage in the labour force.

"In order for Canada to create jobs and opportunity in a competitive world, we must aim higher," said Dr. Howard Alper, Chair of STIC. "We cannot be satisfied with the status quo or incremental progress. That is why STIC members have identified five areas, in particular, where concerted action is needed to reach global leadership."

"For each of these areas, we have identified the world's top five performing countries and the threshold that Canada would have to attain to break into their ranks," said STIC member Simon Pimstone, President and CEO of Vancouver-based Xenon Pharmaceuticals. "We believe that enhanced performance in these five areas will help secure Canada's future as a global STI leader, bringing significant economic and societal benefits."

The five key STI indicators identified by STIC as strategic areas for improvement include:

- Business Performance of Research and Development (BERD) as a share of GDP
- Business investment in Information and Communications Technologies
- Higher education expenditures on Research and Development (HERD) as a share of GDP
- Science and engineering doctoral degrees granted per 100,000 population
- Share of human resources in science and technology

.

over the Harper Conservatives watch, Canada's federal funding for basic research is down. As compared to other developed countries... Canada's funding for research and development (R&D) is down... Canada's performance on key indicators related to business innovation, knowledge development and transfer, and talent development and deployment is down... Canada's rankings as compared to other developed countries are down. Apparently, to some Harper Conservative supporters, this means Harper Conservatives "encourage" innovation! Apparently, this means the federal government has no role to play in supporting science, business, higher education, etc.!
.

[BubberMiley]

Innovation comes from the private sector.

Except for, among other things, the space program, the military, and this Internet we're talking on.

[Accountability Now]

over the Harper Conservatives watch, Canada's federal funding for basic research is down. As compared to other developed countries... Canada's funding for research and development (R&D) is down... Canada's performance on key indicators related to business innovation, knowledge development and transfer, and talent development and deployment is down... Canada's rankings as compared to other developed countries are down. Apparently, to some Harper Conservative supporters, this means Harper Conservatives "encourage" innovation! Apparently, this means the federal government has no role to play in supporting science, business, higher education, etc.!

.

Here....I'll make it easy on you. Federal funding, as per your study, is shown below. It was around 4.5B when Harper took over from Martin. Its now just under 6B. Of course, this increased funding came through tough recession times which leads me to believe why didn't the Liberals cough up more bucks with all those surpluses. I guess they really define "stifle".

[waldo]

but the Libs! But the Libs! But the Libs!!!

"Canada’s gross domestic expenditures on R&D(GERD) declined from their peak in 2008 and, when measured in relation to gross domestic product (GDP), since 2001. In contrast, the GERD and GERD intensity of most other countries have been increasing. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has pushed its rank down from 16^th position in 2006 to 17^th in 2008 and to 23^rd in 2011 (among 41 economies). Since 2001, however, despite the growth in R&D funding in Canada, GERD intensity has been declining, to the point where it reached a low of 1.7 percent in 2011."

"By comparison, most other advanced and emerging economies have increased their total funding of R&D over the 2006 to 2011 period, with a corresponding rise in their GERD-to-GDP ratio. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has, as a result, pushed its rank among 41 OECD and leading developing economies down from 16^thposition in 2006 to 17^th in 2008 and then to 23^rd in 2011. At that point, Canada’s GERD-to-GDP ratio stood at 1.7 percent, more than 1.5 percentage points below the 3.3 percent threshold of the world’s top five performers on GERD intensity."

.

[cybercoma]

I really don't want to see these numbers. Thanks a lot, waldo.

[Accountability Now]

but the Libs! But the Libs! But the Libs!!!

"Canada’s gross domestic expenditures on R&D(GERD) declined from their peak in 2008 and, when measured in relation to gross domestic product (GDP), since 2001. In contrast, the GERD and GERD intensity of most other countries have been increasing. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has pushed its rank down from 16^th position in 2006 to 17^th in 2008 and to 23^rd in 2011 (among 41 economies). Since 2001, however, despite the growth in R&D funding in Canada, GERD intensity has been declining, to the point where it reached a low of 1.7 percent in 2011."

"By comparison, most other advanced and emerging economies have increased their total funding of R&D over the 2006 to 2011 period, with a corresponding rise in their GERD-to-GDP ratio. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has, as a result, pushed its rank among 41 OECD and leading developing economies down from 16^thposition in 2006 to 17^th in 2008 and then to 23^rd in 2011. At that point, Canada’s GERD-to-GDP ratio stood at 1.7 percent, more than 1.5 percentage points below the 3.3 percent threshold of the world’s top five performers on GERD intensity."

.

Perfect. Thanks for proving my point. Total funding has gone up but Funding as a percentage of GDP has gone down. Can't blame Harper for having large increase in GDP....but I'm sure you would.

[Keepitsimple]

Perfect. Thanks for proving my point. Total funding has gone up but Funding as a percentage of GDP has gone down. Can't blame Harper for having large increase in GDP....but I'm sure you would.

Interestingly, with the Global Recession ongoing since 2009, the GDP for many countries has probably shrunk - and if they maintain levels of R & D, their ratios go up - without doing anything - and as you've pointed out, ours goes down. What do they say about statistics.....a phrase with a "damn" in it that I can't remember....

[waldo]

Interestingly, with the Global Recession ongoing since 2009, the GDP for many countries has probably shrunk

"Canada’s gross domestic expenditures on R&D(GERD) declined from their peak in 2008 and, when measured in relation to gross domestic product (GDP), since 2001. In contrast, the GERD and GERD intensity of most other countries have been increasing. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has pushed its rank down from 16^th position in 2006 to 17^th in 2008 and to 23^rd in 2011 (among 41 economies). Since 2001, however, despite the growth in R&D funding in Canada, GERD intensity has been declining, to the point where it reached a low of 1.7 percent in 2011."

"By comparison, most other advanced and emerging economies have increased their total funding of R&D over the 2006 to 2011 period, with a corresponding rise in their GERD-to-GDP ratio. Canada’s declining GERD intensity has, as a result, pushed its rank among 41 OECD and leading developing economies down from 16^thposition in 2006 to 17^th in 2008 and then to 23^rd in 2011. At that point, Canada’s GERD-to-GDP ratio stood at 1.7 percent, more than 1.5 percentage points below the 3.3 percent threshold of the world’s top five performers on GERD intensity."

.

[Accountability Now]

Lol. Let me explain how formulas work waldo. The GERD intensity is directly proportional to the funding amount and indirectly proportional to the GDP. So...countries can increase their GERD Intensity by either increasing their funding or having their GDP decrease while keeping the other variable constant. Having an increase in GERD doesn't automatically mean that country is doing more.

In reality it is a combination of both. Even with the recession, most countries on this list increased their GDP from 2006 to 2011 however the rate % increase in some cases was not the same. The countries who appear to have a decrease in GERD had fairly high GDP increases (Canada - 60%, Singapore - 100%, Australia- 100%, Luxemburg - 60%) The countries who appear to have increased their GERD had lower GDP increases (Estonia - 35%, Slovenia - 31%, Netherlands - 31% and Czech Rep- 46%). Countries like Belgium who had a 51% increase in GDP appeared to remain constant in their GERD intensity. Based on this, it appear that the change in GDP does play a significant role in this equation.

I will agree with waldo that "Canada" (not Harper) did not kick in the additional funds required to maintain or increase its GERD intensity based on our rising GDP however that again is related to the large portion of our funding coming from business and the subsequent drop off in that area.

Bottomline is that Harper did NOT decrease any funding as suggested. If anything it was increased. As such any further arguements should be made based on what "Canada" should do....not Harper.

[cybercoma]

waldo is arguing that public R&D funding has not kept pace with the country's economic growth, which is quite clear from the stats. In fact, even the absolute funding dropped post 2008.

Edited January 16, 2014 by cybercoma

[waldo]

waldo is arguing that public R&D funding has not kept pace with the country's economic growth, which is quite clear from the stats. In fact, even the absolute funding dropped post 2008.

basic research... the cornerstone/driver of innovation! Federal funding for basic research... down under Harper Conservatives:

Canada's (Acts of Parliament created) federal granting agencies... the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)Natural Sciences and the Engineering Research Council (NSERC):

[Accountability Now]

waldo is arguing that public R&D funding has not kept pace with the country's economic growth, which is quite clear from the stats. In fact, even the absolute funding dropped post 2008.

I stated that I agreed with the fact that the funding did not keep pace. See below. Having said that, our GDP took an erratic downward turn in 2010 and then shot up in 2011/2012. Funding increased from 2006 and took a slight decrease from 2008 most likely due to this dip. If this report would have used 2010 numbers then our GERD would have been much better. Unfortunately, the GDP shot up again in 2011 making it not the case. That's quite the moving target if one is in fact supposed to follow GDP.

I will agree with waldo that "Canada" (not Harper) did not kick in the additional funds required to maintain or increase its GERD intensity based on our rising GDP however that again is related to the large portion of our funding coming from business and the subsequent drop off in that area.

As you can see, waldo continues to cherry pick above by pointing out a decrease in one area of funding rather than the entire R&D area that he originally posted. Moreso, like most Harper bashers, he thinks that anything bad is Harper's fault even if it has nothing to do with him. The formula for GERD is not a simiple input output equation as the volatiliy of the GDP has a lot to do with it.

Under Harper, the total R&D did go up....that is clear. Having said that....I still haven't got a response on why the Liberals didn't kick in more funds on an absolute level when they had all that surplus money.

Edited January 16, 2014 by Accountability Now

[waldo]

you go to GERD with the GDP you have... not the GDP you might want or wish to have at a later time!