NB government needs to reevaluate its R&D focus
Past government policies have failed to nuture inovation
I have spoke ad nauseum about the fact that governments "would be better off focusing on policy initiatives that attempt to attract and retain the creative class rather than reintroducing old [failed] policies that do more to drive them out".
Case in point: BioProspecting NB Inc. a privately held cutting edge biopharmaceutical company in Sackville, New Brunswick focused on the development of novel peptides for the treatment of cancer and chronic pain. Why have we heard so little about the "leading edge" cancer research conducted out of one of Canada's elite post-secondary institutions, Mount Allison University? Plain and simple, government failed to implement the proper policies and strategies required to nurture their discoveries over the years.
Yes, I know what you're going to say, both the federal and provincial governments have offered tax credits and R&D incentives in the past; however, because many of these "startups" received very little "initial" financial help or attention from such programs as the Atlantic Innovation Fund (which had a reduced budget), the Ontario "centric" National Research Council - Industrial Research Assistance Program (NRC-IRAP) or the New Brunswick Innovation Foundation, the impact of the tax cuts were minimal. Which is why it was in the best interest of Bioprospecting NB Inc. to patent its technology as well as reevaluate its policy structure so as to be fully utilized "as a state-of-the-art research body". In other words, it made more sense for them to bypass the government in order to concentrate on seeking "untapped resources" in order to provide “gap fillers” for traditional pharmaceutical companies in clinically relevant and "market-driven sectors".
More to the point, now that they [Bioprospecting NB Inc.] have changed policy direction, they are in perfect position to reap the benefits and advantages of Prime Minister Harper's newly proposed national science and technology (S&T) strategy which identifies the need for more private research and development as key to strengthening Canada’s economy.
“Canada’s New Government is charting a new direction, one that links the competitive energy of Canada’s entrepreneurs to the creative genius of our scientists,” the Prime Minister said. “Our new strategy will strengthen Canada’s economy by tapping our deep well of entrepreneurial energy to fuel our technological progress.”
Let's hope Industry Canada and the private sector can get onboard this research as soon as possible. Furthermore, as cancer institute CEO Rodney Oullette hopes, "the success of BioProspecting will also help win the war against New Brunswick brain drain. They believe the biotechnology sector is an untapped resource that could put this province on the road to self-sustainability." Indeed, and more importantly, this leading edge cancer research may end up saving billions of lives in the process.
But as I've said in the past, these types of technological initiatves will never see the light of day in this province as long as the New Brunswick government is content on focusing their energy and resources on declining industries rather than cater to the creative class in a knowledge based economy [KBE] through low taxes and industry based incentives.
7 Comments:
Biochemistry is a ideal industry to foster in NB because of the great pool of talent and education at UdeM.
We could push this farther and make product directly from this discovery.
What I see from this company is that they will just sell their patent to US company. So yet again we sell our ressource to foreign country.
We need someone to coordinate this effort. We need Concrete product tied to R&D. Will this company produce a concrete product? Or is just a guy producing University research but with a profit instead.
Excellent post, however, you didn't follow it up so your 'opinion' doesn't match the facts. First, although it is a privately held company it is FUNDED by government. The company says quite specifically that the head researcher and private partners contributed only seed money.
The company exists because of $150,000 from the Industrial Research Assistance Program (NRC), Business Development Program (ACOA), and the Technology Adoption and Commercialization Program (BNB).
So you are a little off track trying to paint the governments policies as being bad, quite simply, this is an example of government funding having an effect. There is a bad side of course, while taxpayers foot the bill to start the company, when, and if, it makes millions, it will be the researcher and the Gunns who get rich. Moreover, if they decide to move the lab elsewhere, that whole investment disappears. Perhaps taxpayers should ask to be co claimants on the patent.
Why you haven't heard about it is simply the old reason, that there is only one media player in town pretty much. Of course there may have been a story just on a day when you missed hearing the CBC or missed a newspaper article, but this is why I started my blog (partly), because science remains a huge mystery in New Brunswick. Irving is unique in not having a science section.
To pick at another bone, there is no 'creative class', if anything this shows just how ANYBODY can do research. People miss out on the fact that many new science discoveries are done by average people-but people have to have time and the inclination to be interested.
This researcher essentially heard the idea from a friend and followed it up. However, knowing something about medical research I can tell you that the going in the field is EXTREMELY tough. Again, thats why you need governement funding.
Here, tax incentives mean nothing, because there is nothing to tax, in fact there probably NEVER will be anything to tax unless some miracle comes along and then its more a question of the tax on capital gains.
What is MOST important about this is looking at the environment differently, and this should be played up-and maybe why you don't hear about it from Irving. This guys discovery came from looking at the habitat in the environment, and the company is looking specifically at the environment. As anybody who works in the biology field knows, virtually every habitat is unique, often with unique habitants.
So what happens when people start to think "maybe we should clear cut all our forests for the measly amount we get from stumpage fees, who knows what other discoveries may be out there" All of a sudden you have a lot of unhappy leaseholders.
What is most interesting about this story is how it came about, and here it is an example of funding priorities, which I think you mentioned. Universities are the main locomotive for research,
Great idea, Paulin. The more innovation the better.
However, as you probably already know, I don't support policies (which have been in place for many decades) that inhibit innovation, specifically the over-concentration of public sector initiatives out there that are efficient. Which is why I was very pleased to see the new government invest $3 billion in tax assistance to industries that invest in private R&D. I see this as a "win-win" for both government and the industry.
As for your concern about this company selling "their patent to US company", not to worry, as the rate of [Canadian] owned firms being acquired by European countries has surpassed that of the United States since the signing of NAFTA. In other words, the "nationalist" arguement that the United States would swallow up its northern neighbour has been put to rest after viewing recent data.
More to the point, preventing BioProspecting NB Inc. from ever selling its assets in an open free market would not only deprive its Canadian owners of the capital gain to which they are entitled, but shareholders in other Canadian firms in which the newly liquid BioProspecting NB Inc. shareholders may to choose to reinvest --- not to mention Canadian consumers, who could benefit from lower prices linked to our high dollar.
Mea culpa. Meant to say: "...specifically the over-concentration of public sector initiatives out there that are inefficient."
Great points, Mikel. I think we are both closer in our views than we think towards the poorly underfunded R&D sector in New Brunswick. However, our approach to developing these industries differs a bit.
Keep posting my friend, as I know Jack Stewart will be interested in your claims.
Specifically in regards to tax incentives, this is just another 'national' program that kills maritime industry. Again, ask this researcher if he needs a tax break or needs money.
In other parts of the country R&D is far more advanced, which means a tax incentive 'may' have an effect, so long as the company is making good money. However, if you look at the tax incentives vs. what the company is actually doing, I suspect the only thing that really accomplishes is yet another gift to corporate canada.
So take two examples, like Research in Motion and Shell Canada. Both of these companies ALREADY rely heavily on research, they have to. So the 'tax' they now save will now be more money in their pocket, but it doesn't follow that more money will necessarily go into research, it could go anywhere.
Meanwhile, like I said, this guy isn't making any money, so there isn't anything to tax. You can make the Gunns pay even less tax and HOPE they will put that money into the company, but again, there is no guarantee of that.
I personally don't agree that public research should equal private gain, however, that's not the real world currently.
But this brings up many other interesting points, such as the environment, but even more specifically government funding. So $150,000 public dollars are essentially going into this company to employ TWO people. That's a lot of money to create two jobs.
Meanwhile, as anybody who knows about funding knows, the government still refuses to fund service industry jobs, even though thats where the majority of jobs are. In a province with high unemployment, people could reasonably ask whether its better to put 150 grand into employing people that could probably find work elsewhere, even in the province, or four to five full time permanent jobs with lower pay in rural New Brunswick.
In cases where its not either or, then it can at least be asked why rural areas can't get an EQUAL share to that. For example, the maritime fishermens union has been trying to get money for an inshore scallop fishery and tourist centre for years.
Biotech is an industry that 'sounds nice', however, it is not labour intensive. One of the most famous plant researchers in Canada is now embarked on a private company, yet his lab employs no more than 8 people. In science, far more of the work is done through collaborations with other labs.
What would be interesting to know is where these guys found a patent lawyer. A good 20 to 30 grand of that funding went just for the patent lawyers I guarantee. So patent lawyers may be an industry worth looking at if they aren't in ready abundance.
Again, ask this researcher if he needs a tax break or needs money.
No question the researcher needs funding and a tax break. Much like you said in another post that the government is at arms length when it comes to Irving Oil Ltd., the same should apply for R&D. Why do I say that? First, it would reduce the burden away from taxpayers. Secondly, public money which would normally be directed towards funding research and development could be used for other projects, such as dwindling infrastructure in towns and cities. And lastly, it just make sense for business to get onboard important research.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home