The province’s latest move to shore up control over incoming federal dollars may spell disaster for the research sector.
by Andrew Kemle, Trevor Potts. Originally published on Policy Options
October 11, 2024
The Alberta government passed legislation in May that has fuelled growing anxiety within Canada’s research sector. The Provincial Priorities Act (formerly Bill 18) requires all provincial entities — including universities and researchers — to receive the province’s approval before entering into federal funding agreements.
The provincial government has framed the new legislation as protecting against federal overreach, ensuring Alberta receives a “fair share of federal tax dollars” and confronting — as Premier Danielle Smith puts it — ideological “bias” in research.
Critics argue that the law threatens institutional autonomy and academic freedom, and will ultimately lead to fewer dollars for Alberta’s researchers and institutions. It not only builds on the back of similar Quebec legislation, but introduces a potentially disruptive precedent entirely.
Following Quebec’s lead
In 1984, the Quebec government passed la Loi sur le ministère du conseil exécutif to protect Quebec autonomy from discretionary federal investments in areas of provincial jurisdiction. Section 3.11 effectively forbids any school or municipal entity from reaching an agreement with another government in Canada without Quebec’s approval.
The law, also known as M-30, has a “pre-clearance” clause which allows a post-secondary institution to be approved – in advance – for recurring funding from research agencies or programs. The province vets these funding sources and, once approved, institutions can work with them all they want. This effectively ensures a post-secondary carve-out under the law. The Quebec government has the formal right to stand between institutions and research funding agencies, but opts not to.
However, Alberta’s legislation includes a disturbing precedent for Canadian research in that it aims to centralize power with the government. That, along with the law’s politically charged nature, has not surprisingly raised concern among universities and researchers about the government’s intent.
What (and to whom) is Alberta signalling?
The text of the Provincial Priorities Act, as well as the messaging echoed by both the premier and minister of advanced education, appear to signal two key concepts.
Firstly, in its preamble, the act argues that the federal government has overstepped its jurisdiction by entering into agreements with provincial entities “without the involvement of the government of Alberta.” The preamble further states that these agreements “should support provincial priorities” and that the province is “best positioned to understand and determine the unique needs of its population.”
Article 1(c) clarifies that “provincial entities” include not only municipalities, but also post-secondary institutions while Article 2 lays the foundations for the province to centralize its control over them. This effectively signals to all parties, including researchers and institutions, that provincial priorities are to take precedence in future agreements.
Alberta’s legislation goes a step further than Quebec’s M-30 in Article 3, which grants cabinet the exclusive power to effectively set their own rules in regulating “provincial entities.” The cabinet will be able to change how deals with federal programs are managed without having to amend the law, effectively bypassing the legislature. This signals to researchers and institutions that provincial priorities take precedence, and that there are no limitations in place to check this authority.
Secondly, by including post-secondary institutions in the legislation, the premier is sending a message to the federal government as well as to any institutions or researchers seeking funding agreements with Ottawa: Alberta will closely guard any policy areas it feels are under its jurisdiction, particularly research. Post-secondary education may have received a carve-out in Quebec, but the Alberta government appears to be signalling that it will police certain research fields that do not align with “acceptable” ideologies.
Smith told CBC’s Power and Politics in April that Ottawa only supports researchers with certain views and opinions. But a recent survey of Alberta’s 2,535 research projects funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) found that fields strongly linked to provincial priorities — education, psychology, and management/business/administrative studies — received the largest share of federal research funding.
The message appears to be that the province knows more about post-secondary education and innovative research than the institutions and researchers themselves. This could signal that Smith’s government will attempt to steer research towards politically determined ends, or that the government believes academia is inherently “anti-Albertan” if not guided by the province’s priorities.
Implications for Canada’s research sector
The Provincial Priorities Act could prove to have severe consequences for Alberta’s researchers. The University of Alberta, for example, receives more than one-third of total research funding from the federal government. In 2023 alone, researchers at the university secured over $215 million in federal dollars through nearly 1,800 separate funding agreements — all of which could now be threatened.
The university’s president and vice-chancellor, Bill Flanagan, has said the new law poses a destabilizing threat to the long-term sustainability of research productivity in Alberta, and has the potential to harm retention efforts and cause research funding to move to other provinces.
Given the significant contributions that post-secondary institutions have on research and development (R&D) and economic productivity, the Provincial Priorities Act’s potentially disruptive effect may have lasting consequences for higher education in Alberta and the ability to retain top talent. Before the act comes into force in early 2025, it is crucial that the province consult stakeholders and consider a post-secondary carve-out modelled on Quebec’s M-30.
The long-term policy consequences of this legislation remain unclear, but it risks setting a precedent for governmental interference in academic freedom and scientific integrity that would have lasting repercussions on Canada’s research sector.
Subscribe to our newsletter.
This article first appeared on Policy Options and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.