On September 25, the federal Ministry of Innovation, Science and Economic Development released a report: The Innovation and Competitiveness Imperative: Seizing Opportunities for Growth, with over-arching “signature” proposals in the consolidated report, and specific proposals in individual reports by six “high-growth potential” sectors: advanced manufacturing , agri-food , clean technology , digital industries, health and biosciences , and resources of the future . These six groups had been identified by the Advisory Council for Economic Growth , a body which has issued many of its own reports, including the 2017 reports, The Path to Prosperity and Learning Nation: Equipping Canada’s workforce with skills for the future .
In this latest series of reports, the identified Sector groups were led by “Economic Strategy Tables“— which the government characterizes as “a new model for industry-government collaboration”. Each “Table” consisted of a Chair, and approximately 15 industry experts, with consultants McKinsey & Company providing “fact-based research and analysis”. The reports are unmistakably written by management/industry authors (replete with many references to “agility”, “own the podium” and “sandboxes”). A deeper dive into two of the sector reports reveals very substantial recommendations, with common themes of best practice examples from other countries, Canada’s international competitiveness, Indigenous relationships, and attention to workforce issues of skills gaps and diversity.
The Clean Technology Economic Table Report proposes: “the ambitious, export-focused target of clean technology becoming one of Canada’s top five exporting industries, nearly tripling the sector’s current value for exports to $20 billion annually by 2025” – a growth rate of 11.4% per year on average. The report makes recommendations under six categories, including financing, engagement with Indigenous communities in partnership and co-development of clean technology initiatives, increased government procurement, regulation, and workforce issues. Greatest attention is given to the regulatory environment, with proposals for a “Regulatory Sandbox for Water Regulation” and a “Regulatory Sandbox for air quality and methane emissions regulation”. “Ultimately, we will need as much innovation in our public policy tools as there is in technology to ensure progress on critical economic and environmental objectives.” Regarding workforce issues, the report recognizes that Clean Technology will compete for Scientific, Technology, Engineering and Math ( STEM) skills, but highlights a particular shortage of soft skills required for entrepreneurship, business development, finance, advocacy, risk management and forecasting. It calls for “work-integrated learning programs”, and better labour market data collection and dissemination. Without ever using the term “Just Transition”, it does call for “Opening streams of these programs for workers to re-skill”, and “Adding new eligibility criteria for these programs to promote an inclusive and diverse workforce”.
The “Resources of the future” Table Report examines the mining, forestry and energy industries; the tone is set in the introductory remarks which state: “While resource companies are committed to the highest environmental and safety performance, they are burdened with an inefficient and complex regulatory system that adds cost, delays projects and is not conducive to innovation.” Recommendations are set out in five thematic sections, including “agile regulations, strategic infrastructure, innovation for competitiveness, indigenous people and communities, and attracting and re-skilling talent.
The report notes the established issues of an aging and gender-biased workforce in natural resources and identifies automation and digital skills as a neglected and misunderstood issue in the industry. It proposes a “Resources Skills Council” which, notably, would include labour unions, along with all levels of government, industry associations, universities and polytechnics.