In the company of universities, it takes courage to use the "R" word in reference to colleges. Using the phrase "federally supported research" in the same paragraph along with ACCC or colleges will certainly not get us invited to the next sherry binge hosted by either the granting councils or the universities which depend on them. Funded research is seen as belonging to the graduate school community and even a suggestion that college faculty might make a contribution in a national research agenda can generate a glance suggesting that we remember our place in life.

Fortunately, business and industry do not share this view and as government funded research decreases, along with all other government expenditure, the private sector is looking increasingly to our 175 colleges and institutes as applied research partners. While this will not generate many Nobel prizes, it does generate economic activity and it does create jobs.

As a matter of fact, the harder one looks at curiosity driven research, the less benefit there is to see. For many, the key lesson learned from the last 40 years of economic history is that the countries which apply research first are the winners in terms of economic growth, not the countries that do basic research. Nobel level development is certainly useful in pushing back the frontiers of knowledge for all of humanity, but in terms of tangible benefits, those are usually found in the countries with a capacity to make things work. The economies of Asia are exploding with growth, while the scientific communities of western European nations are inventing and winning Nobel prizes.

For younger countries such as Canada, the application of research should be paramount. With limited research funding coming from government, choices must be made. We can feed the needs of a small group of graduate schools for recognition in the international community of university-centred research or we can support business and industry by applying the results of international research for our economic development. Indeed, such research is available to all as the world community of scholars continues to publish its findings. Today, the results of research has no boundaries with vehicles such as the Internet at our disposal. For Canadians, the real issue is expanding the capacity of Canadian business and industry to review and adapt research quickly, regardless of the origins of that research.

Of course, doctorates are important to the research departments of the corporate sector and such departments do attract individuals from all over the world in open competition. Many capable Canadian students study at graduate schools in the United States and elsewhere to perfect their research skills in much the same way that many of our best athletes do. However, a country like Canada can not and should not try to be the best in the world at everything. We should be concentrating on being a world leader in those things which also contribute to jobs and a reasonable standard of living for the maximum number of citizens.

So in fact, if we look at the cost of training a Ph.D. to invent more, as opposed to the cost of training an engineer or technician to apply more, it seems curious that we would support the use of our scarce research dollars as a financial subsidy to graduate schools. Rather, we should be supporting the growth of engineering and technology focused institutions that will actually contribute to the economy in both the short and long runs. The issue is not necessarily the funding of graduate schools but the continuing use of scarce national research funding to do so.

How many of us have worked in countries in which there are two Ph.D.s for every qualified technician or technologist and the economy is moribund? Curiosity driven research is a luxury afforded by very few countries whereas the translation of research into economic activity, whatever its origin, is a more legitimate pursuit of public funding.

As we see in this edition of COLLEGE CANADA, business and industry understand that partnerships with colleges and technical institutes make as much sense in applied research as linkages with other research partners. They result in economic activity. Government and its granting councils must begin to understand that our institutions are equal partners in Canada's future. To not do so is to exclude the private sector who work in the real world of colleges and technical institutes rather than the more ethereal environment of the graduate schools. At a time when governments are talking about cutbacks and economic development in the same breath, existing funding should go into applied research, not graduate school support.