The lessons of the past should tell us that foresight and follow-up matter. It is not too early to start planning for a next normal within our knowledge and research ecosystem across the country.
What will be the plan after the pandemic is managed? Who will show the necessary leadership and how will citizens participate meaningfully? Will we see more effective national coordination on research, innovation, and health strategies? Can we become technologically sovereign with vaccines, medical devices and equipment while maintaining our global science outreach? Will we go beyond the mere rhetoric of being prepared for the next global emergency, writes Paul Dufour. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade
OTTAWA—Hindsight is 20/20—or so they say today. But what happened to foresight?
People. Policy. Politics. This is an exclusive subscriber-only story.
What is and isn’t considered a subsidy is politically charged. The government and industry are both likely to dispute or take issue with the inclusion of some, or many, of the programs to the group's tally.
New prescribed policies, procedures forced people to think about how they were acting, creating a 'profound' change in terms of staff understanding how they need to relate in the workplace, says the PMO's Marci Surkes.