Summary

In part this is a summary of the Strategic Planning Session held in Ottawa on November 18^th, 2000 and a review of CFBS activities during the past year.

At the November 18^th Meeting we were gratified to have 23 participants in attendance to provide input into the vision that we have for the Federation. The delegates present included those from a number of Societies not currently members of CFBS. Senior Directors from the Museum of Nature and the National Research Council, Institute of Biological Sciences also provided input to our discussions. Again the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council and the Canadian Institutes for Health Research made important comments regarding CFBS’ activities.

The major thrust of the meeting was how to develop more effective partnership arrangements between CFBS and the Biological Societies. Given CFBS’ activities since the last Strategic Planning Session the new directions fall under the following categories:

1. Scientific Meetings

For a number of years CFBS has organized its Annual Meeting in an attempt to accommodate the various Societies within its scientific program. This has been done, largely, by providing a modest sum to each society to organize individual symposia. Although the quality of the lecture sessions was of high caliber the major complaint of the membership was that there was insufficient depth in the major scientific topics.

The June 2000 Meeting saw a major shift in the design of the meeting with emphasis on two major themes. Each theme consisted of 4 symposia ( 4 speakers each). The meeting was designed to attract an international audience and was composed of speakers from Canada, U.S.A., Europe and the Far East. The budget allocated for speakers was understandably greater than in the past and resulted in what we believe was an exceptionally exciting program. In the Science Policy Forum, Dr. Robert Herdt, V.P. Rockefeller Foundation, spoke on issues related to Genetically Modified Foods. Attendance at the meeting was approximately 800 and each session had consistently more than 300 participants.

For the 2001 Meeting (June 21-23) this same format will be employed and held at the Ottawa Congress Centre. The two themes for the scientific sessions will be Genetic Basis of Disease and Health and the Environment. Again each theme will be organized around four symposia. In addition the Genetic Society of Canada, Health Canada and the Canadian Society for Nutritional Sciences are preparing concurrent symposia related to the major themes.

There was enthusiastic approval, by those attending the Strategic Planning Session, of the approach currently being used and we were encouraged to continue with this format for future scientific programs.

At the Strategic Planning Session the question of Societies organizing their own scientific meetings, which is the case currently for a number of Societies, was raised. CFBS accepts that this is a natural evolution which CFBS should help foster. It is clear that no individual scientific meeting, whether it is organized by an individual society or by CFBS, can satisfy all its members. It should be the role of CFBS to develop themes that will increase the number of topics available to the Canadian biological science community. Because of the support that CFBS receives from its member Societies it is also the role of CFBS to help underwrite the costs of speakers/symposia at meetings organized by individual Societies. This is clearly what CFBS proposes, the level of support being dependent on the financial condition of the Federation.

During the first strategic planning session in November 1999, there was concern expressed regarding the service that CFBS provides to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. Partly in response to this concern and to make the next generation of biological scientists aware of opportunities in Canada, CFBS will be organizing an "Employment Fair" at the 2001 Meeting. This will allow interaction between young scientists and potential employers in Academe, Government and Industry with the possible outcome of reducing "brain-drain".

2. Advocacy

As an introduction to the lobbying activities it was emphasized that the quality of the Annual Meeting was an important facet in both developing credibility and profile for CFBS as representative of Canadian Biological Science which was of an international stature. At the same time it was emphasized that the current contributions of the Societies in the Federation to CFBS’ budget accounts barely for 50% 0f the costs of operating the Ottawa office. Consequently in order to pursue the role of lobbying, for which the Ottawa office was established, requires that the office personnel raise the remainder of the funds. The success of the Annual Meeting is a financial necessity for the healthy working of our lobbying activity.

To reflect the concerns of the different constituencies within the Federation, we have reorganized the way we develop our lobbying teams. Broadly speaking our two major constituencies are biological and biomedical. Our visits with ministers of the crown, parliamentarians and senior bureaucrats have been an attempt to represent these groups. Teams of individuals who can best articulate the concerns of their group, are chosen to speak to "decision-makers" designated because of their responsibilities in Government or in granting councils. This approach appears to have been effective and those who have participated on the teams have expressed the desire to again be involved in the process.

Prior to the visitations, the ED developed a brief entitled "Creating A Research Environment" which was distributed to Cabinet Ministers and other parliamentarians. Letters received from five Ministers were very complimentary and expressed interest in the points made. It was also gratifying to note that high priority items, namely reducing the debt load of students, (Additional Educational Tax Credit for Students) and additional funding for research infrastructure within CFI were picked up in the October mini-budget.

To give greater visibility to granting agencies, it was suggested that CF BS ask individuals submitting abstracts to indicate the source(s) of research funding. Concern was expressed that scientists in government laboratories lacked access to funding agencies.

3. The Contract with Societies

For Societies to explain to their members how the fees paid, to the Federation are used by the Ottawa Office, a catalogue of activities has been presented. Given that there is only one salaried employee and an ED who receives compensation for expenses, it is clear that increased funding through the membership of additional Societies would relieve the pressure.

It was indeed a pleasure for us to learn that the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology has voted to join the Federation. Because of the importance of lobbying, CSBMCB has indicated that it will continue to financially support our advocacy activities. We hope that other Societies not currently Federation members, some of which were present at our planning sessions, will join/rejoin us.

4. Financial Situation and Future Directions

Fee Structure Discussions

The Strategic Planning Sessions saw extensive discussion around the question of how fee-structure should be organized. A recommendation from the Planning Sessions suggested two (three) possible options, any one of which would be acceptable:

A. Option

• Fees paid to CFBS would remain fixed for a 3-year period.
• Level of funding provided by a Society would be based on the number of ordinary members ($ 45 +GST per member) and emeritus members ($18 + GST) at the end of the calendar year.
• No fees would be levied for graduate students/post doctoral fellows.
• Fees renegotiated at the end of the 3^rd year period.

B. Option

• Fees paid to CFBS vary each year depending upon the number of Society members
• A levy of $ 45 per ordinary member (current level)
• Fees for graduate students/post doctoral fellows remain at current level

C. Option (suggested after the Strategic Planning Session)

• Constant $ level each year with a clause for decreased/increased memberships (# X%) , to be negotiated, adjustment based on previous year’s membership.

A Society, therefore, may consider a choice among these two options in its support of CFBS.

The financial situation reported to the Strategic Planning Meeting was encouraging and suggests that CFBS should be able to provide greater service to our members if this pattern of development continues.

5. Web-Site Activities

• This past year has resulted in more extensive use of our web-site to:
• Interact with members to inform them of new information and advocacy issues.
• Inform members of Job opportunities (free to Society members).
• Advertise Meetings organized by member Societies (free of charge).
• Inform members through "CFBS Alerts" of items. important to Life Science.
• Report on the members of CFBS Advisory Council.

6. Future Visions

We have been attempting to develop greater visibility for CFBS. Discussions are beginning to determine whether CFBS can play a useful role in developing themes of interest to the newly established Institutes within CIHR.

Discussions are ongoing with an organization called "Digiscript" to have future scientific meetings digitized. This would provide increased visibility for CFBS and a possible source of income. Before this happens questions of copyright have to be resolved.

Consultations have taken place with seven non-member Societies/organization ( five of which attended the planning sessions) to establish how CFBS can serve their needs. Several of those present at our November meeting indicated that they were pleased with directions being taken by CFBS. Additional Society members in the Federation would ensure greater financial stability.

Finally, to be effective and to serve the needs of the Life Sciences Community, the Ottawa office needs to hear from the Societies and their members regarding new themes for scientific meetings and issues that need articulating to "decision-makers".

Bruce Sells, PhD., FRS(C)
Executive Director