Re: [cmath] Re: Résultats de notre demande de subvention

[François Lalonde]

Dear Nassif,

    My memo was short, clear and honest -- it was sent to the  
participants in the site visit at the CRM, only to them -- you were  
not on that list, Nassif.  You have, incorrectly, decided to diffuse  
it on the cmath list  and to the top officials at NSERC (with no  
consultation with me). This confirms that communications by email,  
which should be so efficient, are no longer reliable, or useful --  
this ethic problem concerns all of us.  My memo was not intended for  
your purpose, I mean that it was a sober message, it was certainly  
not a glorification of what the CRM has acheived in the past  five  
years. The CRM has a fruitful and lively relation with all other  
institutes in Canada. I think that it would be fair to say that there  
is no other institute that has worked so hard to collaborate with its  
Canadian partners: our thematic programming is shared with Fields,  
PIMS and MITACS -- it is actually because I wanted so much that PIMS  
be part of our 2008-2009 thematic programming that my letter reached  
you  !!  What a paradox.

It is because I have worked hard to involve MITACS in all scientific  
planning for Canada that I have spent months to produce a report that  
will help  MITACS be part of the most exciting developments at the  
institutes. This was not an easy report.  Believe me,  it needs some  
courage. You mentioned in your message what the CRM learned from  
PIMS : yes it is true, the CRM learned a lot from PIMS and has a  
splendid relationship with its director and all of  its researchers.  
I am always pleased to acknowledge this widely. See

    http://accromath.ca/

were there is an eloge to PIMS and its director Ivar Ekeland;  see  
the back cover of the first issue of Accromath where the  
acknowlegment to PIMS and Ivar  appears at the top, even before the  
logos of the ISM, CRM and MITACS.  The same applies to the IPSW for  
which PIMS helped so much, with generosity -- see

http://www.crm.umontreal.ca/probindustriels/index_e.shtml

where the entire second paqragraph is a tribute to PIMS. If this is  
in our website and our newletters, you can imagine that it was in our  
MRS site visit too.

   But you did not mention what the CRM brought to the whole country  
and to the world. And as far as I can remember, you never did. And I  
won't either, since I spent the last 6 months explaining that to lots  
of NSERC's committees. I do not need, and I do not want to do it once  
again.

     The overall CRM-ISM budget is 4.8 M this year, of which 1 M  
comes from NSERC (in the context of the MRS competition, it is the  
ensemble CRM-ISM that must be considered according to the rules of  
that programme amongst institutes). This does not include the inkind  
contributions of the CRM laboratories on all campuses, nor the  
MITACS' investments of course. So, as you see, the CRM faces a real  
challenge: it has both the laboratory structure that now exists (in a  
different way) at PIMS and the thematic programming that now exists  
at Fields. Since you raised that point, let me simply make the  
following correction: the thematic programming in its modern version  
in the world  was introduced by the CRM in the 80's at the same time  
as MSRI (Berkeley). The lab structure at the CRM was not inspired by  
the Collaborative Reseach Groups at PIMS ( as you suggested) but by  
the ''regroupements'' of the ISM that were set up in 1991 and were  
responsible for the first and only unified  doctoral School in North  
America.  This took fifteen years of hard work. The CRG"s at PIMS are  
very different from the labs at the CRM-ISM: I am sure that PIMS did  
not conceive their CRG's on the model of the ISM's ''regroupements''  
and we did not conceive our labs on the CRG's model. These are  
independent paths. Both are interesting.

    Concerning the reports from NSERC, I do not have them -- what I  
said is simply an exact account of what a NSERC top offcial told me.  
I think that I could take his/her words. This is why I did not  
elaborate on these reports. And looking at the results of this  
competition, I have no doubt that all reports for the three  
institutes are praiseful.

    Now  the heart of the question raised by Nassif: it is true that  
BIRS is doing very well in terms of the ratio  federal grant/ total  
budget, and I  perfectly agree with this (this is why BIRS is NOT  
mentionned in the French version of my message, while the English  
translation was not correct -- it is the only point of my message  
that was incorrect, and it was due to the  everyday challenge to  
write everything in both official languages). However, there is a  
genuine concern, for  ALL Canadians, when an institute like the CRM,  
is facing such a drastic cut over a 15 -year period. There is no  
reason to celebrate.

     For the first time in Canadian history, a Canadian institute has  
launched a new mathematical field worlwide that led to a Fields  
Medal. Why not be proud of this ? It is the result of so many years  
of efforts.

Very sincerely,
Francois Lalonde


Le 07-03-30 à 13:18, Nassif Ghoussoub a écrit :

> Dear Francois Lalonde,
>
> At a time when individual discovery grants are being cut by 17%,  
> NSERC's decision to increase the funding of the 3 math institutes  
> was supposed to be an occasion to celebrate. Yet, you have elected  
> to diffuse widely a memo (see below), claiming that:
>
> ``The CRM has ranked first amongst the Canadian Institutes in the  
> NSERC MRS competition."
> but also stating
>  ``these results are worrisome.... because it (the CRM) is the  
> least  supported by NSERC in proportion to its overall budget:  
> indeed the NSERC grant represents only 20 % of our budget, far  
> behind PIMS, BIRS and MITACS which receive between 30 and 50 % of  
> their funding from federal agencies. "
>
> Notwithstanding that the CRM numbers on its own web page show that  
> 31% of its budget (firmly anchored on historic in-kind  
> contributions) comes from NSERC,  and that no other director has  
> received the information and reports that you claim you have from  
> NSERC,  I find myself particularly miffed --but not surprised-- by  
> your choice of PIMS, BIRS and MITACS to dump on, in what should  
> have been a "victory speech".
>
> To that I say:
>
> 1) That a MITACS Board member points a finger at the network -- 
> which is not funded by NSERC's MRS-- at  a point in time where the  
> whole country is proud of MITACS' achievements,  is irresponsible  
> and clumsy at best. MITACS --which was explicitly praised only a  
> few days ago in the federal budget-- attracts huge amounts of  
> provincial and industrial cash, and supports hundreds (soon to be  
> thousands) of graduate students, post-docs and interns across the  
> country. Its recent  successes in getting provincial funds are  
> unheard of:  BC ($10M), Quebec ($225K ), Atlantic Canada ($1M),  
> Alberta ($1M), Prairies ($375K) etc...No other organization (public  
> or private) has as many industrial contributing partners (over 250  
> at last count).
>
> 2) Your figure of BIRS  --which was not part of this MRS  
> competition-- is outright false and totally uncalled for.  I know  
> of no other Canadian research institution where NSERC cash support  
> ($2.87M) is substantially inferior to provincial matching (Alberta  
> alone $3.4M) and foreign funding (NSF alone $3.1M). A mere 21% of  
> the BIRS budget. I invite you to join the rest of Canada in being  
> proud of what BIRS is accomplishing for the international  
> scientific community (2300 participants from over 50 countries  
> every year ).
>
> 3) You say: ``the CRM will have to find research funds outside of  
> Canada", and we say that yes a lesson or two can be learned from  
> others' pioneering efforts in attracting opportunities to Canada.  
> BIRS attracts the largest NSF grant to Canada. The ``Laboratoire  
> CNRS  associe a PIMS" brings huge resources to Canada, albeit  in  
> terms of  talented researchers with full salaries  paid by the  
> French government, or by the access to European granting agencies,   
> that this affiliated Laboratoire allows. Stay also tuned for what  
> PRIMA is about to accomplish on an even larger scale.
>
> 4) It is a pity that the lessons of the first re-allocation  
> exercise have been so quickly forgotten by NSERC's staff who --if  
> your statements are indeed correct-- seem to be back into the  
> unproductive business of foolishly assigning ranks that no serious  
> scientist can take  seriously, since they are neither substantiated  
> nor useful. What a waste of a joyful opportunity to re-assure the  
> community!
>
> 5)  You had the wit to duplicate and adapt the PIMS collaborative  
> programme, the PIMS Industrial problem solving workshops, the PIMS  
> PI in the Sky magazine, among other concepts pioneered by PIMS.   
> NSERC rewarded you for it. So, there is no need to either break the  
> arm that fed you, nor poke the eye of those who inspired you.
>
> I say that some humility and gratitude is in order. It is high time  
> for bitterness to take the back seat, and to allow for a  
> celebration. Good (French) Champaign should be offered to the  
> armies of math scientists who helped you (and the other directors)  
> achieve this success.
>
> Nassif
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 12:00:04 -0400
> From: "[ISO-8859-1] François Lalonde" <directeur at CRM.UMontreal.CA>
> To: liste-25jan07 at CRM.UMontreal.CA
> Subject: [ISO-8859-1] Résultats de notre demande de subvention
>
> ENGLISH FOLLOWS
>
> Chers collègues et ami(e)s,
>
>     j'ai appris hier que le CRM vient de se classer premier parmi  
> les instituts canadiens dans le concours ARM (Appui aux ressources  
> majeures) du CRSNG qui est le programme par lequel sont maintenant  
> financés les instituts canadiens. Voici les résultats du concours  
> pour la période 2008-2013:
>
> CRM:  1 200 000 $ par an
> Fields: 1 200 000 $ par an
> PIMS:  1 100 000 $ par an
>
>   Ces résultats sont encourageants car ils montrent la  
> reconnaissance de la qualité et de l'impact du travail réalisé au  
> CRM en collaboration avec l'ISM et nos universités partenaires du  
> Québec et de l'Ontario au cours des 5 dernières années. Les  
> rapports des comités d'évaluation sont particulièrement élogieux.  
> Cette subvention représente une augmentation de 25 % de notre  
> financement dans une période difficile et dans un concours où les  
> rares  fonds disponibles étaient âprement disputés.
>
>    Mais ces résultats sont également inquiétants: depuis 1997, date  
> à laquelle le CRM recevait du CRSNG une subvention de 875 000 $,  
> jusqu'à 2013 où le CRM recevra 1 200 000 $, l'augmentation n'aura  
> pas atteint 50 % en 15 ans !!!  Bien que le  CRM soit l'institut le  
> plus performant au Canada, il est le moins bien financé au prorata  
> de son budget par le CRSNG: notre subvention du CRSNG ne représente  
> en effet que 20 % de notre budget total, loin derrière les autres  
> instituts qui recoivent entre 30 et 50 % de leurs fonds des agences  
> fédérales. Cela signifie que le CRM devra continuer de trouver hors  
> du Canada ses fonds de recherche -- une situation étonnante dans  
> laquelle le premier institut au Canada se trouve, plus que tout  
> autre, projeté hors du pays.
>
>   Merci à tous ceux et à toutes celles qui ont tant travaillé,  
> aussi bien sur le plan scientifique, administratif que logistique,  
> à ce succès.
> cordialement,
> François Lalonde
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>    I just learned yesterday that the CRM ranked first amongst the  
> Canadian Institutes in the NSERC MRS competition, the program that  
> now funds all Canadian Institutes. Here are the results for the  
> 2008-2013 competition:
>
> CRM:  1 200 000 $ per year
> Fields: 1 200 000 $ per year
> PIMS:  1 100 000 $ per year
>
>    These results are encouraging as they are the recognition of the  
> quality and impact of the work carried out by the CRM in  
> collaboration with the ISM, and our partner universities in Quebec  
> and in Ontario over the past five years. The reports by the  
> evaluation committees are highly praiseful. This grant is a 25 % 
> increase from NSERC and comes at a difficult time when few funds  
> were available.
>
>
>    But these results are also worrisome. Since 1997 when the CRM  
> received an NSERC grant of 875 000 $ until 2013 when the CRM will  
> receive 1 200 000 $, the net increase will have been less than 50 %  
> within 15 yeasrs !!! Though the CRM is the highest performing  
> institute in Canada, it is the least supported by NSERC in  
> proportion to its overall budget: indeed the NSERC grant represents  
> only 20 % of our budget, far behind PIMS, BIRS and MITACS which  
> receive between 30 and 50 % of their funding from federal agencies.  
> This means that the CRM will have to continue to find research  
> funds outside of Canada -- a surprising situation in which the  
> premier institute in Canada finds itself, more than any other,  
> projecting outside of the country.
>
>   I would like to thank all those who have contributed, on a  
> scientific, administrative or logistic level, to this success.
> Sincerely,
> François Lalonde
>
>
>
>   ********************************************************
> Nassif Ghoussoub, FRSC
> Scientific Director, Banff International Research Station
> Distinguished University Scholar, University of British Columbia
> Adjunct Professor, University of Alberta
> http://www.pims.math.ca/~nassif/
>
>
>