Canadian researchers decry DEI intrusion in federal science funding
Diversity, equity, and inclusion criteria are being criticized for prioritizing ideology over scientific merit, objectivity, and excellence.
A prominent Québec biochemist and associate professor at the University of Québec has voiced growing frustration among Canadian researchers over diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) criteria infiltrating federal funding decisions.
In a bold submission to the House of Commons science committee, Dr. Maryse Beaumier argues that it undermines scientific merit and objectivity, as first reported by Blacklock’s.
Commons science committee distributes report knocking DEI criteria in research funding: "Questioning a researcher about their sexual orientation, an actual occurrence, has no place." https://t.co/tk8XPocGYn #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/zRGRitsU8P
— Blacklock's Reporter (@mindingottawa) August 8, 2025
With 16 years in academia, Beaumier highlighted a disturbing example: a researcher grilled on their sexual orientation for a project unrelated to LGBTQ issues. "Questioning a researcher about their sexual orientation, an actual occurrence, has no place in research, nor does questioning whether they are Indigenous, have physical limitations, etcetera," Beaumier wrote. "Objectivity and respect for scientific criteria must be guiding principles for funding."
Beaumier's brief, submitted at the request of Bloc Québécois MP Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, vice-chair of the committee, calls for a re-evaluation of how DEI policies are applied to research grants.
Random tidbit: I was looking up the salaries of the Ottawa Police Services members involved in some of the Grus case and discovered a DEI program manager making nearly $160,000/year
— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) January 8, 2025
What exactly do these people do? pic.twitter.com/YDhB5pROgx
According to the committee's 2024 report on the Distribution of Federal Funding Among Canada’s Post-Secondary Institutions, approximately $4.5 billion flows annually to campuses, with most allocated through competitive processes.
Another brief submitted at the same time, by Professor Sylvie Lesage of the University of Montreal, says equity, diversity and inclusion criteria are well-intentioned, but an imbalanced priority.
The phenomenon of bearded men dressed as women reading to children under the guise of diversity, inclusion and love for all continues.
— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) May 16, 2023
Watch in full:https://t.co/OphfSQhqqm pic.twitter.com/nyJ7bX2pP9
“The integration of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) criteria in grant applications reflects a laudable desire to reduce inequalities in the research community. However, their growing importance within evaluation processes may at times divert attention from the scientific quality of projects. Researchers must now spend a significant portion of their time meeting EDI requirements, rather than focusing on scientific content,” she wrote.
Beaumier noted that she “shares the same view as many of my colleagues who have significant concerns about how Canadian organizations are implementing them,” and that it is “regrettable that criteria unrelated to science, excellence and merit are influencing funding decisions."
Emphasizing the core tenets of rigorous inquiry, Beaumier asserted that DEI goals "should never influence the scientific criteria for research or compromise the objectivity of reviews for funding research projects that are relevant and important to our societies." She added, "One of the basic principles of good research is the objectivity of the researchers. Funding should be awarded to the best researcher with the most relevant and important research for advancing knowledge and adding value to society."
Can DEI mandates coexist with uncompromised excellence, or are they eroding the foundations of objective science?
Researchers like Beaumier are proof that the government will be well served to prioritize merit over ideology to safeguard innovation and tangible scientific progress.
Featured Stories
00:45
COMMENTS
-
Bernhard Jatzeck commented 2025-08-09 00:18:27 -0400Research is an example of “No bucks, no Buck Rogers.” However, whoever provides funding follows the Golden Rule: “Whoever has the gold makes the rules.” But, in many academic institutions, one’s career prospects depend on that funding, and, so, one is subject to the dictates of whoever provides it.
There aren’t many researchers who are financially independent. -
Bruce Atchison commented 2025-08-08 19:46:00 -0400DEI is unscientific. What does it have to with research? DEI must DIE! It’s irrational.
