The Silencing Of Science 

The Silencing Of Science 

Postby Oscar » Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:47 am

The Silencing Of Science 

[ ... f-science/ ]

May 16, 2015

From the floor of the United Nations to the pages of The New York Times, the Harper Government’s war on research, reason and environmental law is being watched by the world.

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014, 125 world leaders gathered at the United Nations office in New York City for the UN Summit on Climate Change. The summit was touted as an attempt to “galvanize and catalyze climate action,” and featured appearances from some of the planet’s most powerful men, many of whom represent countries responsible for the largest carbon emissions in the world, including American president Barack Obama, United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron, French President François Hollande and South Korean President Park Geun-hye. Conspicuous by his absence was Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, who, despite being in town, opted not to attend and sent Canada’s environmental minister, Leona Aqlukkaq, in his stead.

The move shocked and outraged some activists, but to anyone who has paid attention to Harper’s environmental policy over the past eight years, this snub comes as no surprise. Since taking control of the Prime Minister’s office in 2006, Stephen Harper’s government has waged a legislative war on scientists whose research stands in opposition to his government’s political and economic objectives. In early 2014, the CBC’s the fifth estate dedicated an entire hour to the ways in which the Harper government dismissed and defunded scientists working on research that didn’t fit the administration’s ideological objectives, effectively amounting to silencing scientists. In one particularly jarring scene, Dr. Pat Sutherland, a long-time world-renowned Canadian scientist, recounted the way she was unceremoniously dismissed from her post.

“They told me, ‘You have five minutes to collect important personal things,’” said Sutherland, an archaeologist who had worked with the Canadian Museum of Civilization for over 30 years. “I said, ‘Everything here is important.’”

And it’s not like Dr. Sutherland was a slouch, either. Her Arctic research was in the process of discovering groundbreaking evidence of some of the earliest interactions between First Nations people and North American settlers, and has garnered international acclaim, including a spread in National Geographic. Her story is typical. Nearly 2,000 scientists have been dismissed or defunded since Harper took office, many of them for engaging in research that didn’t match the Harper government’s objectives. To make matters worse, earlier this year, the Harper government was responsible for closing seven of eleven of Canada’s internationally acclaimed Department of Fisheries and Oceans libraries, citing a consolidation and digitization effort. Many close to the situation said the transition was done carelessly and hastily, and neglected to take proper inventory of a variety of unique documents, including research on aquatic safety, water safety and other forms of environmental life.

The rest of the world is taking notice. A frequently cited 2013 op-ed from The New York Times took Harper to task for the way he has policed science since taking office, stating, “The [Harper government] is doing all it can to monitor and restrict the flow of scientific information, especially concerning research into climate change, fisheries and anything to do with the Alberta tar sands.” Comparing Harper’s environmental record to the one the United States faced under the George W. Bush regime, the newspaper
concluded, “[Bush didn’t] come close to what is being done in Canada.”

In October 2014, a letter signed by over 800 scientists from 32 countries called on Harper to reverse the alarming trend of defunding and stalling the progress of decades worth of research. “Canada’s leadership in the basic areas of environmental, health, and other public science is in jeopardy,” the letter read, before it urged Harper to restore government science funding. According to the Professional Institute of Public Canada, the Harper government has budgeted $2.6 billion in cuts to federal government
ministries and departments between 2013 and 2016. On top of that, there’s a laundry list of environmental laws that Harper has drastically weakened or outright eliminated, including the Navigable Waters Protection Act, the Fisheries Act, the Environmental Act, and perhaps most infamously, the Kyoto Protocol, which Canada signed and subsequently backed out of. Despite the success of the Harper government’s ability to muzzle scientists, there may be a silver lining.

We are flying along in an airplane, and we’ve put curtains over the windshield of those pilots, of that flight-crew, and we’ve turned off the instruments.

A July 2014 editorial in the Toronto Star written by Rick Smith, the executive director of progressive think tank the Broadbent Institute, wrote about how Harper’s sustained attacks on the environmental movement in Canada has actually reinvigorated activists and led to a focused resurgence of the movement. Looking around the country, there are bright spots that suggest he may be right. First Nations blockades against corporate giants like Imperial Metals and Coastal GasLink have gained steam in BC; Green Party leader Elizabeth May led a sizable Canadian contingent to a protest — dubbed “the largest climate change rally in the history of the world” by some — outside of the very UN summit that Stephen Harper snubbed, and in November 2014, the CBC’s Rick Mercer centered his patented “Mercer Rant” on Harper’s attacks on the Canadian scientific community.

But are these steps enough to combat an administration hell-bent on guiding the country’s environmental policy by ignoring experts whose research conflicts with policy objectives? Some scientists are concerned it may be too late. “What we have done in Canada is turn off the radar,” Dr. Peter Ross, the country’s sole marine mammal toxicologist told the CBC’s the fifth estate early last year. “We are flying along in an airplane, and we’ve put curtains over the windshield of those pilots, of that flight-crew, and we’ve
turned off the instruments.”

- -

Jordan Sowunmi is a writer and editor from Toronto. His work has been published by VICE, Noisey, NOW Magazine, Exclaim! band Toronto Standard.
Site Admin
Posts: 8649
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm

Re: The Silencing Of Science 

Postby Oscar » Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:50 am

Canadian Scientists Warn U.S. Colleagues: Act Now to Protect Science under Trump

[ ... der-trump/ ]

Back up data and speak out ahead of next month’s inauguration, they advise

By Dina Fine Maron on December 20, 2016

Four years ago hundreds of Canadian scientists gathered on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, donning their white lab coats to protest what they said was the “death of scientific evidence.” They held a mock funeral procession and prepared eulogies. Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, they warned, appeared to be waging a war on science—imposing draconian restrictions on scientists’ engagement with the media and proposing a national science budget that slashed research funding and closed certain research centers.

Some of those actions took Canadian scientists by surprise, and a number of them are warning their U.S. counterparts not to be similarly caught off guard following Donald Trump’s election victory in November. Several are offering to help U.S. scientists back up their data, and urging them to make their case to the public about the importance of their research—and of factual evidence itself.

“There was a feeling that the government was not interested in expert opinion, and I think it’s the same kind of thing that you are probably going to see with the new [Trump] administration” in the U.S., says David Tarasick, a senior research scientist at Environment and Climate Change Canada (the equivalent of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Tarasick says Harper’s government prevented him from speaking to the media about compelling research titled “Unprecedented Arctic Ozone Loss in 2011” for two weeks after the report was published in Nature. His agency simply denied interview requests without stating any reason, he says. Instead, that media office supplied “approved” statements to attribute to Tarasick, but he says he had never seen or approved that language himself. (The agency’s media office said at the time that the interview simply “cannot be granted,” according to the National Post). [ ... ian-arctic ]

There were battles on other fronts, too. The Harper administration chose not to provide any monies for a large funding office [ ... NG-web.pdf ] that supported climate change research, and without those grants Canadian scientists often either changed focus or traveled to other countries where they believed they could get funding more easily. Those scientists often cited the toxic scientific atmosphere and dwindling research funds as their reason for leaving, says Thomas Duck, a professor of physics and atmospheric science at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia. “In about six months my team of about 10 people went down to just myself and a graduate student. But my story is hardly unique. It was a common story of many research groups,” Duck says. “It takes decades to build up scientific capacity but it takes months to irretrievably destroy it.”

President-elect Trump has already launched opening salvos against science and the press. He has expressed skepticism about climate change science (calling it a hoax created by the Chinese) and vaccine safety (once tweeting, “Why doesn’t the Obama administration do something about doctor-inflicted autism?”). He has shown disdain for the media and denied press access [ ... blacklist/ ] to outlets that have given him unfavorable coverage. He has also pledged to slash or shrink multiple federal science agencies. And Trump’s top picks for cabinet appointments—Scott Pruitt at the EPA, along with departmental nominees Rick Perry for Energy and Ryan Zinke for Interior—have expressed doubts about humans’ role in climate change, leaving many U.S. scientists to wonder what these actions augur for the future, and for their jobs.

Some of them are already seeking a way out. Within 48 hours of last month’s presidential election, two U.S. climate change scientists contacted a Canadian colleague, Andrew Weaver, asking him to act as a job reference because they were going to (and did) seek jobs in Canada, says Weaver, who was a vocal critic of Harper while working as Canada Research Chair in Climate Modeling and Analysis at the University of Victoria. “It’s going to be a good time for Canadian science, I guess,” he says. Weaver has recently entered Canadian politics himself and is now an elected official in his provincial legislature.

Ahead of next month’s presidential inauguration, thousands of U.S. scientists have already signed protest letters, [ ... te-change/ ] and science organizations are offering to counsel the Trump transition team. Various Obama administration officials are also making the rounds with press conferences and interviews, seeking to cement their scientific legacy and publicly emphasizing the value of science.


[ ... der-trump/ ]
Site Admin
Posts: 8649
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm

Return to Canada's Environmental Protection . . . going, going, gone!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests