• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unmuzzling government scientists is just the first step

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Unmuzzling government scientists is just the first step

    margaret munro
    Unmuzzling government scientists is just the first step

    MARGARET MUNRO

    Special to The Globe and Mail

    Published Monday, Oct. 26, 2015 6:00AM EDT

    Last updated Friday, Oct. 23, 2015 4:51PM EDT


    Margaret Munro is a Vancouver-based science journalist.

    As prime-minister-designate Justin Trudeau and his Liberals take control of the federal government, Ottawa’s media managers are sure to line up to defend the virtues of media control. After almost 10 years under Stephen Harper, the managers have honed the art of controlling and blocking access to federal researchers, crafting “media lines” that seldom answer the questions asked and frustrating journalists.

    Mr. Trudeau has vowed to reopen the lines of communication and take the “muzzle” off federal scientists. Even a modest improvement in communication would be welcome. But a return to more open government will require not only new policy, but also a new mindset in the bureaucracy the Conservatives have left behind.

    Governments, including former Liberal governments, have always tried to control what scientists said on hot-button issues, such as crashing Atlantic cod stocks or rising greenhouse gases. But until the Harper Conservatives came along, government communication officers would often help reporters, and Canadians, connect with federal researchers.

    As remarkable as it seems now, agencies such as the Geological Survey of Canada, the National Research Council and Health Canada used to trust and actively encourage scientists to discuss work on everything from genetically engineered salmon to flu outbreaks aboard cruise ships. Government media officers arranged for reporters to speak with enforcement officers involved in Environment Canada’s wildlife smuggling stings or with scientists tracking invasive zebra mussels in the Great Lakes.

    Federal scientists would even invite journalists into the field, with nary a media handler in sight. They took reporters to see ancient permafrost melting like ice cream in the warming Arctic, to see polar bears being fitted with tracking collars and to see pollution wafting across the Canada-U.S. border.

    That all changed after Mr. Harper came to power. Under his government, a reporter would phone a federal scientist in Victoria to request a quick interview and a media handler in Ottawa would call back. They would demand that questions be submitted in writing. Then they would take days to respond, often with a “no,” to interview requests. Articles that once took hours to research turned into days-long exercises in frustration, or were abandoned as deadlines passed.

    Thwarted journalists started asking questions, and soon got their hands on documents showing how controlling and twitchy the federal government and its bureaucracy had become. One item that surfaced was Environment Canada’s “media relations protocol” calling for “one department, one voice.” It ordered scientists to refer all media queries to Ottawa, where media relations would help them respond with “approved lines.” Such Orwellian policies soon spread to science-based agencies across government.

    Natural Resources Canada nixed interviews with geologist Scott Dallimore about a report he co-wrote in the British journal Nature on a prehistoric flood that swept across northern Canada nearly 13,000 years ago. Fisheries and Oceans Canada would not allow reporters to speak with geneticist Kristi Miller about her salmon study published in the journal Science. Environment Canada atmospheric scientist David Tarasick was not allowed to talk about a report he co-wrote in Nature about an unprecedented hole in the Arctic ozone.

    Documents released under the Access to Information Act show how communication strategists, managers and advisers in Ottawa took to deciding when, and if, scientists spoke to the news media. Multiple layers of approval were required before researchers could talk about even benign studies on snowflakes. Final approval (or more often, rejection) could stretch all the way to the Privy Council Office, which supports the Prime Minister’s Office.

    The documents point not just to a Conservative government but also to a bureaucracy with little interest or aptitude for sharing science with Canadians, who are paying the research bills. This delayed – by years – reports on antibiotic-resistant bacteria circulating in Canada and prevented briefings on the state of the Arctic ice.

    Mr. Trudeau has promised to hire a chief science officer, whose job will include ensuring that government science is made public and scientists can speak freely about their work. That’s a good first step.

    But message and media control have become deeply embedded in the government, and Mr. Trudeau needs also to send a clear and forceful signal to bureaucrats that their days of interfering with the flow of information to the public are over.

    Follow us on Twitter: @GlobeDebate

    #2
    When the results of the science didn't jive with The Conservative's policy, guess what happened? So much for all the science based decision making we were told was the foundation of policy decisions. And just because you don't like the results of any particular scientific study doesn't give you license to label it as junk science.

    Comment


      #3
      I find that unbridled control absolutely nausiating in the "true North, Strong and Free." Silence is not always golden.

      Comment


        #4
        You mean the earth is not flat and dinos lived only a few thousand years ago?

        Comment


          #5
          Good luck separating science from politics as well as expanding the microscopic view onto the world.

          My favorite example of scientific myopia is a study to find what makes banana peels slippery that concluded that really they are NOT slippery.

          Comment


            #6
            Those scientists who said the earth was flat, also said the science was settled! Don't question us,,,the earth is flat!!! We represent 99 percent of the scientists, the science is settled! What, you don't believe the earth is flat,,,your a denier!!!

            Comment


              #7
              Justin can have a team of scientists studying new potheads and their IQ levels and releasing the results to the public before and after.
              His mother has issues from drug use so this should be important to him.

              Lets just hope they respect the science behind GMO's, vaccines, seed treatments unlike the Ontario Liberals who BANNED seed treatments.

              Time will tell how the leader of the left does.

              Comment


                #8
                Doctors use to sell cigarettes,sugar was considered benign,the food pyramid was the way to go,jogging is great exercise,bacon eggs and butter are bad here have some margarine,here kids it ok to drink the juice of twenty oranges,we put the fluoride in your water for your teeth,come get the flu shot trust us this year it works,global warming is so bad we had to change the name to climate change and its so bad we are actually changing the weather on other planets because our o2 levels are up .0000001% no dummy the sun has nothing to do with it how could the sun possibly have anything to do with no come and by a carbon credit from no seriously give me some money I'm forcing you to,no i dont how we got to the moon in a few years with computing power less then today's calculators,what about the radiation belt,no i dont know why we never and no body else has ever been back,why do you ask so many stupid questions,no i dont know why the fossil record doesn't support Darwin's theory,you are the craziest dumb mother ****er on the planet,see that ivory tower on that hill it is full of omnipotent untouchable smart people that we need to listen,no i dont care about the diabetes rate or the cancer rate or the autism rate,food babe just told me it's all because of corn flakes and cardboard. Oh really you think she is dumb as bag of hammers and just trying to capitalize on fear like the essential oil people just did with cancer cutting off the interview with a man who knows what he is actually talking about just to hawk their crap for money. You son need to get a grip with reality.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I have read the same percentage of scientists (roughly 88%) believe that GMOs are safe and that Climate Change is real. So why do so many farmers believe GMOs should not be questioned because of scientific consensus yet deny that same consensus when it comes to climate change?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Climate change may be real but there is no consensus that it is because of C02

                    Comment


                      #11
                      big lentil: the 80 percentage of scientists that I refer to is the percentage of scientists who believe man is contributing at least 50% to climate change. CO2 is just only comment of man made activities.

                      So let me rephrase the question. Roughly the same percentage of scientists believe GMOs are safe as scientists who believe man is contributing to climate change. So why do so many farmers argue that GMOs are safe because of scientific consensus but deny the same consensus that says man is contributing to climate change?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        oops should have read: CO2 is only one cause of climate change

                        Comment


                          #13
                          good one Dmlfarmer

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Cotton, the Food Babe is hot, she must be correct, Im going organic.
                            It is settled.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Dml the answer to your query is very simple the same people pushing the radical global warming agenda reject the safety of GMO crops and want them outlawed.

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...