Scientist protest Canadian Government's Orwellian anti-Science age

[G Huxley]

Its like the Canadian government wants Canada to head in the direction of Saudi Arabia in terms of trying to squelch science that could show the faults of their agenda. It's a pretty sad state of things. You have Europeans making great science projects like CERN, while the Canadian government is merely concerned with corporate profiteering.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/national/Scientists+protest+deteriorating+conditions+Canada/8919493/story.html

[Topaz]

This doesn't come to any surprise to Canadians when we all know he's an "oil& gas" leader, who will do what ever it takes for the oil and gas industry. I wonder if he's getting paid under the table? Job offer after the PMO? He's peeved off so many Canadians and how many federal workers supported the Tories find themselves without a job or realize what kind of party the Tories are. How can a man who believes in God and all his creation, want to destroy it???? The media should ask that question to Harper???

[jacee]

It's very disturbing:

At least one federal department Fisheries and Oceans has in the last year implemented a policy forbidding scientists to publish in peer-reviewed journals without managerial approval, she said.It requires a government manager to have an additional sign-off, even after a paper has been accepted by peer-review and accepted by a journal, she said.So it gives an extra power to the government to withhold science that might be inconvenient for them.

...

Additionally, Gibbs said, strict communication policies limiting scientists contact with media remain in place and have grown stronger.

[Shady]

It's very disturbing:

At least one federal department Fisheries and Oceans has in the last year implemented a policy forbidding scientists to publish in peer-reviewed journals without managerial approval, she said.It requires a government manager to have an additional sign-off, even after a paper has been accepted by peer-review and accepted by a journal, she said.So it gives an extra power to the government to withhold science that might be inconvenient for them.

...

Additionally, Gibbs said, strict communication policies limiting scientists contact with media remain in place and have grown stronger.

That's not disturbing at all. In fact, it's quite logical. The government pays for the studies and the research. So any publication of said study or said research has to be approved by said government. It's works that way in government, as well as in the private sector.

[jacee]

That's not disturbing at all. In fact, it's quite logical. The government pays for the studies and the research. So any publication of said study or said research has to be approved by said government. It's works that way in government, as well as in the private sector.

WE pay for the research and we have a right to know the results.

Who's sitting in Ottawa is irrelevant.

Public research funded by taxpayers should not be used to play politics.

It's not the same as the for-profit private sector.

WE own the results.

[G Huxley]

Jacee exactly. This isn't preventing studies its preventing the results of those studies. That's what the Catholic Church did to Galileo and others through the inquisition and its still happening in Canada in the 21st century.

[Shady]

WE pay for the research and we have a right to know the results.

Who's sitting in Ottawa is irrelevant.

Public research funded by taxpayers should not be used to play politics.

It's not the same as the for-profit private sector.

WE own the results.

No that's not true. When these agreements are signed, the ministries that the oversee that pact ocular area of research has control as to when and how the information is released. It's always been like that.

[Keepitsimple]

Could have sworn we funded Universities to do basic research. Could have sworn there are an additional bunch of grants for basic scientific and medical research.

Edited September 17, 2013 by Keepitsimple

[Argus]

The main problems the conservatives have with scientists is often a result of the politicising of science, invariably by left wingers.

[The_Squid]

The main problems the conservatives have with scientists is often a result of the politicising of science, invariably by left wingers.

No... Not quite.... Often the results don't conform to the conservative political agenda... That's what they don't like.

The results themselves are used by "the left" of course... If it conformed with the "right wing" view I'm sure they would be pushing the government to use the results to form public policy as well...

I use quotes on left and right because I don't believe science is a political issue. The results are the results. The conservatives have turned science into a left-wing force that must be stopped... in their minds at least.

[G Huxley]

If scientific reality has a left wing bias in your opinion its because the right wing alternate reality isn't applicable to the real world.

Statements like Stockwell Day former Prime Minister for the right that Humans once co-existed with dinosaurs are pretty evident. It wouldn't be so frightening if this guy weren't in such a high position of power rather than being some hick in the bible belt posting on conservapedia.

[Mighty AC]

Our current administration seems to be dedicated to advancing the interests of selected industries, chiefly oil. They have gutted research into projects that do not advance their agenda and shifted funding into what are essentially industry subsidies.

The “world class” project is a perfect example of this. After gutting science funding for climate, freshwater research, ozone depletion, marine mamals, observatories, etc. the Harper government found $100M to research Enbridge specific interests. The public sector will now model waterways in the Kitimat region and test the effects of chemical dispersants on bitumen in marine environments. This is research that industry should be carrying out. Using the science budget to subsidize industry specific projects is exactly opposite of what we should be doing.

The government has said that as it does more to commercialize science, industry should be picking up the slack on basic research. But that’s backwards. Why is government pursuing short-term economic gains and leaving the long-term public interest to the private sector? No CEO in his right mind would invest millions in a particle collider whose indeterminate dividends may not pay off for decades.

Meanwhile, cash-strapped universities can’t afford to build the infrastructure necessary for ambitious work in, say, particle physics or lake ecology. Only government can provide the funds and the foresight to ensure that Canadian science continues to be fertile ground for industries to till. -

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2013/05/13/harper_governments_nrc_makeover_is_shortsighted_and_wrongheaded_editorial.html

[jacee]

No that's not true. When these agreements are signed, the ministries that the oversee that pact ocular area of research has control as to when and how the information is released. It's always been like that.

They are employed by OUR money and function on OUR behalf, not for partisan political gain.

Suppression of public information for political gain is corruption:

"the misuse of public power for private benefit."

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_corruption

In this case, private political benefit and public paycheque benefit.

Edited September 17, 2013 by jacee

[Shady]

They are employed by OUR money and function on OUR behalf, not for partisan political gain.

Suppression of public information for political gain is corruption:"the misuse of public power for private benefit."http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_corruption

In this case, private political benefit and public paycheque benefit.

They willingly sign non-disclosure agreements right before they start accepting their pay cheques. Perhaps they shouldn't sign them then.

[BubberMiley]

I agree with Shady. There's nothing wrong with a totalitarian state if people agree to live in it.

[jacee]

They willingly sign non-disclosure agreements right before they start accepting their pay cheques. Perhaps they shouldn't sign them then.

Can you provide a link to verify this, and the content?

Regardless, these numbers are extremely disturbing:

He noted that in 2006 the National Research Council published nearly 2,000 peer-reviewed publications and 53 patents. In 2012, the agencys publication output had dropped by 80 per cent and the patent rate by 95 per cent, to just three.

Telling scientists they are not able to communicate their work to the people who paid them to do it is a pretty striking statement on the condition of Canadas democracy, he said.

How good can a government be if they can't operate in an environment of open information?

Edited September 17, 2013 by jacee

[G Huxley]

I agree with Shady. There's nothing wrong with a totalitarian state if people agree to live in it. -Bubbermiley

Good to see there's some consensus on the right.

Edited September 17, 2013 by G Huxley

[G Huxley]

How good can a government be if they can't operate in an environment of open information?

Bubber and Shady can probably brainstorm a unique way that it could be done.

[Shady]

Bubber and Shady can probably brainstorm a unique way that it could be done.

Apparently recognizing sarcasm isn't your thing. He wasn't being serious.

[Shady]

I agree with Shady. There's nothing wrong with a totalitarian state if people agree to live in it.

Most definitely. The worst totalitarian states are the ones with non-disclosure agreements. The worst!!!

[G Huxley]

Apparently recognizing sarcasm isn't your thing. He wasn't being serious.

Sometimes sarcasm is so close to the truth, its difficult to tell between the two and sometimes they overlap.

My creds to you Bubber.

[Moonlight Graham]

The main problems the conservatives have with scientists is often a result of the politicising of science, invariably by left wingers.

Despite conservative claims to the contrary, those crazy "left-wing" scientists proved that the earth revolved around the sun (not vice versa), that the earth was not 4000 years old but was in fact billions of years old, that humans evolved from ape-like creatures and not simply from Adam and Eve, and that phrenology was a BS pseudoscience that shouldn't be used as justification for the "natural" white "superiority" over other "lesser" races and for male "superiority" over women.

The Harper government doesn't like "facts" getting in the way of their agendas. I can't believe this crap is happening in Canada in the 21st century and they're getting away with it.

[GostHacked]

That's not disturbing at all. In fact, it's quite logical. The government pays for the studies and the research. So any publication of said study or said research has to be approved by said government. It's works that way in government, as well as in the private sector.

If the studies are done with taxpayer money, we deserve the access to these papers. Policy decisions are made on these studies.

[The_Squid]

If the studies are done with taxpayer money, we deserve the access to these papers. Policy decisions are made on these studies.

Not with this government. Policy decisions are made in the face of evidence to the contrary... which is why this government doesn't like science.

But your point still stands about access to studies/papers.

[scribblet]

I'm sure the government likes science as much as any other gov't, but the narrative by opponents spins it to their advantage.

They are asked to sign a non disclosure agreement, even American scientists working together with the Canadians. No doubt their protests are self serving, who wants their public grants cut and so on. I don't blame the gov't for asking employees not to blab everything to the media considering how the media can spin an issue.

Actually, the gov't has been increasing investments in research and technology—more than $11 billion in the current budget.

Edited September 18, 2013 by scribblet