Canadian Scientists Mourn the Death of Evidence

[OffsideSpecialist]

Canadian scientists aren't normally among the placard-waving crowd on Parliament Hill.

But today in Ottawa, scientists invoking an image of the Grim Reaper will take on the Stephen Harper government for what they call the "death of evidence" brought about by federal cuts to everything from the long-form census to closure of the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory in Nunavut.

"Scientists are generally not agitators, but this continuous set of decisions has got very many scientists hot under the collar," says Scott Findlay, a rally organizer and University of Ottawa ecology professor

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/st...sts-rally.html

Very interesting read on all the science and environment related cuts that have been made within the Federal government over the last several years. It seems awfully short-sighted to me to be making any cuts in these kind of fields in favour of the economy. In reality, if there is no environment, or the environment is not properly understood, there will be no economy. Obviously, we aren't really in dire straits, but I have to wonder if these kinds of cuts will continue beyond this budget, I think that would have to be somewhat concerning.

[Thor]

Very sad, not the direction we should be going. I would prefer if we did the opposite, increased spending (efficient spending) to attract and create more work in science related fields, the spin offs for being leaders in science are just small things like wealth, and advancement as a society.

[FlamesAddiction]

Too bad about the experimental lakes. I think that is a great program. I used to work at another federal research facility and thought it was a very worthwhile endeavor.

[troutman]

Scientists vs. Harper


http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/07/10/t...sts-vs-harper/

Over the phone, the University of Ottawa conference organizers told Science-ish that they are disturbed by what they believe is the government’s disdain for evidence. They also provided an impressive media backgrounder, obviously prepared by science nerds with a zest for evidence and footnoting. The alleged crimes included the scrapping of the mandatory long-form census, cutting the federal funding for Canada’s Ozone Network, closing the Experimental Lakes Area, as well as the elimination of the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy and the position of National Science Advisor.

Such examples demonstrated “an erosion of the capacity of the federal government to actually collect evidence, and the capacity of civil society to bring evidence forward into public debate,” conference co-organizer Dr. Scott Findlay, said. This protest about the federal government’s anti-science stance seemed right on point.

But while rational, evidence-based decision making may be the ideal, one would be hard pressed to find governments that rely solely on science, and we probably wouldn’t want our politicians to operate that way anyway. As this recent comment in the British Medical Journal points out, “Although it may frustrate scientists when politicians are swayed by the possible electoral consequences of various policy options, few scientists (including us) would want to live in a society in which politicians completely ignored the views of those who have elected them as their representatives.”

Besides, at least one episode in the series “scientists vs. Harper” seems to have been an invention of the media.

We need to keep a close eye on Harper and make sure his government doesn’t gut the research that voters and policymakers alike need to make informed decisions. But scientists who call the government anti-science are hardly helping their own cause: they risk polarizing the discussion and losing the trust of the public. That’s just as bad as a government that willfully ignores the evidence, and it glosses over a number of more nuanced questions that need addressing—in the spirit of scientific inquiry, and with an open mind.

[GP_Matt]

Thanks Troutman,
I wanted to put together a response but the criticisms are so many that it is hard to argue without coming up with a "you forgot Poland" defence that looks like nitpicking or spending hours arguing all the points.

[Fire]

They are worried about losing their cushy jobs so they are trying use a "hidden agenda" scare tactic.

When Paul Martin slashed health care severely to balance the budget, did doctors rally against it and call it "death of healthcare"?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Fire

They are worried about losing their cushy jobs so they are trying use a "hidden agenda" scare tactic.

When Paul Martin slashed health care severely to balance the budget, did doctors rally against it and call it "death of healthcare"?

Most of the scientists I worked with only made around $40-50,000/year. Not too many of them have cushy jobs.

[OffsideSpecialist]

Also, something I have heard from folks in the health care field is that there is far too much bureaucracy and middle management, which causes a lot of the problems regarding health care. I'm not sure the same can be said with regards to scientists.

[Table 5]

The greatest country on earth doesn't need no stinkin' science.

[Tinordi]

This government is driven by ideology and science/evidence is a very inconvenient check on ideology. Not surprisingly they have axed and muzzled scientists for research and evidence that run counter to their ideology. It's very frightening.

[Erick Estrada]

These programs are very costly and the government has to weigh the value of keeping them going. The CBC article glosses over some key points. The Liberals as well tried to shut down the Experimental Lakes Program so there's obviously some merit to cutting the program in that the government has felt for a while the program wasn't generating enough information to keep it going.

Also the article fails to state that a new High Arctic research station is to be built in Cambridge Bay. The federal government provided direct support for Pearl but the Pearl scientists failed to get grants for the rest of the money needed to keep it going.

A lot of this is simply job preservation for scientists and an excuse fo Liberal supporters to promote their Convervative 'Agenda' hogwash.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

A lot of this is simply job preservation for scientists and an excuse fo Liberal supporters to promote their Convervative 'Agenda' hogwash.

I'm trying to figure out: When was the last time a big group DIDN'T complain when their funding was slashed by the government? This strikes me a bit like the same old...always demand more funding, and if it goes down, it's assassination or death of the field.

For example, wasn't there some noise and protests prior to passing the budget about the publicly funded jobs that'd die? Then a haircut shaving of Election Canada's funding (which, if memory serves, was a 1% cut) was instantly decared as the Conservatives' attempt to kill the investigation on the "robocall" scandal by destroying their income.

[Senator Clay Davis]

This is a case of spending money on idiotic, incredibly wasteful things (see: Crime Bill) versus cutting money from worthwhile endeavours. It'd be an easier sell if this was part of larger cuts, but seeing as the deficit is rising this is truly ideology above all.

[Kybosh]

Being an academic scientist is far from cushy. The pay stinks and the government's constantly cut funding based on whatever the hot topic is for the current day. I find many Albertan's also have a hard time sympathizing with government cuts because they are so well off financially. It's hard to comprehend someone fighting tooth and nail to keep a job when people walk away from their 2 year tech program or undergrad and waltz into high paying work with many options for advancement.

This protest has been a long time coming. There have been significant cuts to NSERC and other funding bodies long before Harper ever took the reins.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

This is a case of spending money on idiotic, incredibly wasteful things (see: Crime Bill) versus cutting money from worthwhile endeavours. It'd be an easier sell if this was part of larger cuts, but seeing as the deficit is rising this is truly ideology above all.

So unless they cut everything that you think is wasteful anything they cut is ideological?

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

These programs are very costly and the government has to weigh the value of keeping them going. The CBC article glosses over some key points. The Liberals as well tried to shut down the Experimental Lakes Program so there's obviously some merit to cutting the program in that the government has felt for a while the program wasn't generating enough information to keep it going.

No no no... you don't understand, anytime the Conservatives reduce funding it's for their own hidden agenda. Aren't you up-to-date with your NDP/Liberal propaganda yet?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

So unless they cut everything that you think is wasteful anything they cut is ideological?

It's more about why are they cutting it? If they say its for fiscal/budgetary reasons, then why add more costs through things like the crime bill? So that rings hollow as an excuse. And if its not budgetary, then what else can it be? Canadians I'd imagine whole heartedly approve of science, so thats not it. I can think of one group who would like the see enviromental research and science in general go away, and that would obviously be corporations. Outside of them, who does this really benefit?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Being an academic scientist is far from cushy. The pay stinks and the government's constantly cut funding based on whatever the hot topic is for the current day.

Come on... I see all you scientists driving around in your fancy Ford Tempos while listening to your cassette players on your way back to your apartments.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Most of the scientists I worked with only made around $40-50,000/year. Not too many of them have cushy jobs.

Yeah those wealthy government funded employees, damn teacher, scientists, police, firemen all living high off the taxpayer dollar.

I still amazes me when people make these comments, utterly detached from reality.

[rubecube]

http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion...059/story.html

British Columbia will be disproportionately affected by the federal Conservative government's passage of the omnibus Bill C-38.

Buried within 420 pages of budgetary provisions, amendments to acts and policy changes on everything from telecommunications to immigration, the bill makes sweeping changes to environmental protections that will have detrimental impacts on our province's environment.

The bill completely rewrites the Environmental Assessment Act and weakens the assessment process, shortens the list of protected species, abolishes the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act and guts the Fisheries Act.

While all of Canada will be affected by the amendments to the nearly 60 environmental statutes, B.C. - as Canada's Pacific Coast province - will bear most of the brunt of these legislative changes. Cuts to Coast Guard operating budgets, the reduction of science personnel across government and the closure of the Pacific Coast's oil-spill response centre will diminish B.C.'s capacity to prevent, monitor and respond to potential environmental disasters.

Under these amendments, the federal cabinet could choose to go ahead with the controversial Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project, which would create great risks and little reward for B.C., even if the decision of the National Energy Board's joint review panel is not to approve it.

It's just kind of shocking that the Conservatives are trying to move so many steps backwards from the rest of the world.