The WAR on Science: Thursday, November 21, 2013, 7:00 pm Room 1900, SFU Harbour Ctr

Status
Not open for further replies.
Another day another library... First DFO then EC and now Health Canada.
Health Canada library changes leave scientists scrambling

Main Health Canada research library closed, access outsourced to retrieval company

By Laura Payton, Max Paris, CBC News Posted: Jan 20, 2014 5:00 AM ET

Health Canada scientists are so concerned about losing access to their research library that they're finding work-arounds, with one squirrelling away journals and books in his basement for colleagues to consult, says a report obtained by CBC News.
The draft report from a consultant hired by the department warned it not to close its library, but the report was rejected as flawed and the advice went unheeded.
Before the main library closed, the inter-library loan functions were outsourced to a private company called Infotrieve, the consultant wrote in a report ordered by the department. The library's physical collection was moved to the National Science Library on the Ottawa campus of the National Research Council last year.
"Staff requests have dropped 90 per cent over in-house service levels prior to the outsource. This statistic has been heralded as a cost savings by senior HC [Health Canada] management," the report said.
"However, HC scientists have repeatedly said during the interview process that the decrease is because the information has become inaccessible — either it cannot arrive in due time, or it is unaffordable due to the fee structure in place."
A recently retired Health Canada pathologist agreed with this assessment.
"I look at it as an insidious plan to discourage people from using libraries," said Dr. Rudi Mueller, who left the department in 2012.
"If you want to justify closing a library, you make access difficult and then you say it is hardly used."

Staff borrowed students' library cards
The report noted the workarounds scientists used to overcome their access problems.
Mueller used his contacts in industry for scientific literature. He also went to university libraries where he had a faculty connection.

The report said Health Canada scientists sometimes use the library cards of university students in co-operative programs at the department.
Unsanctioned libraries have been created by science staff.
"One group moved its 250 feet of published materials to an employee's basement. When you need a book, you email 'Fred,' and 'Fred' brings the book in with him the next day," the consultant wrote in his report.
"I think it's part of being a scientist. You find a way around the problems," Mueller told CBC News.

Librarians missed after cuts
One of the problems Mueller couldn't work around was the disappearance of librarians who could help him in his search for scientific literature. The report said the number of in-house librarians went from 40 in 2007 to just six in April 2013.
"The librarian would sit down with me and specifically design the searches for what I needed," said Mueller.
"A librarian is far better at doing a literature search than I am," added Mueller. "It's their profession."
James Turk, executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, sympathized with Mueller's frustration.
"Knowledgeable and expert librarians and archivists are invaluable resources in helping you find what you want," he said.
"So they [Health Canada] are not just closing physical collections of books. They are getting rid of the guides to those collections."

Quality of work at risk
Turk worried about the effect this change would have on Canada's international reputation.
"Scientifically, we are going to be a third-rate country," he said.
A lasting regret for Mueller is that by the end of his career at Health Canada, he didn't feel satisfied with quality of his work. And he put the blame for that squarely on cutbacks in the department's libraries.
"If I tell my children what I have done, I am not as proud as I would like to be."

In the end, the report recommended moving the physical collection back to Health Canada and increasing library staff from six to between 15 to 20.

According to Health Canada, the report was a draft and contained many factual inaccuracies.
"[The report] was returned to its author for corrections which were never undertaken. As such, the recommendations are based on inaccurate information and have not been accepted," Health Canada wrote in response to questions from CBC News.
In addition, the department says it has consulted with employees and addressed many of their concerns.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/federal-science-hobbled-by-cuts-and-policies-poll-says-1.2525819

Federal science hobbled by cuts and policies, poll says
Government's science priorities out of step with public, union for federal scientists says
By Emily Chung, CBC News Posted: Feb 06, 2014 1:30 PM ET Last Updated: Feb 06, 2014 3:55 PM ET

The federal government is slated to cut $2.6 billion from 10 federal science-based department and agencies between the 2012-13 fiscal year and the 2015-16 fiscal year.

PIPSC news release and report

The government's cuts to federal science budgets and its changes to policy are damaging scientists' ability to serve and protect the public, according to a new survey.

The survey was commissioned by the union representing federal scientists.

As well, the Conservative government's shift in federal science priorities under Prime Minister Stephen Harper toward supporting industry is out of step with the public's view that health, safety and the protection of the environment should be the government's top science priorities, says the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. (PIPSC)

Research cutbacks by government alarm scientists
The fifth estate: Silence of the Labs
The survey conducted by Environics Canada last June and released Thursday included responses from over 4,000 federal scientists, researchers and engineers. It found:

91 per cent think cuts to federal science budgets will have a detrimental impact on the federal government's ability to serve the public and 51 per cent think the impact will be "very detrimental."
69 per cent of 690 respondents at Environment Canada think Canada is doing a worse job of environmental protection than five years ago.
86 per cent of 343 respondents from the Fisheries and Oceans Canada think recent changes to the Fisheries Act will hamper Canada's ability to protect fish and fish habitat.
80 per cent of 268 respondents from the National Research Council think Canada has done a worse job over the past five years of advancing our international standing in technology and innovation. The government 'refocused' the agency to service business in 2012.
As of 4 p.m. ET Thursday, Greg Rickford, minister of state for science and technology, had not responded to a request to comment on the survey.

'I don't think any manager can credibly claim to run an efficient and effective operation if so many of the staff are questioning the whole operation.'
- Marc Saner, University of Ottawa
The union sent surveys to over 15,000 of its members, who work for the government as scientists, researchers and engineers. Of those, 4,069 or 26 per cent responded between June 5 and 19, 2013. PIPSC says the results are considered accurate within plus or minus 1.6 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, and the response rate is considered relatively high for that kind of survey making it "at least as representative as any other."

CBC's the fifth estate recently reported that over the past five years, the federal government has dismissed more than 2,000 scientists and drastically cut or shut down hundreds of federal programs and research facilities, including programs that monitored smoke stack emissions, food inspections, oil spills, water quality and climate change.

PIPSC noted that so far, the government has cut $758 million of the $2.6 billion slated to be cut from 10 federal science-based department and agencies over three years ending in the 2015/16 fiscal year.

Public attitudes

Peter Bleyer, the union's head of policy and communications, said his goal was to learn from the scientists how they were experiencing the cuts and whether the cuts were really "back office" cuts as the federal government has suggested.

hi-lab-test-852-9818962
PIPSC also commissioned a public opinion poll that found Canadians think the top priority for government science should be protecting public health, safety and the environment.

What the survey found, he said, is "there has been a huge impact already, and this incredible fear over what's coming into the future and that these cuts will put Canadians' health safety and environment at risk."

He added, "You have to use a very twisted logic to try and define these cuts as being back office cuts when you hear about what is actually being lost in terms of science capacity and direct impact that will have on Canadians."

Bleyer acknowledged that it was natural for scientists to feel cuts to their own department were having an impact on their work. He said that is one reason PIPSC also wanted to get a sense of whether the government cuts and shift in priorities was aligned with the perspective of Canadians, so it commissioned a second poll from Environics.

That one surveyed 1,003 Canadians last November on their attitudes toward government scientists, and the results are considered accurate plus or minutes 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

It found that:

69 per cent of Canadians think cuts to federal science activities will have a negative impact on the government's ability to serve the interests of Canadians.
73 per cent of respondents, including 67 per cent of Conservative Party supporters, think the top priority for the government science should be protecting public health, safety and the environment. Only 10 per cent though the top priority should be business innovation and resource development, and 14 per cent thought both priorities should be equal.
Bleyer acknowledged that a lot of the "cuts" are, in fact, a reprioritization of government science, and that some areas such as resource development are getting more money from the government than before.

"The problem is," he said, "they're out of sync with the priorities of Canadians."

Little faith in leadership

erlenmeyer flask water sample 147912113
A water sample is collected in a flask for scientific testing. Most poll respondents from Environment Canada think Canada is doing a worse job of environmental protection than five years ago. (Merkushev Vasiliy/Shutterstock)

Among the other findings of the survey of federal scientists was that 63 per cent are somewhat or very dissatisfied with the use of scientific evidence in policy development by the current government. In Fisheries, Natural Resources, and Agricultural and Agri-Food Canada, more than 75 per cent were dissatisfied. However, on the upside, 41 per cent of Health Canada scientists were very or somewhat satisfied – almost double the 24 per cent of federal scientists overall.

Some other findings were:

57 per cent of respondents disagree that the leaders of their department or agency are making the right decisions for their organization.
A majority of scientists are very concerned about their ability to collaborate with international colleagues (73 per cent) and academia (69 per cent), due to new policies on intellectual property and increased permissions required to publish their scientific results.
A third are dissatisfied with their jobs, including 52 per cent of respondents at the National Research Council and 40 per cent at the Department of Defence. Seventy-three per cent of those who say there are dissatisfied are also considering retirement or leaving.
53 per cent would not recommend a job at their department to a young scientist.
Government should be concerned: researcher

Marc Saner, director of the Institute for Science, Society and Policy at the University of Ottawa, said while most scientists can expected to be unhappy and feel things are headed in the wrong direction when their budgets get cut, he was struck by the huge majority that felt the cuts would affect their ability to serve the public.

"What comes through in this survey is ... real concern about how meaningful the job is," he said.

That's something the government should take heed of, he added.

"I don't think any manager can credibly claim to run an efficient and effective operation if so many of the staff are questioning the whole operation."

He suggested that the government needs to do a better job of explaining why it's making the cuts, especially to its collection of scientific evidence.

"One probably can gain more trust and more support from internal staff if one explains exactly why it's been reduced," he said. "My impression is that the government does not go out of its way to explain to what extent the evidence was unnecessary or who else will collect it."

Saner said that while there may have been a bias in who responded to the survey, it could have gone either way, since unhappy employees might be more uncomfortable about commenting or happy employees might feel less need to respond.

NDP science and technology critic Kennedy Stewart said the results of the survey aren't surprising, and said they point to a problem far more serious than just job cuts.

"These results are showing really a widespread malaise within the scientific and tech community employed by the federal government," he said. "If you reduce your scientific capacity at such an alarming rate, it's really going to have a much, much longer term effect... we're really undermining the knowledge economy in Canada."

Liberal science and technology critic Ted Hsu said he was struck by the concerns expressed by federal scientists about their ability to collaborate internationally at a time when significant science papers rarely have authors from just one country and sharing of data is the norm.

"If you make it hard to collaborate, you're really handicapping Canadian science," he said.

Hsu said that while it's good that the government is supporting science for private business interests, that shouldn't come at the expense of science for the common good.

"It's easy to cut scientists because they're not visible and the government controls how visible they can be," he said. "But in the long run, it's going to pose a risk to public safety and health and just having good smart policy decisions."
 
http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/7-environmental-charities-face-canada-revenue-agency-audits

7 environmental charities face Canada Revenue Agency audits

Protesters gather on Parliament hill on Monday Sept. 26, 2011 in Ottawa. Environmental charity groups say they are being targeted by the CRA through audits. Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press

Protesters gather on Parliament hill on Monday Sept. 26, 2011 in Ottawa. Environmental charity groups say they are being targeted by the CRA through audits. Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press

The Canada Revenue Agency is currently conducting extensive audits on some of Canada's most prominent environmental groups to determine if they comply with guidelines that restrict political advocacy, CBC News has learned.

If the CRA rules that the groups exceeded those limits, their charitable status could be revoked, which would effectively shut them down.

Many of the groups are among the Conservative government's fiercest critics. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty signalled clearly in his budget of 2012 that political activity of these groups would be closely monitored and he allocated $8 million to the effort. The environmental organizations believe they have been targeted with the goal of silencing their criticism.

“We’re concerned about what appears to be an increase in audits around political activity and in particular around environmental organizations,” said Marcel Lauzière, president of Imagine Canada, an umbrella organization for charities.

“There’s a big chill out there with what charities can and cannot do.”

The list of groups CBC has now confirmed are undergoing audits reads like a who’s who in the environmental charity world. They include:

- The David Suzuki Foundation

- Tides Canada

- West Coast Environmental Law

- The Pembina Foundation

- Environmental Defence

- Equiterre

- Ecology Action Centre

“This is a war against the sector,” says John Bennett, of Sierra Club Canada. His group is not yet being audited, but he said he is prepared.

"In the 40-year history of the Sierra Club Canada Foundation, it's been audited twice in 40 years," so there are more audits than usual, Bennett said.

CBC has confirmed that at least one group, Environmental Defence, has received its report back from the CRA and they are appealing it. Sources said their report threatened to revoke their charitable status. Another group, West Coast Environmental Law, had auditors fly in from Ottawa to enhance the work of the local CRA team. One source said the Ottawa CRA people called themselves “The A team.”

Most groups on this list would not talk on the record, but sources say executive directors of these groups are meeting regularly by phone to discuss a united response to the government.

By law, charities are allowed to use a maximum of 10 per cent of their resources for political activity or advocacy, but the guidelines are clear that it cannot be partisan activity. That has been interpreted for years to mean that a group can oppose a government policy but cannot back a specific candidate in an election.

During a pre-budget consultation in December, Flaherty said he is considering making even more changes to rules for charities that have a political aspect.

“We're reviewing that,” Flaherty said. “We spent some time on it last year and we're looking at it again now as I prepare the budget."

He went on to warn charities: “If I were an environmental charity using charitable money, tax-receipted money for political purposes, I would be cautious."

Bennett said the rules seem to be constantly changing.

“We don't know what rules we're playing by. The problem with this is that they gave the power to CRA to walk in and shut you down. And then if you want to complain, you can go to court afterwards."

The government insists it does not target certain charities, nor does it tell CRA to do so. Auditors alone determine whether they investigate a charity.

"I assume they receive all sorts of information from all sorts of Canadians, in terms of who they should or should not audit. Ultimately it is up to them as an independent agency who they audit or not,” Alberta Conservative MP James Rajotte said.

CBC News contacted the CRA several times to ask how auditing targets are chosen. Spokespeople suggested responses could be found on their website. There, it states some of the reasons a charity could be selected for an audit, including random selection, to review specific legal obligations under the law and to follow-up on possible non-compliance or complaints.

According to lawyer Mark Blumberg, who specializes in charity law, the CRA often audits charitable organizations based on complaints.

“If there are a number of complaints about a charity and its political activities, that could trigger an audit by CRA,” he said. That assessment is echoed by a number of groups currently undergoing audits.

“I believe our audit was complaint driven,” said Ross McMillan, the president and CEO of Tides Canada.

“I am confident of a positive outcome as we take seriously our responsibility to act in compliance with the Income Tax Act and Canada Revenue Agency guidelines,” he said.

Pro-oilsands group has filed complaints

McMillan goes on to cite complaints from Ethical Oil, a group that has formally submitted complaints to the CRA about Tides Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation and Environmental Defence.

The complaints are all filed through legal counsel and are part of a campaign Ethical Oil has started to strip these environmental groups of their charitable status.

Ethical Oil is a registered non-profit non-governmental organization that describes itself as an “online community” to empower people to become grassroots activists in defence of the oilsands development.

The group was founded by Alykhan Velshi, who is currently the director of issues management in the Prime Minister's Office. Environmental groups say Ethical Oil is funded by the oil and gas industry to try to undermine their work

CBC News has repeatedly asked Ethical Oil to reveal who their funders are but no specific list has been made public.

Environmental groups are not the only ones who have been audited. Social justice groups like Amnesty International Canada are also currently undergoing an audit about their political activities. CBC News contacted them but they declined to comment.

All the groups say they will be watching Tuesday's budget for new rules that may affect their charitable status.

"We have an important role to play in our society and we want to play that role," said Bennett. "But we need a governing system that actually welcomes public dialogue instead of discouraging it."
 
Seems we were warned.....

[_iyFw8UF85A] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iyFw8UF85A&feature=player_embedded
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ele...ront-to-democracy-marc-mayrand-says-1.2527635
Election reform bill an affront to democracy, Marc Mayrand says
By Susana Mas, CBC News Posted: Feb 08, 2014 7:00 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 08, 2014 10:16 AM ET

Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand says the government's proposed Fair Elections Act puts severe restrictions on the information he is able to communicate to the public.

In an interview airing Saturday on CBC Radio's The House, Mayrand said "my reading of the act is that I can no longer speak about democracy in this country."

"I'm not aware of any electoral bodies around the world who can not talk about democracy," Mayrand told host Evan Solomon.

Hear Evan Solomon's full conversation with Marc Mayrand
Elections head feels benched by electoral reform bill
Election reforms would bring big changes to campaign spending
Read the Fair Elections Act
The Fair Elections Act says it "limits the chief electoral officer's power to provide information to the public."

Under the proposed bill, the only role of the chief electoral officer would be to inform the public of when, where, and how to vote.

Elections Canada would be forbidden from launching ad campaigns encouraging Canadians to vote. Surveys and research would be forbidden under the new bill, Mayrand said.

"Most of the research will no longer be published because these are communications to the public."

The chief electoral officer and the commissioner of Canada elections would also no longer be allowed to publish their reports, Mayrand said.

"These reports will no longer be available. In fact, not only not available. I don't think it will be done at all."

Voter turnout and legitimacy

At a time when voter turnout appears to have stagnated around the 60 per cent mark, this bill would take away efforts to increase voter turnout from the agency's hands and leave it to would-be politicians to figure out.

Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre, who introduced the bill in Parliament on Tuesday, said candidates are better placed to get the vote out.

"Political candidates who are aspiring for office are far better at inspiring voters to get out and cast their ballot than are government bureaucracies," ​Poilievre told the Commons on Wednesday.

Persistent and declining voter turnout could undermine the legitimacy of an election's outcome, warned Mayrand.

"Nobody owns [voter] turnout. I think it requires a collective, collaborative approach of the whole society."

If [voter] turnout continues to decline at the pace it has been declining over the last 40 years… we'll have questions about the legitimacy of our government and how representative they are," Mayrand said.

Putting limits on the chief electoral watchdog, would also mean the end of Elections Canada's participation in outreach programs for youth.

Mayrand said he would no longer be able to take part in Student Vote, a national program that allows 500,000 students who are not yet of voting age to vote in a parallel election.

All these limitations ought to give Canadians pause for concern, Mayrand said. "It's something that should be worrisome."

"I don't think it reflects a model democracy that Canadians aspire to."

Creating an independent commissioner

Polievre defended the bill, telling the Commons it would give a new independent commissioner "sharper teeth, a longer reach, and a freer hand."

Mayrand said he would have liked to see the bill give the elections watchdog the power to compel witnesses to testify, a problem Elections Canada faced when investigating robocalls made during the last federal election.

"It's a bit disappointing," Mayrand said.

He also would have liked to see the bill give the chief electoral officer the authority to compel political parties and their riding associations to provide Elections Canada with financial documentation to support their financial returns.

"It would make it easier to follow the money in the system."

"Right now we get an overall report stating expenditures of parties during campaigns... we don't have the supporting documents that attest to those expenditures, for example. So it makes it very difficult to carry a complete compliance review of those returns," Mayrand said.

Mayrand, who says he was not consulted on the bill, hopes members of Parliament will take the time necessary to study it at committee and consult with Canadians.

On Thursday, the government invoked time allocation, putting a limit on the amount of time members of Parliament can spend debating the new bill.

Mayrand publicly spoke about the bill for the first time on Thursday, when he defended himself against accusations of partisanship, following a committee meeting on Parliament Hill.

The chief electoral officer, like the auditor-general or the privacy commissioner, reports directly to Parliament and as such is independent of the government of the day and all political parties.
 
Tarper Bush league
[rk2NHrCaiYs] http://youtu.be/rk2NHrCaiYs
 
Report lists top scientists who lost jobs due to federal cuts - See more at: http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/2014/02/12/Federal-Science-Cuts/#sthash.MdljHbWk.dpuf


Canada's largest union representing scientists and professional public employees now estimates that between 2013 and 2016, $2.6 billion and 5,064 jobs will be cut from 10 science-based federal departments.

A new report by the Professional Institute of Public Service of Canada (PIPSC), "Vanishing Science," catalogues cuts to science programs, budgets and staff by the government.

"The Harper government's efforts to balance the federal budget in time for the 2015 election is being built on deep, unpopular cuts to public science that put at risk Canadians' health, safety and the environment," said PIPSC president Debi Daviau in a press release.

"These are not cuts to 'back office operations,' as the finance minister described them in 2012 -- not unless by 'back office' he means Canada's natural environment, air and water quality, the survival of other species, and the health and safety of all Canadians."

In addition to nearly two dozen federal library closures, the federal government has axed various Canadian environmental programs, including the Experimental Lakes Area (it lead the world in correcting freshwater pollution), the Hazardous Information Review Commission (it protected the right of employers and workers to be informed about the chemical materials that might pose health and safety hazards), and the Ocean Contaminants and Marine Toxicology Program.

Budgets for Environment Canada, for example, have been cut by $125 million, or 17.5 per cent.

Thousands of federal scientists that once inspected meat, studied vaccines, measured climate change or monitored losses in ocean diversity have been axed from federal payrolls.

"Vanishing Science" chronicles the disappearance of many of these federal agencies and scientists. Which got the shaft? Here's a partial list, as detailed by the report:

"[Cuts] include the loss of leading experts in their fields such as Dr. Michael Arts, an international authority at Environment Canada on the health of aquatic ecosystems. (The elimination of Dr. Arts' position prompted 90 internationally renowned scientists, including members of the Royal Society of Canada, to write letters of protest to the government.)

"Dr. Kenneth C. Johnson, a senior epidemiologist at the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), was the only remaining scientist at PHAC or Health Canada whose work focused directly on the study of tobacco and cancer, specifically the connection between second-hand smoke and breast cancer.

"Dr. Phil Burton, a research scientist and manager of Northern Projects for the Pacific Forestry Centre (PFC) of the Canadian Forest Service, played a vital role in assessing the impact of the Mountain Pine Beetle and, before his departure in 2012, Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline proposal.

"Jean-Pierre Gagnon was an engineer with the federal government for 32 years -- 23 of them spent at Transport Canada -- and one of North America's leading experts on train cars carrying dangerous goods, including the DOT-111 rail tank cars at the centre of the Lac-Mégantic tragedy on July 6, 2013. Over a year earlier, in April 2012, he received notice that his position would be affected by workforce adjustment. At the time, he was working on a project reviewing the security and integrity of non-pressurized rail tank cars such as the DOT-111. Shortly before he retired from the public service in March 2013, he had convened a meeting with industry on the safety of the DOT-111 cars.

"The cuts have also contributed in their way to Canada's science brain drain. Dr. Kenneth Lee, who before receiving an 'affected' notice in May 2012 enjoyed a 30-year career with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, was director of the Centre for Offshore Oil, Gas and Energy Research and the country's foremost oil spill expert. He spent four months in the Gulf of Mexico providing scientific expertise to efforts at containing the 2010 Gulf oil spill. Today, he directs ocean research at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization in Australia.

"Many of the cuts have eliminated any hope -- at least for the foreseeable future -- of policies based on evidence. The loss of Statistics Canada's mandatory long-form census in 2010 and the Health Canada-funded First Nations Statistical Institute in 2012 (the only comprehensive attempt to assess data on educational, social housing and labour force needs among First Nations communities) are just two examples."

- See more at: http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/2014/02/12/Federal-Science-Cuts/#sthash.MdljHbWk.dpuf
 
http://thetyee.ca/News/2014/01/10/New-BC-Curriculum/
New Curriculum Erases Enviro Ed, Says Science Teacher

Lenny Ross fears changes to what BC kids learn will be anything but green.
By Katie Hyslop, 10 Jan 2014, TheTyee.ca


The British Columbia government may be the only provincial government in Canada to proudly declare itself carbon neutral, but at least one teacher says B.C.'s proposed curriculum changes are anything but green.
Draft social studies and science curriculums for Kindergarten to Grade 9 were released this past fall, with teachers, administrators, parents and the public invited to submit feedback.
Unlike the current curriculum, the drafts are less detailed about what content must be taught, which the government hopes will leave students more time to delve into the subject and provide teachers more autonomy over what they teach.
As it stands now, the new science curriculum, for example, will cover fewer concepts -- or "big ideas" -- than now, and the grade level at which certain concepts are taught will change. For example, where weather is currently taught in Grade 4, the draft proposes it move to Kindergarten.
That's a problem for Lenny Ross, a Grade 4/5 science teacher at Strawberry Vale Elementary in Victoria. In an essay emailed to dozens of colleagues, academics, politicians, and journalists, Ross criticized the proposed curriculum for not including any environmental science "big ideas," omitting some environmental science concepts, and "pushing down" topics to grades where students won't properly grasp them.
Using the draft Grade 4 curriculum as an example, Ross wrote "students currently study weather, and its impacts on humans, different habitats and ecosystems, food chains, and adaptations of animals to survive; we have the strongest focus on ecology in the elementary years. This has been replaced with the study of atoms and molecules, 10 forms of energy, and the rock cycle. Hardly 'Big Idea' topics that [nine]-year-olds get passionate about."
But government says the draft curriculum is just that -- a draft open to revision and overhaul after public and teacher feedback. A ministry spokesperson said feedback is still being accepted. "The placement and emphasis that is going to be placed on specific topics will be revised based on feedback that the ministry gets," they said.
Not in the curriculum, won't be taught: Ross
The ministry says a more conceptual curriculum gives teachers the freedom to include more lessons on subjects they and their students are interested in, which could include environmental education. But in an interview with The Tyee, Ross said he fears teachers will omit environmental science altogether if it isn't part of the key concepts.
"If you don't identify in one of those 'big ideas' environmental science as a key theme, it won't be taught. There won't be materials provided for it," he said. "They won't even teach it to teachers at university. They'll just say, 'It's not in the curriculum, why would we teach that?'"
Environmental education is a growing trend in Canadian elementary schools, particularly on Vancouver Island with the introduction of outdoor kindergartens and preschools where students spend the majority of class time outside exploring nature. So it confuses Ross that the government would not more clearly mandate the teaching of environmental science content in B.C. schools.
Ross says studies have shown kids who spend more time outside are physically and mentally healthier than their sheltered peers, and have a better grasp on the importance of a healthy environment to their own well-being.
By changing what grades students will discuss environmental issues, new course material will need to be produced and services arranged to train educators on how to tackle these topics in an age-appropriate way, he added. That's a big cost for a ministry that says it has no more money for education.
"To my mind, there is no need to change these topic levels: topics can stay where they are," he said.
Proposed social studies curriculum also sees a reduction in environmental education. Where students are now receiving "year-by-year, sequential development of the awareness of the need for environmental stewardship," the proposed social studies curriculum focuses on the relationship between a community and its environment instead of the importance of students' responsibility to protect the environment, something Ross finds dissatisfying.
The science teacher and many of his colleagues have written letters to the ministry of education about the changes to environmental education in science, and in social studies, where they argue the concept of environmental responsibility has been removed entirely.
The government hasn't responded, leading some to conclude there is a conspiracy against environmental education. Ross doesn't believe there is a conspiracy, but says the curriculum drafts and government's silence feeds the rumours.
"I think government needs to take responsibility. They need to be out there saying, 'What are we doing for environmental ed?' Right now the evidence shows that they don't value it, it's not there," he says.
Ross has tried to find out who is on the committees that drafted the curriculum proposals, so far unsuccessfully. The ministry said committee members are composed of representatives from the BC Teachers' Federation (BCTF), the Independent Schools Association of BC, the First Nations Education Steering Committee, as well as consultation with several Aboriginal groups.
The ministry could not provide committee members' names by deadline, nor would the teachers' union provide the names of their members who sat on curriculum committees.
Waste of teaching 'wealth'?
The ministry says it recognizes the value of environmental education, adding it is already planning to further emphasize it in revised curriculum drafts and additional teacher resources.
"These supporting materials will act as guides for teachers and educators to incorporate additional education on environmental topics," said a ministry representative, adding future revisions to the Grades 10 to 12 curriculums could also result in adjustments in Kindergarten to Grade 9 curriculum.
Ross hasn't received much of a response from his own union, either. Discussions with Victoria's union local rep ended in a promise to bring the issue to the union's executive. Ross also wrote a letter to BCTF president Jim Iker, but he has yet to receive a response.
Although Iker declined to comment on Ross' concerns in particular, he said the union has policies supporting the inclusion of environmental education in curriculum and will refer to those policies when submitting feedback to the ministry.
The BCTF is generally in favour of a more conceptual curriculum, Iker said. But he added the union's over 40,000 members are diverse, and though not all teachers will agree, their feedback influences the union's recommendations for the drafts, he said.
Ross says he will continue to speak out on what he sees as a proposed waste of the "incredible wealth of environmental educators" in B.C.
"I don't think the 'Big Ideas' they're using are proper for children, for elementary children in particular, and I don't think they're making good use of our resources at a time when we struggle for funding," he said. "To me, it seems just about criminal."
ico_fishie.png
 
Canada's Experimental Lakes Area has been saved from the Harper Gov't cuts. Given the short paragraph below it's not hard to see why Harper was not a fan of the world-renowed research effort. The the ELA will no doubt continue to advance our understanding of freshwater ecosystems and pose as a pest to those who see health, safety, regulation as an inconvenience.
----

Research conducted at the ELA has been instrumental to understanding the impacts of acid rain, algal blooms, climate change, and aquaculture, as well as emerging contaminants like mercury, flame retardants, and nanomaterials. ELA research has underpinned sound policy decisions not only in Canada, but in North America and Europe. The ELA has also amassed Canada’s longest running monitoring record, clearly showing the cumulative effects of human activity on the climate, waters and watersheds of the boreal forest.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...tersweet-victory-for-science/article17753956/
 
Strange coincidence how some of these changes are now needed so that ELA can operate as it had for years before the feds dumped it and it was picked up by another organization. Did the feds know that ELA would be picked up by an org that needed a special exemption to continue to operate - namely an exemption that could really, really help fish farms and other industry dump their harmful polluntants into fish habitat? hmmm?

-----
URGENT ACTION NEEDED: Stop further gutting of the Fisheries Act. Send a message at www.evidencefordemocracy.ca/fisheriesact

The government has proposed changes to the Fisheries Act that dramatically increase ministerial discretion while reducing the role for science and evidence, resulting in far weaker pollution prevention measures in the Act.

Changes could come into effect on April 23. Send a message to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and your local MP asking for these regulatory changes to be amended.

Ministers would be able to:

Give blanket authorization to fish farms to dump drugs, pesticides and other pollutants into wild fish habitat;
Allow other industries to dump pesticides in fisheries waters; and
Shirk their regulatory oversight of pollutants, offloading responsibility onto provincial governments or relying on non-binding guidelines and policy.

Some of these regulatory changes are needed to allow research at the Experimental Lakes Area (ELA) to resume. Because the ELA is no longer the responsibility of the federal government, it requires a special exemption under the Fisheries Act that will allow scientists to experimentally release contaminants into lakes under controlled conditions. Such experiments are crucial for providing the best possible scientific evidence about the environmental effects of these substances, and how deleterious effects might be reduced.

The opportunity to grant such exemptions requires regulatory changes to the Fisheries Act. We agree with changes to the Fisheries Act in support of research at ELA. Unfortunately, the proposed changes go far beyond this - they would allow Ministers to authorize industry to pollute our waterways.

https://evidencefordemocracy.ca/fisheriesact
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/thr...ered-in-access-to-info-commissioner-1.2605956
Three Tory staffers interfered in access to info: commissioner
Report followed investigation into cases that date back to 2009

The Information Commissioner of Canada has found evidence of "systemic interference" with access to information requests by three Conservative staff members, and suggests bringing in the police.

But Public Works Minister Diane Finley, who oversees the department where the interference occurred before her time, won't be sending the matter to the Mounties.

Her office linked the findings against the three staffers to a related case that did not result in criminal charges.

"They chose not to pursue the matter further and the minister agrees with the RCMP," said spokeswoman Alyson Queen.

Cases date back to 2009

Suzanne Legault delivered her second report Thursday following an investigation into cases that date back to 2009 in the office of cabinet minister Christian Paradis, who held the Public Works portfolio at the time.

She had already found against one staff member, Sebastien Togneri, in a previous investigation that was sparked by a Canadian Press access-to-information request.

Togneri resigned in 2010 after The Canadian Press reported he had been involved in other cases of meddling.

Colleagues Marc Toupin and Jillian Andrews also turned up in emails tabled with a parliamentary committee.

Staffers 'inserted themselves' into access process

Legault looked at five additional cases, finding Togneri interfered in all of them, Toupin in one and Andrews in one.

The records ranged from the sensitive asbestos file, to U.S. President Barack Obama's visit to Canada.

Andrews currently works as a senior aide in the office of Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq.

It is not clear if Toupin is still in the government's employ.

"These staffers inserted themselves in various ways into a process that was designed to be carried out in an objective manner by public servants," Legault wrote in her report.

"Consequently, the rights conferred under the Act were compromised."

Department initially refused to hand over records

Legault also described how she had to resort to using her powers to order the production of documents, after the department refused to divulge records held within the minister's office.

Five months later, they turned over the files.

Ministerial records are not covered by the Access to Information Act, but the Supreme Court has found that they can be reviewed if they deal with departmental matters.

It turned out that those records -- emails between political staffers -- did deal specifically with departmental business.

They helped to form Legault's finding against Toupin.

Evidence a possible offence committed

In an interview, Legault explained why Canadians should care about the investigation.

"The reason why we have an objective, non-partisan process in the Access to Information Act is to make sure that the Act is a key instrument in holding our governments to account," she said.

"It cannot and must not be that political staffers or politicians thwart the intent of the Act and prevent Canadians from holding governments to account when they're entitled to disclosure of information."

Legault says there is evidence a possible offence has been committed.

The act forbids anyone to "direct, propose, counsel or cause any person" to conceal a record, with a maximum penalty of $10,000 and two years in jail.

No one has yet been convicted under the section.

'Laudable initiatives'

But Legault again noted her dismay that she cannot refer matters to the Attorney General of Canada for investigation herself.

In the case of Togneri, former Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose referred the matter to the Mounties, but no charges were ever laid.

The department also undertook to make changes to how it handles access to information after the Togneri report, which Legault said were "laudable initiatives."

She made a pointed reference to the responsibility of ministers and top bureaucrats to make sure the access to information system is protected.

She said that a culture of "pleasing the minister's office" had been fostered among public servants.

"The integrity and neutrality of the access system depends on strong leadership from the top," she wrote.

"Ministers and senior managers must ensure their employees know their responsibilities with regard to access to information, and the limitations on their roles."

© The Canadian Press, 2014
 
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2014/05/1...ce=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=140514
Canadian Science Goes Down the Drain
A limnologist laments the deserted Experimental Lakes, sapped fisheries management, and more.
By David Schindler, Today, TheTyee.ca

Two years ago, the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans announced that it would be closing the Experimental Lakes Area as part of a budget-balancing move. The government first announced that the ELA was no longer needed, and that similar science could be done at its other facilities. Never mind that the ELA had a license to perform whole-ecosystem experiments that were not possible at any other facility in the world, or that the station had the longest monitoring record for lakes and streams in Canada.

The announcement caused outrage in the international science community, among journalists and the general public. The Harper government, bewildered that there would be such widespread support for an obscure low-budget field station, quickly changed its story: they would be seeking a new operator for the site. Only one such operator showed interest: the International Institute for Sustainable Development, a Winnipeg-based think tank. Negotiations between DFO and IISD began in the autumn of that year. March 31, 2014 was set as a target date for an agreement.

During the first week of April 2014, the long negotiations finally closed and the ELA was transferred to IISD. Thanks are due to the many scientists, journalists, editors, politicians and private citizens who threw their support behind the ELA, and to the IISD for their patience during the lengthy process.

Negotiations with scientists who were on DFO's ELA team are still underway, and it is uncertain how many of them will move to IISD. They must weigh the relative advantages of being part of a large government department with excellent pension plans versus remaining a part of the high-stature ELA team, but with less security. I am optimistic that many will choose the latter. DFO has not been a comfortable home for ELA personnel for at least 20 years. But most believed that the science they did was important, and figured out how to get it done, working weekends and building their own equipment if necessary. A large part of the ELA's success resulted from perfecting the art of "guerrilla science."

Poisoning the oats of the research donkey

The Experimental Lakes Area began as a project in 1968, under the Fisheries Research Board of Canada (FRBC). The then-chairman, F.R. Hayes, and most other members of the board believed that sound fisheries management must be based on solid basic science. In the 1970s, the FRBC was disbanded, and its personnel were transferred to the civil service in what eventually became the modern DFO.
 
(continued from above...)

DFO, largely run by bureaucrats with little knowledge of fisheries, has never understood why whole ecosystems must be studied rather than just fish, so that the ecosystem approach used at the ELA has never fared well in bureaucratic assessments of the Department's priorities. The ELA has struggled along with its recent key experiments largely funded by grants to university scientists, disguising the participation of DFO personnel by calling what they do "fish habitat research." This outdated view of fisheries management is in good part why cod, salmon and other species "managed" by DFO are in jeopardy.

The other part of the fisheries management problem is that financial considerations have always outweighed environmental concerns when political choices must be made between the "bottom line" and protecting fish stocks. As Hayes astutely predicted in his book on the history of the FRBC, The Chaining of Prometheus, managers in the civil service "will slyly slip sawdust into the oats of the research donkey until the animal becomes moribund." As described below, under the Harper government, the diet of DFO's current research donkey appears to contain no oats whatsoever. It is high time that research to underpin environmental policy is once again done at arm's length from the political process, as it was under the Fisheries Research Board.

The governments of Ontario and Manitoba have been able to see the value that escaped the Harper government, committing enough funding to operate the ELA station for the next several years. A federal NSERC grant to scientists at Trent University to study the ecosystem effects of silver nanoparticles, potentially potent biocides that are becoming ubiquitous in the environment, will allow a new ecosystem-scale experiment to begin, the first in several years.

But to use the ELA to full advantage, the ecological community must act quickly to devise and obtain funding for more of the ecosystem-scale projects that have been the ELA's legacy, and to secure reliable long-term support that is not dependent on political processes. This is a tall order that will require help from the academic community. IISD scientists presumably will not have access either to NSERC funding or to the federal departmental resources that have helped to maintain the ELA over the years.

Enviro science singled out

What has happened to the ELA is only a small part of what has been aptly described by journalist Chris Turner as "The War on Science" carried out by the Harper government. Many research stations have been closed or funding cut. Over 2,300 federal scientists have been cut. When confronted, the government's standard response has been that it is funding more science than any government before it, avoiding the issue that environmental science has been singled out for cuts.

Much of the new government funding has gone toward industry-university partnerships, in the vague hope that these will spawn new gadgets that can be flogged abroad to spur Canada's flagging manufacturing industry. In short, funding that once went to protect the public interest of Canadians has been diverted to assist industry with its research needs. Cutting environmental science, threatening environmental groups, and weakening of environmental laws such as the Fisheries Act, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the Species at Risk Act, and the Navigation Act appear to be part of a vague general plan to speed the unopposed approval of new energy projects.

One example of the poor understanding of the importance of the ELA and other environmental science by the Harper government is a statement made by on March 20, 2013, by Gary Goodyear, then-minister of state for science and technology, in an attempt to justify closing the Experimental Lakes Area. The minister declared that money could be saved by conducting small scale experiments rather than using whole lakes, and that such approaches would also protect the lakes (at the ELA) from harm. This ignores the fact that the ELA has repeatedly shown that using such small-scale experiments as a basis for environmental policy would have resulted in flawed policy that did not protect aquatic ecosystems! Recently, an independent audit of lakes used for ELA experiments showed that there was no damage.

Soviet-style muzzling

Other aspects of Harper's "war" include the muzzling of federal scientists, with the claim that departmental voices must be "harmonized." This means that changes to key environmental policies can be imposed on a gullible public without mere scientists revealing their possible flaws. One example is the modification of the Fisheries Act, once considered to be Canada's strongest environmental law. As a small "rider" to omnibus Bill C-38, the government changed the Act to protect only fish species of importance to Commercial, Recreational and Aboriginal fisheries (immediately abbreviated by fisheries bureaucrats to CRA species). Fish populations not being exploited directly for one of these three reasons are now unprotected under the new Act. Ecological principles indicate that many of these unprotected species must indirectly support the CRA species, as members of the food chain. Also, it means that any species in a location too remote to qualify as a CRA species is not protected. Protection of fish habitat was also weakened.

Several of us personally travelled to Ottawa to protest these proposed changes to a Parliamentary Committee. Native leaders and former federal fisheries ministers also testified in opposition to the proposed changes. All these experienced people were assured by Tory committee members, few of whom had any direct experience with the science or policy of fisheries management, that they were wrong: the changes would not weaken the protection of Canadian fisheries. It was as if convincing arguments against the changes simply convinced Tory politicians that they were right. Not long after the changes were made to the Fisheries Act, responsibility for enforcing the Act when new energy projects are reviewed was quietly transferred from DFO to the Alberta Energy Regulator. This organization is devoid of fisheries expertise. During all of these machinations, experienced government environmental scientists, who viewed the changes with dismay, were totally silent.

Currently, when a government scientist makes a new scientific breakthrough, he is not allowed to publish it unless the manuscript is approved by management. Management must actually sign the copyright forms that journals require before publication, whereas in other institutions, authors have that privilege. Once published, a government scientist can't speak about his work to the popular press, unless what he will say is approved by the Prime Minister's Office. This usually means that by the time the scientist's lines receive official approval, the popular media's interest has waned. Also, the approved lines are usually so inane that the scientist is embarrassed to utter them.

On several occasions, government spokespeople have accompanied their scientists to meetings, to ensure that they said nothing that would cast official government policy in a bad light. This has cast a chill reminiscent of the effect that the KGB "handlers" who accompanied Soviet scientists had on international science meetings in the Cold War era. Overall, federal scientists, many of them internationally-renowned in their fields, are not heard from on matters of environmental policy. The resulting "Silence of the Labs" has caused outrage among non-government scientists, leading hundreds of them to the protest in a "Death of Evidence" march on Parliament Hill on July 10, 2012. At least one new group, titled "Evidence for Democracy" was formed as a result.
 
(last continuation from above)

Jack-booted omnibus bills

More recently, the closure of government fisheries libraries in Dec. 2013 caused another round of outrage. With little public notice, seven of nine federal fisheries libraries were closed. The public was told that all of the valuable material was digitized, and could be obtained from the remaining two libraries, where the information would be archived. Several scientists have since found that their requests for documents could not be filled.

This action shows little understanding of how scholarship works. When one is crafting an original paper, whether it be on science or some other sort of scholarship, efficient work requires that the necessary materials must be at hand, not accessible at some unknown time in the future. Electronic access has added much to the convenience of scholarship, but it still cannot entirely replace "hard" copy. Those unconvinced by the libraries' importance should peruse this website before making up their minds.

There is growing evidence that environmental science is not the only area in which Canadian experts are under attack. Most recently, there has been widespread criticism of changes to the Elections Act that would make it more difficult for people to prove that they were qualified to vote. Experts and opposition politicians alike see the proposed changes as a thinly-veiled attempt to skew the next election to favour the Conservative Party. As with the debate over the Fisheries Act, the government has been unable to produce reasoned arguments for the changes it is proposing.

Instead, it has resorted to ad hominem attacks on the people who oppose the changes, many of them experienced and respected former officials. As journalist Andrew Coyne observed in the National Post, "That it [the Harper government] could casually dismiss the unanimous expert opposition to the [Elections Act] bill, without bothering to offer a rebuttal, shows contempt not just for those involved but for the whole concept of expertise." Indeed, Canadian experts in all fields must be on guard, including members of the Royal Society of Canada.

For a democracy to function well, experts must be heard so that citizens can make decisions on matters of importance that are based on the best information possible. That changes to the Fisheries Act, the Elections Act, and many other pieces of legislation can be forced down citizen's throats by jack-booted omnibus bills suggests that we live in a very weak democracy, if indeed Canada remains a democracy at all.
 
And the war continues... sad

http://www.cbc.ca/news/robert-buckingham-s-u-of-s-firing-a-case-of-tenuous-tenure-1.2643442

Tenure has long been seen as a virtual guarantee of lasting academic employment, but it may be under threat after the University of Saskatchewan fired a popular dean for criticizing the institution's budget cuts.
So say teachers and labour experts who believe that the dismissal of Prof. Robert Buckingham could have a chilling effect on other faculty who openly question top administrators.
"I'm actually staggered," Jim Turk, executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, said from Ottawa.
"What happened at the University of Saskatchewan is anathema to what a university is and should be. It's unprecedented and, left unchecked, the impact of this could be really chilling."
Turk said tenure doesn't necessarily translate to "having a job for life," but achieving that contractual right should protect a senior academic from being terminated without "a just and rigorous process."
Security guards escorted Buckingham out of the building on Wednesday, the same day the Saskatoon-based university stripped him of his tenured faculty position. A termination letter reasoned that by speaking out against the school's restructuring plans, Buckingham "demonstrated egregious conduct and insubordination" and was in breach of contract.
He was also banned for life from the campus.
 
[h=1]University of Saskatchewan president offers public apology to Buckingham[/h]

About face....
It's all just a big misunderstanding....

The University of Saskatchewan said today it will offer Prof. Robert Buckingham a tenured faculty position, but he won't be returning to his old job after he was fired for speaking out against the school's cuts and restructuring plans.
In a news release, the university says Buckingham won't be given back his job as head of the university's School of Public Health.
U of S president Ilene Busch-Vishniac told CBC News that Buckingham should never have been fired from his tenured position, calling the dismissal "a blunder." She said the university is looking into how it happened and those involved will be disciplined.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...askatchewan-university-after-firing-1.2644085
 
[h=1]University of Saskatchewan board fires president Ilene Busch-Vishniac[/h]http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...ires-president-ilene-busch-vishniac-1.2650301

Ilene Busch-Vishniac has been terminated without cause as president of the University of Saskatchewan.
The board of governors said Busch-Vishniac will continue in a teaching capacity at the university.
The move to let Busch-Vishniac go comes after a flurry of criticism surrounding a decision to dismiss and end the tenure of a professor who openly criticized the university's leadership. That professor, Robert Buckingham, was returned to his teaching duties after Busch-Vishniac conceded the move was a "blunder".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top