And what of them? Well I've never been shy about it. Neither have you regarding yours. Our current government has made a habit of limiting our access to government scientists and the results of the research we are paying for, they've thrown out habitat protection, they've reduced the delivery of services, they've cut thousands of scientists, and now they're closing libraries to save $443,000. They've made changes to the SRED tax credits that favour large corporations like the one I work for over smaller firms that are equally driving innovation. I think these are all mistakes. That is my politics and I've always been clear about that. I don't trust them one bit when it comes to digitizing many thousands of old volumes and reports. This is the same government that promised transparency and hasn't delivered, so why should I, or better yet we take them at their word here, especially in my case where I have first-hand knowledge of this not being the case?
This has nothing to do with brands, that seems to be your thing though. Listing Cons, Libs, Dips, Greens, I don't care about that. All I care about are the impacts of decisions, I really couldn't care less which logo is on the letterhead.
Apart from saying you don't trust this government you have not really explained how this book destruction theory of yours has escaped detection by the national media or the opposition parties.
Nor have you dealt with the departments own admission that some of these library facilities receive less than 15 physical visits a year.
But lets move on.
You certainly do make a strong point how valuable and useful these libraries are to you.
And since most of the information in these DFO libraries seems to be highly specific and research oriented I have a couple of questions.
You say you work for a large corporation, in research I assume, and I am also assuming that said corporation is both non-government owned and for profit?
And, if memory serves, this corporation makes, or researches pharmaceuticals some of which are used in the fish farming industry?
Also, as far as I know, the majority of larger international salmon farms are owned and operated, for profit, by the Norwegians?
My point is this; your research and development company is accessing a research library for the benefit of its shareholders (the majority of whom may not even be Canadian) run at Canadian taxpayer expense.
Now that seems like a good deal for your companies shareholders I must say.
How about we whip up a massive taxpayer funded research library on resource extraction and oil drilling for the befit of Syncrude?
Maybe a large research organization on how to cut costs when sourcing out cheap plastic crap for Wal-Mart's reference uses?
Where was a research library tailored to my needs when I started my company?
I think private companies should pay their own bills.
And I also think that taxpayers are better served with their tax dollars remaining in their pockets as versus subsidizing large profitable corporations.
I am not opposed to tax payer funded research for the common good of Canadians.
The Fed's pour funding into research universities for just that purpose.
And those tax payer funded universities tend to have extensive and detailed libraries.
And it's all good.
