Harper's Ministry of Disinformation Getting Noticed

[tay]

Canadian federal research deal 'potentially muzzles' U.S. scientists





The Canadian government is requiring foreign researchers who collaborate with federal scientists to sign agreements that could potentially muzzle them, a U.S. scientist says.

Andreas Muenchow, a physical oceanographer at the University of Delaware, collaborates with Canadian government scientists on Arctic research. On his blog last week, he posted his concerns about the new language in a research agreement that the Canadian government is asking him to sign.

"I believe this is a disturbing political climate change," Muenchow wrote. "I feel that it threatens my academic freedom and potentially muzzles my ability to publish data and interpretation and talk timely on science issues of potential public interest without government interference."

Muenchow posted excerpts from the agreement that stated: "Any technology, data, or other information of any kind related to or arising from the project (collectively “information”) shall be deemed confidential and neither party may release any such Information to others in any way whatsoever without the prior written authorization of the other party."

He pointed out that it was substantially different from a 2003 Canadian government agreement that said, "Subject to the 'Access to Information and Privacy Acts', project data and any other project-related information shall be freely available to all parties to this agreement and may be used, disseminated or published, by any party, and any time."

"The new draft language is excessively restrictive and potentially projects Canadian government control onto me and those I work for and with," Muenchow wrote.

Muenchow said he is trying to negotiate with the Canadian government to change the language of the agreement.

Jeffrey Hutchings, a fisheries scientist at Dalhousie University, said Canadian federal scientists have been barred from speaking to the media unless their "media lines" have received ministerial approval.

"But to have international scientists working on international projects express the concern that their freedom to express the results of their work might be hindered by policy implications or managerial or political concerns, is a first," he told As It Happens Thursday.

"And what this will lead to, almost inevitably, is a situation where international scientists will be less likely to work with Canadian government scientists."

Within Canada, he added, academic scientists might be less likely to work with government scientists.

"That's a very bad thing for society," he said, because it's the government scientists who are most knowledgeable about the government policies and management programs that could be affected by findings made in the course of scientific research.

Kevin Stringer, assistant deputy minister on ecosystems and ocean sciences at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, said the reason the federal government has made the changes to its agreements with scientists in other countries is "to ensure that we're looking after intellectual property."

When asked whether the policy was about "controlling the message," Stringer responded that the government has an objective "of getting independent science into the public domain."


Canadian federal research deal 'potentially muzzles' U.S. scientists - Technology & Science - CBC News

 

[damngrumpy]

That is not all many Canadians are not happy with the Jobs Plan adds either.
The government has spent three hundred thousand on surveys to determine
how effective they are and found a majority are not impressed calling them a
waste of money and of little value.
I think we will see more and more dissatisfaction with this government as people
start looking behind the curtain to see what is not there. I am not a Liberal but
I see history at work perhaps repeating itself as young Trudeau gains steam.
The poor, the women and the youth could well make him the Prime Minister.

 

[Angstrom]

That is not all many Canadians are not happy with the Jobs Plan adds either.
The government has spent three hundred thousand on surveys to determine
how effective they are and found a majority are not impressed calling them a
waste of money and of little value.
I think we will see more and more dissatisfaction with this government as people
start looking behind the curtain to see what is not there. I am not a Liberal but
I see history at work perhaps repeating itself as young Trudeau gains steam.
The poor, the women and the youth could well make him the Prime Minister.

They been muzzling for over 10+ years. As long as the left is devided, Harper will win.

 

[Trex]

Researchers generally tend to be normal folks just like the rest of us wandering around in the malls and burbs.
Politically and socially researchers are mostly mainstream, a few tend to be cutting edge brilliant and a small few are somewhat strange nutbars.
If you work in the private sector in any area that may bring to light new or unknown issues you probably are signing a lock tight non-disclosure agreement.
Researchers and engineers in the private sector are completely used to this decades old practice.
You can whistle blow to the media if you believe you are aware or peripherally involved in illegal or immoral practices .
Why would it be any different for public sector researchers employed at taxpayer expense by the government?
The thought of every less than successful public service tech, secretary or unsatisfied researcher howling to the media about any imagined slight or personal political issue boggles the mind.
Whistle blowing OK.
The rest not so much.
If you have issues with your job, quit.
Then you can hold press conferences to your hearts content

 

[Dixie Cup]

I'm not so sure this is bad at all. Science has become so political and the hatred for the conservatives so blatant, that I don't blame the government for putting a leash on some of these guys. When science starts producing facts that are consistant and proveable and not "politically motivated" then perhaps the leash can be loosened.

I personally don't want the Al Gore's of the world determining what my government should be doing in whatever segment they represent that will affect Canadians for many years down the road. The scare tactics that are being used are dispicable and have no place in public policy.

JMHO

 

[The Old Medic]

Some portions of the Canadian government have been obsessed with secrecy for many, many years now. Just look at "Statistics Canada", and their position on the release of Census data, 90 years AFTER it is taken. They do not want ANY information released at all.

Now, each person has to agree to having their particular information released, at the time of the census, even though that information won't be available to researchers for 90 years!

Talk about carrying "secrecy" too far, that agency is doing it in spades!

 

[FiveParadox]

Some portions of the Canadian government have been obsessed with secrecy for many, many years now. Just look at "Statistics Canada", and their position on the release of Census data, 90 years AFTER it is taken. They do not want ANY information released at all.

Now, each person has to agree to having their particular information released, at the time of the census, even though that information won't be available to researchers for 90 years!

Talk about carrying "secrecy" too far, that agency is doing it in spades!

Is this supposed to be sarcastic?

Statistics Canada does not set the rules for the confidentiality and sensitivity of its data collection and storage; these rules are established in section 18.1(2) of the Statistics Act by the Parliament of Canada.

 

[Liberalman]

That's nothing in a couple of weeks Canada will announce their very own office of religious freedoms this means government interference in the docterins of the churches

 

[taxslave]

That's nothing in a couple of weeks Canada will announce their very own office of religious freedoms this means government interference in the docterins of the churches

Then their first order of business is to ensure that our government is kept free from religious influence.

 

[captain morgan]

The Canadian government is requiring foreign researchers who collaborate with federal scientists to sign agreements that could potentially muzzle them, a U.S. scientist says.

The 'agreement' is a Confidentiality Agreement. They are standard agreements that protect proprietary information.

There is nothing sinister about this other than tay's belief that it is signed under the Harper gvt

 

[taxslave]

The Canadian government is requiring foreign researchers who collaborate with federal scientists to sign agreements that could potentially muzzle them, a U.S. scientist says.

The 'agreement' is a Confidentiality Agreement. They are standard agreements that protect proprietary information.

There is nothing sinister about this other than tay's belief that it is signed under the Harper gvt

Now you went and ruined another perfectly good conspiracy theory.

 

[captain morgan]

Now you went and ruined another perfectly good conspiracy theory.

Sorry bud.... Next time, PM me and I'll play along. Maybe we can get the usual suspects all in a fever

 

[FiveParadox]

I am not sure that it is so simple, captain morgan.

Research and scholarship around technological development really should be an international collaborative effort to improve conditions for people everywhere. All parties to that research and scholarship should be free to use what they have learned to enhance other projects and research. Science is about advancement, and it seems that the new language in the confidentiality agreement stands in the way of research and scholarship.

This is a marked change in how Her Majesty's Government for Canada administers scientific research. Previously, under Her Majesty's former Government led by the Liberal Party of Canada, discoveries could be "used, disseminated, or published, by any party, at any time." This was a much more open and transparent approach and attitude toward science, and in tremendous contrast to the new policy of non-disclosure in research.

This present Government of Canada has demonstrated a strange contempt for the scientific community, and this is irrefutable. Take, as only an example, the requirement that scientists at Environment Canada refer to the Government as "Canada's New Government" or the "Harper Government." There is a clear trend of limiting the freedom of scientific research and scholarship, and in fact, a trend of politicising the work that Government of Canada employees used to be expected to carry out in a non-partisan way.

 

[captain morgan]

Hello 5P... The important word in your initial statement is "should"...

At present, there are far more cooperative relationships between national gvts and the private sector than there are international collaborative efforts between governments.

In accepting the private sector participants (cash and expertise), the gvt has to trade-off certain things, one of which are proprietary rights, especially as it relates to opportunities for future revenues (profit and tax).

'Tis the way of the world I'm afraid

 

[darkbeaver]

Hello 5P... The important word in your initial statement is "should"...

At present, there are far more cooperative relationships between national gvts and the private sector than there are international collaborative efforts between governments.

In accepting the private sector participants (cash and expertise), the gvt has to trade-off certain things, one of which are proprietary rights, especially as it relates to opportunities for future revenues (profit and tax).

'Tis the way of the world I'm afraid

"Cooperative relationships" let me translate that for you, Conspiracy.

 

[captain morgan]

 

[Tonington]

Intellectual property is a red herring. The NRC produces IP for Canada. A DFO scientist studying ecology does not. This is ludicrous. If there is any IP involved at all, then the scientists wouldn't be publishing results in journals either, as that destroys IP claims. This is more of the Harper government trying to control the message. That is all that is going on here. Agreements surrounding IP are not new; calling IP anything a government scientist produces is.

Is this supposed to be sarcastic?

Statistics Canada does not set the rules for the confidentiality and sensitivity of its data collection and storage; these rules are established in section 18.1(2) of the Statistics Act by the Parliament of Canada.

And publishing personal data is a far cry different than a DFO division manager auditing manuscripts intended for publication to ensure that the findings are consistent with DFO policy.

Anyone want a clear example of why this is bad? I'm in the aquaculture health field. There are a number of questions that come up with respect to DFO managing aquaculture and fisheries, and being the responsible lead agency when it comes to stock assessment and stock health. Now imagine that DFO scientists work with counterparts in the US to determine what is driving the loss of salmon stocks along the Pacific coast, from California all the way up to Alaska. Imagine that they find an impact from fish farming. DFO has to approve the manuscript first, but the implications are that DFO policy has been too lax, and they have failed their role as stewards.

There is one reason for DFO to suppress a finding like that, for the political aspects. But that is not defensible. When politics starts managing empirical findings of fact in a scientific exercise, then there is a big problem. Do we really need a Ministry deciding truth? Hell phucking NO. That is what subject matter experts are for.

The above hypothetical could come to light, and that would be disappointing to me. But science should never be constrained because the truths found are uncomfortable, or because the results are different than those we hope for. Scientific findings are one tool used to evaluate risk, and being willfully blind to risk is willfully stupid.

Now anyone who thinks this is a good idea, and defensible, try to objectively think about this. You are essentially contributing to the ideas George Orwell described.

 

[Niflmir]

As the USA moves to make any public research publicly available because they rightly see publicly funded science as part of the public trust, Canada moves to lock up public research so that only the politically expedient truths are available to the public. Simultaneously, all NASA data becomes public automatically after 2-3 years (and this is only to give a 2-3 head start to American institutes). This should be a national shame.

Comparing this with private industry really misses the point. One cannot have a free and democratic society when the research that the government funds to answer important questions is covered up if the government doesn't get the answer it is looking for. We taxpayers who pay for the science should see the results. As opposed to signing confidentiality agreements, they should be signing forced disclosure agreements.

I guess some people romanticize dictatorial control.

 

[taxslave]

My information was that the whole point of confidentiality agreements was to prevent someone on a mission from cherry picking data to support their own ends making noises in the media. Especially some of the anti fish farm crowd. We all know that it takes a whole lot more time and money to prove that someone told a lie than to prevent it in the first place. This way when they BS the gullible media there are legal ramifications.

 

[captain morgan]

Intellectual property is a red herring. The NRC produces IP for Canada. A DFO scientist studying ecology does not. This is ludicrous. If there is any IP involved at all, then the scientists wouldn't be publishing results in journals either, as that destroys IP claims. This is more of the Harper government trying to control the message. That is all that is going on here. Agreements surrounding IP are not new; calling IP anything a government scientist produces is.

The NRC (and their provincial affiliates) work closely with private sector groups; and make no mistake, the outside group pays for the services provided - they are the client. Further, it is the client that details the nature of the 'problem' to be resolved and the goals sought.

But, whether or not private companies are involved or not is not the underlying issue here. Whether it's the gvt or a private entity that engages the work, the staff that are hired to do the research - they are a service provider and the research they are providing is the sole property of the payor.

If Andreas Muenchow (the physical oceanographer at the University of Delaware) wants ownership of that data/research for their own ends, the solution is simple - put up the cash to fund the research themselves and they can do whatever they want with the information