Archives for: Silencing Scientists

think again.

Suzuki is among the few brave enough and powerful enough in our Country to get the word across. We are lucky to have such a man in our midst. Many Canadians continue to be ignorant to the problems we are facing for the future. We need Scientists like Suzuki to remain vocal and in the spotlight if we want to have any hope of continuing to live life the way we do today.

Royal Report on GMO’s

Royal Report: Elements of Precaution: Recommendations for the Regulation of Food Biotechnology in Canada

Way back in 2001 Health Canada, Environment Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency commissioned this report. The report warns about the dangers of GMO.

It demonstrates how the government of the day forced these agencies to promote GMO in the interests of keeping jobs in Canada.

Absolutely nothing has changed since 2001.

climate and tar sands

When Northern Canada starts experiencing the warmest temperatures it’s seen in at least 120,000 years, you’d think that might cause a few smart people to pay attention.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/eastern-arctic-temperatures-likely-at-120-000-year-high-1.2251709

But let’s not let little details like a melting arctic get in the way of Canada’s now seven year long war on science.

http://thetyee.ca/Books/2013/11/01/War-on-Science-Review/

Developing the Tar Sands means game over for the climate. That should really end the discussion about them right there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-climate.html?_r=0

Tailings ponds at the Tar Sands are leaking four billion litres of contaminated water a year into local watersheds.

http://www2.macleans.ca/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/tailingsreport_finaldec8.pdf

And that’s only part of a distressing list of environmental and health impacts of the project.

http://oilsandstruth.org/

But Canada’s federal government doesn’t want its own citizens to know about the environmental impacts of the project, which is why scientists studying tar sands environmental impacts are also muzzled.

http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/08/stephen-harper-hates-science-federal-government-muzzles-scientists-protect-tar-sands-reputation

Of course, Canada muzzles all of its scientists. Not real fans of science or evidence, the Harper government.

http://www.canada.com/Muzzling+federal+scientists+called+threat+democracy/7990412/story.html

Scientists can’t even speak out when public health and safety are at risk.

http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/most-federal-scientists-feel-they-cant-speak-out-even-if-public-health-safety-risk-says-1843090.htm

And the Canadian Natural Resources minister takes his cues and talking points from the industry directly.

http://www.timescolonist.com/business/natural-resources-minister-aligned-priorities-with-pipeline-lobby-documents-1.86028

And the few limited environmental protections that still theoretically exist to reign in the industry aren’t even enforced. Records indicate that there were over 4,000 “alleged contraventions” – possible violations of environmental regulations that have not been proven in court – in the Canadian Tar Sands since 1996. According to enforcement reports, in that same time period the ministry took only 37 actions to enforce those regulations. Ah, the joys of industry self reporting.

http://globalforestwatch.ca/pubs/2013Releases/03PollutionIncidents/Envir_Incidents_July-22-2013.pdf

The Canadian bitumen industry is also putting Canada on a dangerous economic trajectory as well. This study shows that the current bitumen path is creating the double threat: a “staples trap,” whereby the faster Canada exports its bitumen, the less diversified, productive and resilient the economy becomes;” and a “carbon trap,” which locks Canada into an carbon dependent development path, making the costs of future climate adaptation much more difficult. It presents a wealth of empirical data indicating the negative side effects of unregulated bitumen developments for Canada’s trade, exchange rate, productivity, and income distribution performance and proposes a two-track approach to steer away from the “bitumen cliff.”

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National%20Office/2013/02/Bitumen%20Cliff.pdf

Denial of scientific evidence in determining policy is not leadership, it’s insanity.