THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT’S WAR ON FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
Sackville Post Tribune
A democracy is a political system in which the supreme power lies with a body of citizens who elect people to represent them. People and groups in a democratic society enjoy freedom of speech and the right to publicly communicate ideas and opinions (with the exception of expressions of hate that are gender based or racist in nature).
A dramatic drop in media coverage on climate change science has resulted from the Federal Government's introduction of new rules in 2007 aimed at controlling the content and tenor of interviews between government scientists and journalists.
A spokesperson for the Conservatives confirmed that meteorologists will not be allowed to speak publicly on climate change at all; the reason they give is that meteorologists don't have qualifications in the science of climate change. For example, they can comment on the frequency of extreme weather, but not on how they feel climate change affects global warming.
Environment Canada climatologists are considered qualified to address issues on climate change, but under this "communications policy" they must get permission from government officials before giving interviews to journalists about the severity of climate change, with the content of their message undergoing scrutiny as well.
As a result scientists are inhibited from speaking freely, which is their right in a democratic society. This has been confirmed in a survey which indicates that 90% of government employees feel that they can't speak freely and 24% confirming that they have been required to exclude or alter information beforehand.
These restrictions have been an effective way of prohibiting information on the real causes of climate change, and the effects it will have in the future, from coming to light in Canada. A leaked Environment Canada analysis found that there had been an 80% drop in media coverage on climate change issues since the communications policy was put in place. "Many climate change scientists are recognized experts in their field, having received media training and have successfully carried out media interviews for many years", said the document leaked by an unnamed employee. This same analysis noted that four prominent scientists who regularly addressed climate change issues appeared in twelve newspaper clippings in 2008, compared with 99 clippings in 2007, the year that the new regulations were proposed.
The Climate Change Network that led an investigation into the muzzling of scientists feels that this approach will affect funding, appointments to science panels and communication on climate change research in Canada.
"This all points to the government trying to undermine climate change research. It goes against their public statements that they are committed to research and that they believe in the fundamentals of climate science".
Another organization, The Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science, is similarly concerned. This group of scientists, considered to be the leading agency for global warming research in Canadian Universities, has been denied funding crucial to their ability to continue to educate through the publishing of scientific research papers. This foundation has funded nearly 200 research projects that have led to breakthroughs in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, transforming the way both government and private industry operate.
The Conservative Government, a fierce supporter of tar sands development, has created this relatively recent hostile environment to impede investigative journalism critical of the administration. The tar sands are the third largest oil reserve in the world. Production is increasing so rapidly that capital investments are predicted to reach $218 billion over the next 25 years. Backward progress like this is antithetical to the new conventional wisdom that we need to keep it in the ground.
Climate change is one of the biggest reasons that the tar sands are so controversial. This oil with its thick consistency requires unconventional methods for extraction. These methods are more carbon intensive in that they emit more greenhouse gases than normal drilling. Increased tar sands production has resulted in Canada's energy industry becoming the largest producer of greenhouse gases in the country, edging out transportation for the first time.
While people often think of Canada as an environmentally friendly country, our cities are energy hogs and we are in the top ten in terms of carbon emissions per capita, just a hop, skip behind the U.S.
The U.S., however, has a population 10x that of Canada, and there is no indication that the government of this very big country with a comparatively small population, with a very lucrative, but a very dirty oil industry, has any intention of passing legislation to reduce carbon emissions any time soon.
"That such pygmies should cast such long shadows only shows how late in the day it has become", Irwin Chargraff, Biochemist
These days the tar sands are getting a lot of bad press; from people of note, climate scientists and environmental journalists both inside and outside Canada. And now we have a stunning unanimous decision by the Supreme Court that First Nations people will have the opportunity to claim title to their ancestral lands. The Federal and Provincial governments will no longer have a duty to consult, but rather an obligation to win consent.
The Federal Government and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers now officially consider the term "tar sands" to be a colloquialism, no longer acceptable in any serious dialogue about Alberta's number one export. Foreign journalists, Alberta bound, may find themselves confronted at Customs by belligerent officials who insist that it is the oil sands they will be visiting, not the tar sands. And don't dally, for heaven's sake, because the Feds will most likely issue an official document limiting the visit to a week or less. Those who use the term tar sands, both environmentalists and journalists alike, are now the enemy.
From what I have read, a visit to the tar sands must be a solemnly awesome experience. Enormous smokestacks dominate the landscape with large black deserts sitting next to ponds of chemical waste. There is little evidence of the nearby boreal forest that was.
Leaks from the tailing ponds leech into the Athabasca River and flow downstream to various native communities. There are corresponding reports of a consistent rise in cancer rates in these areas over the last twenty years.
The high carbon intensity of tar sands extraction and the likelihood that these sites will never be reclaimed and returned to their natural state are of great concern despite television images to the contrary from the oil industry.
The organization Canadian Journalists for Free Expression issues a report card annually reviewing freedom of information in Canada. The relevant concerns here are two-fold; one is the increased amount of bureaucracy journalists have to negotiate to get at significant information, the other is the continuing cuts to the funding of scientific research. The report card gave a failing grade to Canada's Access to Information system, as well, noting the long delays in the time it takes to get a response and the fact that much of the information is heavily censored.
The government has also been working to dismantle environmental groups by spying on them, cutting their funds and otherwise disrupting their efforts.
For example, the majority Conservative Government has the CRA targeting environmental groups for possible abuses of their non-profit charitable status. Former Minister Joe Oliver then stating; "There are environmentalists and other radical groups that would seek to block the opportunity to diversify our trade. They seek to exploit every loophole they can find, to ensure that delay kills good projects."
As well documents obtained by the Guardian in February of 2014 revealed that both the RCMP and CSIS view environmental activist protest as "forms of attack" and depict those involved as national security threats.
Journalists, reporters and activists say that they experience an egregious amount of defensiveness, spitefulness and intimidation that prevents them from doing their job effectively. Andrew Nikiforuk, an award winning journalist who has been reporting critically about the oil and gas industry for twenty years refers to current politicians and bureaucrats as a "government of thugs". He was slandered and libeled by members of Canada's Energy Resources Conservation Board when they tried to prevent the publication of his 2010 book ,"Tar Sands", claiming he made factual errors. Nikiforuk fought the claims, published the book and eventually won the Society of Environmental Journalist's Rachel Carson Book Award.
As for the Alberta government, documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation found that they employ 214 communications professionals at a cost of $21 million per year to run down stories critical of the industry. This number (214) far outstrips the number of reporters that cover a range of government departments like health, education and law enforcement, none of whom are dedicated to attacking journalists.
Thus far this strategy seems to be working, environmental issues about leaking tailing ponds and bitumen waste, toxic contaminants leeching into waterways and the impact of excess sulfur produced are perceived by environmental journalists as being under-reported.
The hostility towards environmental activists, however, has been in the public eye lately which has resulted, surprisingly, in record breaking donations to environmental groups from average citizens, a clear sign that Canadians support protecting the environment from the effects of tar sands development.
Far from being a disincentive for the public to support activism, the government's paranoid behavior is becoming a reason for the public to view the expansion of the tar sands, rightfully, as the most harmful resource development in the country.
Donna Mclellan for the
Tantramar Alliance Against Hydro-Fracking
No comments:
Post a Comment