Tightened muzzle on scientists is 'Orwellian'

Documents reveal federal researchers, whose work
is financed by taxpayers, need approval from Ottawa
before speaking with media

By Margaret Munro, Postmedia News

Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at the University of Victoria, says
the public has a right to know what scientists are discovering
and learning.

The Harper government has tightened the muzzle on federal scientists,
going so far as to control when and what they can say about floods at
the end of the last ice age.

Natural Resources Canada (NRC) scientists were told this spring they
need "pre-approval" from Minister Christian Paradis' office to speak with
journalists. Their "media lines" also need ministerial approval, say
documents obtained by Postmedia News through access-to-information
legislation.

The documents say the "new" rules went into force in March and reveal
how they apply to not only to contentious issues including the oilsands,
but benign subjects such as floods that occurred 13,000 years ago.

They also give a glimpse of how Canadians are being cut off from
scientists whose work is financed by taxpayers, critics say, and is often
of significant public interest -- be it about fish stocks, genetically
modified
crops or mercury pollution in the Athabasca River.

"It's Orwellian," says Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at the University of
Victoria. The public, he says, has a right to know what federal scientists
are discovering and learning.

Scientists at NRC, many of them planetary experts, study everything
from seabeds to melting glaciers. They have long been able to discuss
their research, until the rules changed this spring.

"We have new media interview procedures that require pre-approval
of certain types of interview requests by the minister's office," wrote
Judy Samoil, NRC's western regional communications manager, in a
March 24 e-mail to colleagues.

The policy applies to "high-profile" issues such as "climate change,
oilsands" and when "the reporter is with an international or national
media organization (such as the CBC or the Canwest paper chain),"
she wrote.

The Canwest papers are now part of Postmedia Network Inc.

Samoil later elaborated, saying "the regional communications
managers were advised of this change a couple of weeks ago."

The documents show the new rules being so broadly applied that
one scientist was not permitted to discuss a study in a major research
journal without "pre-approval" from political staff in Paradis' office.

NRC scientist Scott Dallimore coauthored the study, published in the
journal Nature on April 1, about a colossal flood that swept across
northern Canada 13,000 years ago, when massive ice dams gave
way at the end of the last ice age.

The study was considered so newsworthy that two British universities
issued releases to alert the international media.

It was, however, deemed so sensitive in Ottawa that Dallimore, who
works at NRC's laboratories outside Victoria, was told he had to wait
for clearance from the minister's office.

Dallimore tried to tell the department's communications managers
the flood study was anything but politically sensitive.

"This is a blue sky science paper," he said noting: "There are no
anticipated links to minerals, energy or anthropogenic climate change."

But the bureaucrats in Ottawa insisted. "We will have to get the
minister's office approval before going ahead with this interview,"
Patti Robson, the department's media relations manager, wrote in
an e-mail after a reporter from Postmedia News (then Canwest News
Service) approached Dallimore.

Robson asked Dallimore to provide the reporter's questions and
"the proposed responses," saying: "We will send it up to MO
(minister's office) for approval." Robson said interviews about the
flood study needed ministerial approval for two reasons: the inquiring
reporter represented a "national news outlet" and the "subject has
wide-ranging implications."

The documents show several communications managers, policy
advisers, political staff and senior officials were involved drafting
and vetting "media lines" on the ancient flood study.

Dallimore finally got clearance to talk to reporters from Margaux
Stastny, director of communication in Paradis' office, on March 31,
a week after NRC communications branch was told the study was
appearing in Nature, and two days after reporters began
approaching Dallimore for interviews.

By then, the reporters' deadlines had passed and they had already
completed their stories about the ancient flood. Canwest News
Service, CBC, ABC, Reuters and other organizations based their
reports on interviews with co-authors of the study from universities
outside Canada that responded to interview requests promptly.

This effectively "muzzled" Dallimore by not allowing him to do
timely interviews, says Weaver, at the University of Victoria, who
says the incident shows how "ridiculous" the situation has got in
Ottawa.

"If you can't get access to a nice, feel-good science story about
flooding at the end of last glaciation, can you imagine trying to get
access to scientists with information about cadmium and mercury
in the Athabasca River? Absolutely impossible," says Weaver, in
reference to growing controversy over contaminants downstream
from Alberta's oilsands.

Environment Canada and Health Canada now tightly control media
access to researchers and orchestrate interviews that are approved.

Environment Canada has even produced "media lines" for federal
scientists to stick to when discussing climate studies they have
coauthored with Weaver and are based on research paid for
through his university grants.

"There is no question that there is an orchestrated campaign at the
federal level to make sure that their scientists can't communicate to
the public about what they do," says Weaver, adding that the
crackdown is seriously undermining morale in federal labs. "Science
is about generating new knowledge and communicating it to others."

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun