A Glaring Contrast

It is refreshing to see that, unlike in Canada where government scientists cannot speak about climate change, American government employees are not afraid to draw some harsh correlations between it and environmental destruction.

While Harper Fiddles, Canada Burns

There have been so many developments on the climate front of late that, collectively, give us a pretty stark warning and yet the media, the public and our political leadership are tuning out. We seem to be culturally embracing a sort of Andean fatalism that seems to precede abrupt civilizational decline. Perhaps we’re hampered by the fact that it’s a moving target that repeatedly exceeds our ‘worst case scenarios’. Far from being pessimists we constantly underestimate the onset of climate change even as severe events increase in frequency, intensity and duration. Maybe that’s why Harper (and his rivals) aren’t coming forward with any meaningful responses. They’re all avowed fossil fuelers and, having staked out that turf, any significant reduction in Canada’s GHG emissions would have to be borne by every other sector of the economy and the Canadian people. Who would risk the public wrath when pretending to act and doing nothing remains an option? There’s a rank and dangerous cowardice that runs through the Conservatives, the Liberals and the New Democrats alike. God save the Queen. The Canadian people can fend for themselves.


The other day came news of a mysterious crater in Siberia that Russian scientists determined was caused, not by a meteorite, but by an eruption of subsurface gas released by thawing permafrost – a global warming event. We’ve known for several years that the ancient permafrost that girds the high north was “perma” no more. The tundra was drying out, catching fire, and exposing the permafrost below that it once shielded. The permafrost was a sink for massive quantities of the potent greenhouse gas, methane, or, as the energy industry calls it, natural gas.

On the heels of the Russian crater story comes a report from Climate Central about fires spreading unchecked across the Northwest Territories.

“The amount of acres burned in the Northwest Territories is six times greater than the 25-year average to-date according to data from the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Center.

“Boreal forests like those in the Northwest Territories are burning at rates "unprecedented" in the past 10,000 years according to the authors of a study put out last year. The northern reaches of the globe are warming at twice the rate as areas closer to the equator, and those hotter conditions are contributing to more widespread burns.

“The combined boreal forests of Canada, Europe, Russia and Alaska, account for 30 percent of the world’s carbon stored in land, carbon that's taken up to centuries to store. Forest fires like those currently raging in the Northwest Territories, as well as ones in 2012 and 2013 in Russia, can release that stored carbon into the atmosphere and contribute to global warming. Warmer temperatures can in turn create a feedback loop, priming forests for wildfires that release more carbon into the atmosphere and cause more warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's landmark climate report released earlier this year indicates that for every 1.8°F rise in temperatures, wildfire activity is expected to double.”

The Climate Central report indicates that the massive amounts of airborne soot from these forest and tundra fires could accelerate the melting of the Greenland ice sheet far faster than we had ever imagined, perhaps by the end of this century. Ice, being white, reflects most solar energy back into space. Soot, being black, absorbs the solar energy and it passes into the ice beneath, causing melting. The melt run-off should wash away the soot except that these fires just keep adding more soot. And, of course, the fires that generate the soot also release ever more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. Forest fires release the CO2 from the trees. Tundra fires release CO2 and expose the permafrost below that releases methane.

As for the Greenland ice sheet and the prospect of losing all or most of it by the end of this century, here’s what you need to bear in mind. When that ice sheet is gone, and it will eventually, it will create 23-feet of sea level rise. You’ve probably seen plenty of graphics of what three or four feet of sea level rise will mean around the world. The reality is that we tend to build our major cities where there’s navigable water. In Canada that’s Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. With Lake Ontario at 75 metres above sea level, Toronto should be safe from inundation but Montreal, on the St. Lawrence and at 6 metres is vulnerable and, as for Vancouver, well let’s just say that False Creek, Coal Harbour and Burrard Inlet will be a whole lot bigger and the Lower Mainland an awful lot smaller.

So, with the prospect of runaway climate change steadily worsening, with major population centres and critical infrastructure at increasing risk, surely this must be at the very top of our Lord and Master’s priority list, right? What’s that, no? His priority is flogging as much of the world’s highest-carbon oil as quickly as he can push through the pipelines and supertanker ports to carry it, really? Surely the opposition parties are going to shut this down as soon as the voting public gives Harper the boot, right? Wrong? Oh dear. Maybe it’s time to caulk the dinghy.


MoS, the Disaffected Lib.

Has Harper Betrayed The West? A Mound Of Sound Guest Post

Recent summer flooding across southern Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba seems to be bringing the reality of climate change home to the people of the prairies and it’s drawing some unwelcome attention to prime minister Harper.

Look, it was bound to happen. You can’t have once-a-century weather disasters arriving every two or three years for very long before even the doubters stop listening to climate change deniers. That, from a glance at some prairie newspapers, seems to be happening at the moment. Postmedia science scribe, Margaret Munro, writes that these summer floods are the new reality for much of western Canada. Reginal Leader-Post columnist, Murray Mandryk, writes that Saskatchewan has to catch up to the fact of climate change.

“But don’t take my word for it. Ask someone like hydrologist John Pomeroy – Canadian Research Chair for Water Resources and Climate Change at the University of Saskatchewan – who has studied the issue for years, including intensive study of the drainage of Smith Creek, which flows near Langenburg along the Manitoba-Saskatchewan border.

“’We have to stop doing what we are doing,’ Pomeroy said in an interview from Alberta, where he is currently studying the impact of mountain run-off into the South Saskatchewan River.

“’Things are happening and they are happening much faster than anyone imagined.’”

Munro highlighted Dr. Pomeroy’s remarks about how the pro-oil/anti-science Harper government has gutted federal hydrology, climate and flood management programmes, leaving the provinces to fend for themselves.

“By July, Smith Creek is usually ‘bone dry.’ Last week it hit a new high as 24.5 cubic metres of water a second roared down the stream.

“[Pomeroy] says heavy winter snow had saturated the soil, which was made even wetter by unusually heavy spring rains. Then the frontal system came up from the US, stalled over southeast Saskatchewan in late June, ‘and pushed it over the top.’ The system dropped more than 150 millimetres of rain in a few days – almost as much rain as normally falls in southeast Saskatchewan all year.

“He says the change in the past decade has been remarkable.

“’Everything we know about hydrology of the prairie appears to be different,’ he says. ‘We never have saturated spongy soils with flow running off farmers’ fields in the midsummer. Never.’

“The situation calls out for a national Canadian strategy and program to improve flood prediction and water management, Pomeroy says, pointing to the US which has more comprehensive systems.

“He says recent cutbacks and, in some cases, the ‘gutting’ of federal hydrology, climate and flood management programs have left the country ill-prepared.

“When it comes to the flood forecasting problem, he says, ‘every province is left on its own, with some doing better than others.’”

Coastal British Columbians know how Harper has betrayed us and left our environment defenceless. Harper has moved the west coast oil spill emergency centre to Montreal. He has shut down many of our Coast Guard stations. He has axed entire departments of Fisheries and Oceans once responsible for monitoring our coastal waters and the health of our marine species. He has stripped navigation regulations and done everything asked of him to facilitate hazardous oil tanker traffic. To us, the fact that Harper has gutted federal hydrology and flood management programmes, leaving the prairie provinces defenceless. is old hat. This is simply another illustration of Harper’s rank ideology at work in betraying the West for the sake of Big Oil only this time it’s Harper’s natural constituents caught in the crosshairs.

Reality is catching up with Harper and even the usually reliable, centre-right media are beginning to speak out. Doubters and deniers are beginning to sound utterly unconvincing, shrill, desperate. Pomeroy might have coined a suitable epitaph for Harper’s conservatism when he said, “Things are happening and they are happening much faster than anyone imagined.”

Calling Stephen Harper

It is always heartening when young people get involved in issues that should matter to everyone:

Thomas Walkom Misses The Mark

One of the reasons I subscribe to The Toronto Star is the quality of its columnists. Tim Harper, Martin Regg Cohn, Thomas Walkom, Heather Mallick, etc. rarely disappoint. However, no one is perfect, and today's column by Walkom is not up to his usual critical standards.

Entitled Conservatives’ downfall could be Stephen Harper’s dismissive tone, the piece seems to suggest that if Harper were nicer, people wouldn't perceive his government in nearly as bad a light as they do:

When the obituary is finally written on Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government, it is the tone that will stand out.

Most of his actions will not. With some notable exceptions (such as gutting environmental regulations), they have not been extreme.

As illustration of the regime's mean-spirited nature, he cites the increasingly antagonistic and divisive tone of Immigration Minister Chris Alexander, (a once well-regarded foreign diplomat whose moral decline since joining the cabinet has been precipitous, egregious and Dorian-Gray like). Responding to criticism of his bill that would give the government the power to strip citizenship away from native-born Canadians who hold dual citizenship, Alexander called into question former prime minister Pierre Trudeau, who, he said, had eliminated treason as grounds for citizenship revocation “at a time when the Liberal Party was playing footsie with Moscow.”

To be sure, the tone of the regime has been relentlessly harsh toward all who question or oppose its policies. It is on daily display during Question Period, where civility and respect were long ago replaced by sneering derision, not only for opposition members, but also for the institution of Parliament and its officers. Well-documented in the blogosphere, such debasement, I have opined in the past, has been intentional so as to discourage an already discouraged electorate from political participation.

Voter alienation is one of the highest costs we are paying with this cabal, but of course, it has wrought much destruction in so many other areas as well.

A very brief overview will amply underscore some of the things Walkom has blithely overlooked:

- a war on science, resulting in the muzzling of scientists and dismantling of world-class research

- an antipathy toward climate change mitigation. As we saw last weak, Harper and Australia's Tony Abbott are true soul mates in this domain.

- the starving of the beast. Every measure to reduce federal revenues, be they through direct cutting of taxes, expansion of Tax-Free Savings Accounts, income-splitting, etc. is consistent with the conservatism espoused by Harperites. The less money there is, the less 'social engineering', as they would call it, the federal government can do. This kind of economic Darwinism, of course, ignores the needs of the many while rewarding and encouraging the indulges of the few.

- harsh mandatory sentencing in a time of declining crime rates.

- the loss of Canada's international recognition as an honest broker. The government's unflinching support of Israel in all matters, and its increasing contempt for bodies like the U.N., betray long-standing traditions that served us and the world so well.

- contempt for privacy. Only now are we waking up to the realization of widespread domestic surveillance sanctioned by the regime, including warrantless requests for information from our ISPs.

Obviously, I have touched on but a few of shortcomings of the current regime. To be fair to Walkom, no one column could be expected to address them. But suggesting the main problem for the government is one of tone does seem to woefully underestimate the damage done by this hateful regime.

On Harper's Hateful Hypocricsy

There is little doubt that Alana Westwood will now be joining that ever-growing pantheon of proud Canadians inscribed on Harper's Enemies List. The PhD Candidate at Dalhousie University and volunteer coordinator at Evidence for Democracy has written a fine piece in today's Toronto Star entitled Stephen Harper’s blatant hypocrisy on science which merits reading.

Her starting point is what she describes as a rare one-on-one interview this past Thursday with the CBC (surely an act of hypocrisy in itself, given his abiding contempt for and constant cost-cutting of the public broadcaster). Out of deference to those delicately constituted, I shall provide no link to the interview - that are certain things no one should have to subject him or herself to, and watching Dear Leader is one of them, in my view. From past exposure, I know that I always have, shall we say, a Pavlovian response to him that is not pleasant to behold.

During said interview, in which Harper espoused his enthusiasm for vaccines, he chided Canadians, “Don’t indulge your theories; think of your children and listen to the experts.”

He added, for good effect, that “it’s a tragedy when people start to go off on their own theories and not listen to scientific evidence.”

The irony, as she calls it, is not lost on Ms. Westwood:

The PM’s sudden endorsement of science is a peculiar turn in the wake of systemic and sustained affronts to Canadian scientists, statisticians and record keepers. Just recently, we have seen announcements of cuts to research funding for the Department of Justice, massive closures of libraries (including consolidation and loss of collections from Health Canada) and even restrictions on the ability of meteorologists to say the words “climate change.”

She goes on to enumerate other examples of Harper's manifest hypocrisy and unfitness to lead the country:

- over 2,000 federal scientists dismissed since 2009

- the cut/closure of about 200 scientific research and monitoring institutions, many dealing with issues of monitoring food safety, environmental contaminants and other domains directly affecting the health of Canadians.

While Harper apparently extolled the crucial role of good baseline data during the interview, Westwood reminds us of this inconsistent and inconvenient truth:

How long after the axing of the mandatory long-form census will Canada hit the wall? From the drastically insufficient national household survey, we won’t even have appropriate baseline data about the basic demographics of our own country to plan hospital locations.

And of course, as has been noted previously, the avidity with which the Harper regime muzzles its scientists is behaviour worthy only of a third-world martinent.

To be sure, none of this is new or shocking to those of us who follow the downward trajectory of our country. It is only the latest reminder of the urgency with which each of us must convey, in whatever means are at our disposal, the truth of this autocratic regime so that as many as possbile are as engaged as possible, in 2015.

Forecast: Very Cloudy Indeed

Mike de Sousa is a former Post Media reporter now operating his own website continuing his investigative work into energy and the environment. He is well-worth paying attention to.

His latest piece, Government’s weather forecasters shouldn’t discuss climate change, says Environment Canada, while perhaps not breaking any new ground, is a potent reminder of how inimical the Harper regime is to science as it continues to ignore climate change in its mad pursuit of policies promoting and facilitating tarsands' extraction.

Succinctly expressed, Environment Canada doesn't permit its meteorologists to comment on climate change because it lacks 'expertise':

“Environment Canada scientists speak to their area of expertise,” said spokesman Mark Johnson in an email. “For example, our Weather Preparedness Meteorologists are experts in their field of severe weather and speak to this subject. Questions about climate change or long-term trends would be directed to a climatologist or other applicable authority.”

Officially, these scientists cannot be trusted to connect the dots that their years of study would seem to entitle them to do:

...the department’s communications protocol prevents the meteorologists from drawing links to changing climate patterns following extreme weather events such as severe flooding in southern Alberta or a massive wildfire in Northern Quebec in the summer of 2013.

While Environment Canada's official position is that their employees are eminently satisfied, de Sousa includes a link to a union-sponsored survey that paints an altogether different picture. Here is a snippet of the responses:

“I am outraged by the Orwellian restriction of information under the current government. I cannot see any justification for preventing scientists from speaking about publicly-funded, published research to the media. The data were paid for by all Canadians and in my view belong to all Canadians. For us to work in the public interest, we need to be able to express our findings to non-scientists through public presentations and news media.

“The development of carefully crafted "Values and Ethics" codes across government are resulting in silencing the scientific community for fear of breaching their "Duty to Loyalty" (and are becoming synonymous with gag order).”

And there is this sad surrender:

“Leaving public service for academia. Won't have a muzzle anymore.”

Writes de Sousa:

The quotes from government scientists were released in support of the union’s internal investigation into allegations of muzzling of federal scientists. Its survey found that 90 per cent of federal scientists and professionals felt they couldn’t speak freely in public about their work and that 24 per cent had been asked to exclude or alter information for non-scientific reasons.

There is much more worth reading in this investigative piece. Mike de Sousa's website is surely one worth bookmarking for regular visits.

Of Course We Could Ignore This

But are we willing to pay the ultimate price?

If Only We Could All Take This To Heart

Then where would the Harperites be?

It's Definitely Not Democracy

That's the conclusion fundraising expert Harvey McKinnon draws in this interview during which he discusses the Harper regime's targeting of groups that oppose the Tory policy of environmental despoliation, about which I wrote previously.

McKinnon also offers this startling information: Statistically, one in 100 charities are audited each year. This Revenue Canada has gone after seven out of 12 charities this year. According to a statistician on his staff, the odds of this happening randomly are one chance in a billion.

Draw what inference you will from that.




H/t Occupy Canada

Another Informed Star Reader

Christine Penner Polle of Red Lake offers some observations that I suspect few but the most ardent ideologues would dispute:

Re: Ottawa plans cuts to climate programs, March 12

Have we Canadians fallen down the rabbit hole? We are living in a Mad Hatter world where our federal government is slashing funding to Environment Canada’s climate change efforts at the same time scientists are raising the alarm about the threat of an unstable climate to our civilization, and where even staid, small “c” conservative institutions such as the IMF and the IEA are urging swift action to decrease emissions from fossil fuels.

This kind of cost-cutting is false economy, for the longer we delay in addressing climate change the more expensive – and dangerous – it becomes.

The federal government could address the climate crisis by putting a straightforward and transparent price on carbon through a carbon fee and dividend policy that (finally!) charges industry the true cost of carbon pollution, and rebates the money back to Canadian households, helping us all make the shift toward the clean energy economy of the 21st century.

At the same time, the market will be allowed to pick winners and losers in the energy race, rather than government through inefficient sector-by-sector regulation. Sounds like a solution that might get Canadians back to a saner, safer reality.

Heather Mallick And The Climate Of Fear

Toronto Star columnist Heather Mallick has a lacerating assessment this morning of the political landscape we now inhabit, thanks to the machinations of the Harper cabal. Owen, over at Norther Reflections, has a post on her piece that is well-worth reading.

I shall only add this from her column:

What an extraordinary thing to live a pleasant life in a western nation and yet fear your own government. But the Canada Revenue Agency’s new audits of environmental charities like Tides Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation and Environmental Defence in the midst of their continuing warnings about the effects of the climate-poisoning Alberta tarsands project are terrifying.

Harperites are sessile, “rooted to the ground and unable to pick up and move ... when conditions turn unfavourable,” as the New Yorker put it recently in a rather dismissive piece about plant IQ. They can’t adapt to the news of climate change so they lash out at those who have.

I have praised David Suzuki to the skies, most recently in a column about a performance staged at the Royal Ontario Museum about the damage done by the tarsands. Am I to be audited next?

Extraordinary, indeed, that we are witness to, and in many cases abettors of, an ongoing process of democratic subversion directed by the Harper cabal, culminating in a very real and justifiable fear of the government.

Peace Of Mind: An Elusive State

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

- Dylan Thomas

I have now passed seven years of my 'official' retirement; it will be eight years this June since it actually began, given that I took a six-month leave before starting to draw my pension. According to all of the 'good life commercials,' I should be wiling away the rest of my days on the golf course, on some non-existent yacht, or fleeing harsh Canadian winters via the snowbird route.

Instead, I find myself increasingly restless and angry. Instead of disengaging from the concerns of this world, I find myself drawn into them more. While I would not have it any other way, it does make peace of mind somewhat elusive.

But perhaps, whether we are young, middle-aged, or old, peace of mind should not be our primary goal. Not in a world beset by so many problems, many of which promise to only grow much worse after we are gone from the scene.

In yesterday's post, I commented on the witch-hunt being conducted by the Harper regime against environmental groups that speak out about climate change and tarsands development. With the use of a trojan horse called Ethical Oil, an organization whose roots reach directly into Harper's inner office, and the weapon of the Canadian Revenue Agency, the regime seems bent on silencing those who do not embrace our headlong plunge into climatic chaos.

A story in today's Star provides additional information on this assault against freedom of speech, something we once placed a high value on:

Don’t talk about Alberta’s oilsands and how their development may aggravate climate change.

That’s the clear message from Ottawa to environmental charities being extensively audited by the Canada Revenue Agency to determine if they have crossed the line between public and political advocacy.

As many as 10 green charities are being audited by the CRA, while three say they are likely being investigated on complaints by Ethical Oil, a pro-Alberta oilsands, non-profit, non-governmental organization.

“Their (Ethical Oil) feeling is that by raising concern about climate change and the role of tarsands expansion . . . it is political activity,” said Tim Gray, executive director of Environmental Defence, one of the three green groups that acknowledged it is being audited on the basis of complaints made by Ethical Oil.

Please read the entire story here. Weep, and then get angry. Get very angry.

Engaging Community: Some Thoughts From The Salamander

The other day I wrote a post about the Harper cabal's systematic efforts to re-engineer Canadians' critical thinking capacity through the gutting of science libraries and their resources. No books=no concern over climate change=cheerleading for tarsands development. It is up to each of us to combat this drift into darkness.

I received a number of comments on the post, including those of The Salamander, a passionate and articulate Canadian who shares the grave concern many of us have over Canada's direction under a regime that has consistently shown little but contempt for the nation's traditional values. I am reproducing below the exchange that he and I had in the hope that people will read his ideas and suggestions and offer additional commentary and ideas:

The Salamander:

.. the question of our times, in Canada today.. is certainly one of our national identity.. and a related question must be.. do 'we' care.. PM Harper is trying to permanently embed the bizarre notion that he reflects (or is) our national identity and we should ensure our values, emulate his.. or lack of..

Here's a short list for the pollsters .. and ideally the questions to the Canadian public * of all ages * would be framed in positive ways, accommodating blunt intuitive responses..

Here's a sample or two..

- Q - Do you care if Canada lets other countries control the development, mining/harvest & sale and delivery of our natural resources, energy, fish, lumber, grain etc .. or if the cost for that decision is the extinction of species like salmon, polar bears, caribou, eagles or killer whales because we eliminated the habitat, waters, forest etc they lived in.. or if certain regions have no safe drinkable water or useful soil, breathable air as a result?

- Q - Do you see any value in letting partisan political parties gain further control or direct how Canada moves into the future.. in particular by their secretive use of databanks, election funds, robo & live calls, or questionable election campaigns or electoral fraud to manipulate, gain on maintain power?

- Q - Do you care if to a great extent, Parliament and our political process is simply posturing and its the religious beliefs, greed or immorality of the Prime Minister or his complicit MP's, corporate sponsors & controllers that define policy, legislation and secret economic agreements?

- Q - Do you care if Members of Parliament, unelected anonymous public servants ie in the PMO or many or any of the consultants hired or contracted by the Federal Government end up in jail for fraud, illegal lobbying, graft, lawsuits or have relationships with their babysitters or nannies or parliamentary pages and secretaries?

- Q - Do you know what 'The Rapture' is? Do you know what religions believe the ultimate fall of Israel is the biblical key for good christians to rise triumphantly by the hand of god up into the rosy clouds

- Q - Do you have better questions for your fellow Canadians, that might help improve the situation? Or do you trust folks like Tony Clement, Dean Del Mastro, Senator Gerstein, Ray Novak, Ezra Levant, or Arthur Hamilton or Julian Fantino to look after the important stuff for you ?



Me: These are very provocative questions, Salamander, that, if ever asked, would likely provoke some serious thought and discussion among Canadians. While it is safe to assume such a poll would never be commissioned by any of our 'leaders,' it could prove a potent weapon in the hands of a group dedicated to improving public policy, if it had sufficiently deep pockets to underwrite it.

The Salamandar: .. I'm not certain there is much hard cost to such a poll, Lorne

To a certain extent, such a poll. with exceptionally well developed questions & criteria would generate its own inertia.. driving on as a Q & A reflection of true concerned Canadian spirit, identity and response..

In their own way, the indy blog items from yourself, Mound, Beav, Lautens, Whirlpool, Owen at N Reflections, Kinsella, Simon etc.. all have driven thought, process, review and spread knowledge.. and in fairness so have some mainstream media.. as well as the unique ones like Kady and Rick Mercer etc.. or a truly heavy battlewagon like Neil Young

In a unique progressive and unique way.. you.. and me.. are a poll.. a reflection of ideas and thoughts of real people

I guess what I am driving at is to identify or refine what really matters to Canadians, First Nations, immigrants, the aged, the young, the workers, teachers, artists, mothers, grandparents, miners, farmers, fishermen, clerics, students & newborns..

I truly don't give a f off to what greasy spokes-dwarts like Joe Oliver or Jenni Byrne 'think' or are told to say.. or what a fatuous self absorbed dick like Harper trots out to dweeb political weasels in Israel.. I care what the pulse and reality of this gigantic country called Canada is..

A 'running poll' .. non partisan .. tabulating, reflecting .. observant, reactionary, abrasive, honest, simple, blunt & clear, Canadian .. could be just the nurse or doctor that Canada needs.. taking our temperature, listening to our concerns or fears, investigating & identifying pathogens and infections, treating us for.. or suggesting simple remedy for the ills of a modern society, threatened by toxic, rabid, dishonest political animals

So there you have it. I hope this exchange provokes some further discussion as we continue to direct our efforts and our passions toward a better Canada for everyone.

An Unspeakably Sad Picture

But this photo of materials tossed in a dumpster upon the closure of the Fisheries and Oceans Canada library in Mont-Joli, Que. also speaks volumes about the Harper contempt for any knowledge or research that contradicts his regressive and destructive policies.

A war on science indeed.

The War Continues

The Harper cabal's contempt for the environment, science, transparency, and knowledge in general has become the stuff of dark legend, provoking outrage both at home and beyond our borders. That a putative democracy can be behaving in such a totalitarian manner strains credulity. And the latest salvo against science, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' closing of seven of eleven regional libraries housing a priceless accumulation of aquatic research, is being regarded as a tremendous loss by both scientists and the general public:

Peter Wells, an adjunct professor and senior research fellow at the International Ocean Institute at Dalhousie University in Halifax, has this to say:

“I see this situation as a national tragedy, done under the pretext of cost savings, which, when examined closely, will prove to be a false motive”... “A modern democratic society should value its information resources, not reduce, or worse, trash them.”

Even members of the defunct Progressive Conservative Party are speaking out. Tom Siddon, the former federal fisheries minister in Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative government, had this to say:

"I call it [closing libraries] Orwellian, because some might suspect that it's driven by a notion to exterminate all unpopular scientific findings that interfere with the government's economic objectives".

Others are reportedly too afraid to speak out.

Another person piercing this veil of darkness and intimidation is The Star's Rick Salutin, whose column today addresses some of the wider implications of Harper's war against enlightenment and progress.

First he presents a poignant picture of scientists' reactions to seeing invaluable knowledge being either carted off to dumpsters or scavenged:

Scientists were practically or actually crying as they watched their beloved atlases etc. hauled away or dispatched to the shredder. The feds say it’s all been digitized but that’s evidently untrue. Postmedia unearthed a document marked secret that had no mention of digitization.

But scientists are not the only ones affected by these depredations:

For Canadians, it’s like the loss of irreplaceable family photos. This country was built on its coasts and waterways via the fishing grounds and fur trade. We are as we are — nature heavy and underpopulated — due to those patterns.

Yet, as Salutin points out, the loss is much larger:

It goes deeper though. It has to do with being human. What humans do is solve problems with intelligence, when they can, and when they fail, try to learn from that and pass it on for the next round. This gives humans their edge. ...There’s something willfully perverse in turning your back on accumulated knowledge in the name of “value for taxpayers.”

And perhaps the greatest casualty is democracy itself, something the Harper reprobates have shown such ongoing contempt for:

Democracy isn’t about everybody casting one vote. That way all you get is a sloppy aggregation of individual opinions. The whole is the sum of its parts, period. Democracy means people consult together, listen, discuss — so that some voices will weigh more than others, and everyone gets a chance to decide which those are. But that can’t happen if the most informed voices from the past and present are stifled or dropped into dumpsters.

So whether we realize it or not, the Harper war against knowledge is part of a larger battle against all of us. If that's not worth fighting, I don't know what is.

Although I featured this picture in a post yesterday, it seems appropriate to run it again:



For further reading on the Harper war against science, check out John Dupuis' piece here.

Another Clear And Cogent Explanation Of The Polar Vortex

This explanation is offered by President Barack Obama’s science advisor, Dr. John Holdren. Even if Stephen Harper hadn't abolished the position of National Science Advisor in 2008, it is hard to imagine anyone in his employ speaking so frankly.

Ignorance Is Strength

At least it is so in Harperland.

A Scientist Speaks Out

By now, the plight of government scientists is reasonably well-known. Despite the Harper propaganda machine's vehement campaign to deny the practice, more and more Canadians have become aware that the regime has been systematically muzzling its scientists, whose research and hard data frequently contradict and expose as lies the ideology that passes as truth in our debased democracy.

Because we have a collectively short memory, every so often we need to be reminded of some harsh realities, as was done on September 16 when scientists rallied against government efforts to suppress much-needed information.

David Schindler, described as the Killam Memorial Professor of Ecology emeritus at the University of Alberta, has a well-written piece in today's Star reminding all of us of the government's odious practices.

Entitled Remove the muzzle from government scientists, the article begins by reminding us of the proud and often pivotal role Canadian science, much of it governmental, has played in some far-reaching environmental initiatives, including the fact that

Canada was the first country to regulate phosphorus in sewage and detergents, leading to the recovery of many lakes from algal blooms.

Canada also led global efforts to decrease emissions of ozone-depleting chemicals, resulting in the Montreal Protocol.

...policies to control acid rain, based largely on science from government departments, were implemented.

Shindler himself left government science when things began to change. The first changes were somewhat subtle, beginning in the 1990s:

Scientists ... were warned to avoid directly criticizing government policies, even environmentally harmful ones. Rebukes were mild for a scientist who challenged his political masters. At worst, a scolding letter was “put on your file.”

Things steadily deteriorated, with restrictions reaching their nadir once the Harper regime became ensconced:

Shortly after it took office, scientists were told they must have permission from bureaucrats to speak publicly. Bureaucrats and communications officers issued “speaking lines” that must be used to avoid criticism of policies. The permitted lines were often so inane that most scientists chose to remain silent rather be embarrassed by using them.

This weakening of the scientific voice had dire consequences, including the collapse of the cod industry, but much worse was to come:

The government divested itself of the Experimental Lakes Project, government contaminants programs, climate projects and the Arctic PEARL project. The Fisheries Act and the Navigable Waters Act were changed to provide less protection, while expediting large industrial developments.

And now, of course, we have the almost daily spectacle of government ministers defending the indefensible, with lies about subjects ranging from greenhouse gas emissions to oilsands and protection of fisheries.

Shindler ends his piece with the following sobering thoughts:

We must take government science back from politicians who would twist or hide science that reveals flaws in their policies. We deserve to know the truth about the impacts of proposed developments on our environment, in order to avoid mistakes that will be costly to future generations.

Government science once provided this information, and it must be changed to do so again. The health of not only our environment, but of Canadian democracy, depends on it.

We can expect the Harper cabal to continue to fight any such ideas vigorously, as is the wont of repressive regimes everywhere.

David Suzuki On Harper's Contempt For Democracy

David Suzuki has a thought-provoking essay in today's Globe and Mail that also serves as an excellent precis of some of the things the Harper government would like us to forget, including its promotion of ignorance/contempt for factual data, its demonization of environmentalists, its arrant hypocrisy, and its general contempt for voices that express disagreement with its ideology.

I hope you will read it and disseminate it widely; constant reminders of this cabal's war on democracy and informed discussion will be, I think, crucial, if we are to have a chance of ousting it in 2015.