No. They just don’t publicly release the intelligence.

The issue, here, is that when the government *does* commission a study, the results shouldn’t be quashed if they contradict the goals of the current majority party.

Don’t you believe in democracy?

Incidentally, there will be many benefits to this project as well (for one, the First Nation communities only have winter road access and global warming has reduced the usefulness of these roads, precipitating a crisis situation this year when the road was only open for 3 weeks). It just seems a shame that with those roads will come the unsustainable practices that have already changed the areas further south.

“However, don’t overlook the fact that governmental funding influences scientific research”

A recent example is where the government scientists found the pollution levels of the tar sands operation were well within guidelines, but independent scientists like world-famous limnologist Dr. David Schindler found the pollution levels in the rivers were way above acceptable. He responded to questions about the discrepancy with something like, “Let them [gov't scientists] argue their case in the proper forum–peer-reviewed journals”, and said he and others on the independent teams would happily put their work under that kind of scrutiny from others.

Hm, I saw the words “Democracy” and “la Belle Province” in the same sentence. *blink* Well, I suppose it is a democracy although minorities and the First Nation people might disagree. C’est la vie.

“Could it be that the Canadian govt really feels it is doing the right and responsible thing here for good reasons?”
Well shoot, sure they do. Almost everyone believes that they’re doing what they’re doing for all the right reasons. Even people like Hitler and Pol Pot were convinced that if we could just get rid of these few (million) people, everything would be a million times better for everyone ELSE in the long run. The ends justify the means and all that. Everyone’s got a rationalization for what they do, usually an altruistic one.
In the case of climate science, I’d argue that there’s a strong negative confirmation bias due to fear. Many people simply don’t want to acknowledge the situation, because it’s scary and requires some unsettling changes to be made.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m not criticizing Canadian culture, at all. In fact, if I can get my career on track enough to make myself useful to Canada, I’d love to live there.
It’s just the whole bit about science (and whatever else) technically being in service to the Crown, well, that’d rub me the wrong way.

@Brian too: Thanks for the information. I hate to further the stereotype of Americans as ignorant of other nations, but… what the hell, it’s mostly true
Anyway, as I said above, I guess there’s something to be said for a representative (or moral authority, as you put it) who doesn’t have to worry about pandering to voters.
So basically the attitude is “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”? As someone who’s wasted countless hours torturing numerous computers trying to “improve” them, I can definitely see the wisdom there

“Don’t stare at me like that. How did I know – ”

“Nobody knew anything ,”said Araman* bitterly, “but you all just took it for granted that the government was stupidly bureaucratic, vicious, tyranical, given to suppressing research for the hell of it. It never occurred to any of you that we were trying to protect mankind [sic] as best we could.”

- Pages 270 & 271, “The Dead Past” short story in ‘The Edge of Tomorrow’ anthology by Isaac Asimov, Tor, 1986.

Well *are* we assuming that the Canadian govt here is being stupidly bureaucratic, vicious & tyranical, suppressing scientists for the hell of it?

Are we sure we’re not?

Could it be that the Canadian govt really feels it is doing the right and responsible thing here for good reasons?

I’m not saying they necessarily *are*.

I don’t know. I know next to nothing about the Canadian govt except that they won their last election and so became the govt.

But I am saying we should pause and consider the possibility.

After all, the government is the people we theoretically place our trust in (Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!) and who we (or, in this case, the Canadian voters) chose.

Not everyone should be able to know everything. For example, a patient in a lunatic asylum should NOT know how to hack into the military and order an all-out nuclear attack!

Now this is obviously NOT quite on that level & I do oppose censorship usually and excessive govt power over our lives but this is a point to bear in mind at least just a little.

Things are not always as simple and straightforward as they can be made out seem.

—————

* Weirdly enough this name is very similar to another character in an Isaac Asimov short story who was named R.E. Mann – which turned out to be a form of “Ahriman” the Zoroastrian “Satan” figure to Ahura Mazda’s benevolent god. Now I’m not sure if that’s just co-incidence or not but it is somewhat interesting to observe.

@31. Brian Too & others :

This is a frequent misconception. Although Canada is indeed a constitional monarchy, the “monarchy” bit is distinctly second place. The Queen’s role is almost entirely ceremonial, as are those of the Governor General and their provincial counterparts. For instance, all legislation requires the Queen’s assent to be enacted. However this is a rubber stamp item. The monarchy almost never interferes in this

The same is true for Australia as well.

I’m pretty New Zealand like Canada and us here in Oz along with quite a few others also share this system – & it works pretty well. Not perfectly but okay.

As for the censorship of Govt over scientists it doe soccur tome that ther may occassionally be valid reasons for it eg. military and security applications.

Hypothetical : If the Canadian scientists discovered how to make a cheap A-bomb out of everyday products, or how folks could make black holes in their kitchen sinks or even time machines – would you really trut this information tobe shared with all your neighbours, fellow countryfolk and people on the street?

Perhaps it’s a good thing if some bits of info *are* kept secret and some information controlled for the public good and so that it is kept in responsible and not irresponsible hands?

Playing devils advocate here a bit but still ..

The thing is, though, I don’t know if any of the other parties can do any better. I would die before voting the NDP into power, and the Liberals today are a total lame duck. |sigh|

This is a frequent misconception. Although Canada is indeed a constitional monarchy, the “monarchy” bit is distinctly second place. The Queen’s role is almost entirely ceremonial, as are those of the Governor General and their provincial counterparts.

For instance, all legislation requires the Queen’s assent to be enacted. However this is a rubber stamp item. The monarchy almost never interferes in this process; the Queen does not have the political legitimacy to do so. Everyone knows it.

The only times the Queen has any real power is during constitutional matters. If there were a constitutional crisis for instance, the Queen could play an important part in resolving it. If a Federal election failed to produce a meaningful result and no coalition could be formed, the Queen might broker a solution. Even then this would be done in consultation with Canadians. Without such cooperation no one would respect the result.

One common description of the monarchy in such a setup is that they represent the country, without governing it. They are symbolic of Canada itself. As such they have some moral authority but little governing authority. In a country like the U.S., both symbolic and operational roles are fulfilled by the President.

Neither system is perfect. In the end you have to simply ask, “does it work? What is the net result?” Well, Canada is a stable and prosperous representative democracy. By most quality of life indicators life is pretty good. As a result there are some who wish to get rid of the monarchy, but for most it is a non-issue. You’d get more benefit for your time and trouble working on almost anything else.

Most of the most livable countries in the world are democracies with a figurehead monarchy. Democracies with an elected head of state have had a rocky record. Probably that’s coincidence, but some political scientists disagree.

In a nutshell, I was asking Canadians if there were any movement in your country to formally dissolve the Monarchy, and if not, why the hell not?

What was he charged with?
When did this alleged crime take place?
Is there a legal consensus as to the legitimacy of these charges?
What previous arrests has he had, and for what?
What agency or police force ordered the raid in the first place?

I’m certainly not defending the court’s gag conditions, but I feel like I’m not getting the whole story here.

“No, read the Canadian Constitution.

In the States, the taxpayer money belongs to the taxpayers, and the research done with this money belongs to Tha People of the US of A.

In Canada, as soon as it leaves your pocket, the taxpayers money belong to the Crown and the research done with it also. All the work done with it belongs to the Crown.”

You’re picking nits. No, I do not have property rights regarding the research work. However, I have a *moral* right to that work, as it is commissioned by a government that operates based on the consent of the voters. If you wish to dispute that, fine, although that seems a rather difficult position to defend.

Or, to put it more succinctly: morality has nothing to do with legality.

http://www.ec.gc.ca/adsc-cmda/default.asp?lang=En&n=F3D25729-1

(catchy, easy to remember URL isn’t it?)

Just look at the bulletin archives to see the warming for each season separately.

But the site is careful not to attribute the warming to anything in particular.

Is that ok? No. Is it legal? Well, yes. Do I freak out over the lack of knowledge I’ll experience? Not a bit. If they’re scientists, they’re supposed to be somewhat intelligent. What would do an intelligent scientist? I’ll bet I don’t even have to give you the answer! :O

Still, instead of putting up a website, their first step should be applying for a Green Card. That, I’d call it “efficient pressure on that place where it hurts”!!!

Remember, when they cancelled the Arrow, those people all went to work for NASA. In a sense, while an American was the first man on the Moon, it’s Canadians who sent him there.

No, read the Canadian Constitution.

In the States, the taxpayer money belongs to the taxpayers, and the research done with this money belongs to Tha People of the US of A.

In Canada, as soon as it leaves your pocket, the taxpayers money belong to the Crown and the research done with it also. All the work done with it belongs to the Crown.

A subtlety that let even us Canadian able to get US nautical charts for free over the web while we still have to pay for our own Canadian ones. That work done by the CHS with your taxpayer money stays sole property of the Crown.

Now you know the difference between a Democracy and a Constitutional Monarchy.

Friendly yours, from la Belle Province!

Hey! Maybe even now, you know why (amongst others) we’re not about to sign that Constitution. We kind of like democracy over here.

Way to go scientists! Right now, you’re making case for the governement’s nihilism in censorship.

I’ll stick to Arvix and Google News in the meantime.