Comment from Jim encourages constructive dialogue
Jim posted a perceptive and interesting comment on my post announcing the CAUT meeting this week, and I wanted to make sure it was noticed by as many readers as possible. So, with all credit to Jim, I’m reposting it here.
The CAUT forum will (rightly) be interpreted by the government as vested interests whining about their own constituency. If the research community wants to make real progress with this government, it needs to engage the general public, communicate the benefits of research, stop trying to publicly embarrass the government (it won’t work even though it sells papers) and build constructive dialogue. This government has made mistakes but rubbing these in will just lead to more entrenchment. That doesn’t mean making empty platitudes, but the point has been made already. It’s time to move into constructive thinking – even if the government appears not to be listening.
Indeed, continued whining in public may easily turn into a backlash from the many thousands of Canadians who have recently lost, or fear losing, their jobs. The other political parties realise this too so we won’t find them coming to our defense. The research community must avoid becoming the weapon that others (journalists, opposition MPs) use to whip the government as we’ll be the entity receiving the subsequent wrath.
I agree with Jim, though I suggest that the research funding cuts will result in scientists losing jobs, and that whining about this is no different than what we’re hearing from other sectors. Nonetheless, apart from battling specific government decisions, scientists should be seeking a greater role in informing and influencing public policy. While raising voice in protest is appropriate when necessary (and I think the vocal response to the most recent budget is appropriate), building a constructive dialogue with government and the public will have greater long-term benefits. I applaud the efforts of DontLeaveCanadaBehind in opening that dialogue, and encourage scientists to involve themselves in the discussion at their site. I also hope we’ll see more opportunities like the Canadian Science Policy Conference, and that the positive role of research in society will be effectively voiced by the nascent Science Media Centre of Canada.
FYI: Question Period – April 21st, 2009 via ACAHO
Question Period always begins with the Leader of the Oppostion asking the first 3 questions. These questions are on topics that are considered to be urgent or pressing. Yesterday, all 3 questions were on Research. Mr. Garneau follwed with 2 questions related to the Aerospace industry. Five questions on research and science and technology is a first.
La période de question commence toujours par le chef de l’Oppostion posant les 3 premières questions. Ces questions sont sur les matières qui sont considérées pressantes. Hier, chacune des 3 questions était sur la recherche. M. Garneau a suivi avec 2 questions liées à l’industrie aérospatiale. Cinq questions sur la recherche et la science et la technologie est une première
Français suit
SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the Bank of Canada now says that the recession will be deeper than the government anticipated. That makes it all the more important to create the jobs of tomorrow today, yet the government has done nothing but cut. It cut $148 million from our three research councils. It cut Genome Canada from the budget altogether. It cut research funding each year since it took office in real terms. How can we expect to get recovery from a government that has so little confidence in Canada’s scientific community?
Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Industry, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, actually, nothing could be further from the truth. This government, in budget 2009, increased funding for science and technology by $5.1 billion. That is more money for our researchers, more money for our research institutions, and more money for the granting councils because we believe in science and we believe in innovation. Speaking of raising, though, it is the hon. member as leader of the Liberal Party who wants to raise taxes. He said last week, April 14, “We will have to raise taxes”. Canadians want to know, which taxes? How much will they go up? Who will pay? Those are the questions Canadians want to know about.
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I do not take lectures in fiscal responsibility from a government that led us to the edge of deficit before the recession began. Let me try again on science. The U.S. is investing six times more per capita in science than we are. What are we doing? Genome Canada is cancelling major stem cell research. We are losing top talent to other countries. That is the legacy of the Conservative budget cuts. Why has the government lost faith in Canadian science?
Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Industry, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, under this government Genome Canada had a multi-year commitment of hundreds of millions of dollars. That is our commitment to Genome Canada and we are following through on that commitment. The hon. member said and I want to be clear about this, “We will have to raise taxes”. Not we do not want to raise taxes, or this may be a possibility but I do not want to do it. He said we have to raise taxes. That is what he told the people of Canada. That is the Liberal instinct. Whenever there is a challenging time, whenever we are facing challenging times, the Liberals’ instinct is to raise taxes. The people of Canada do not want that instinct in government.
Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, this is a desperate tactic by a government that led Canada to the brink of deficit before the recession. This government has cut funding for scientific research every year, in real terms, since it was elected. It has cut $148 million from the three research councils. Why is this government starving our scientists? Why has it not given them the support they need?
Hon. Tony Clement (Minister of Industry, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, that is not true. In our 2009 budget, we increased funding for research across Canada by $5.1 billion. But when the Leader of the Opposition went to Ontario, he said, “We will have to raise taxes.” Canadians are not wondering which budget they support. They want to know which taxes will go up, by how much and who will pay. That is the question—
@Jim
Thanks Jim!