Canada bans meteorologists from mentioning climate change

Missed this in the news cycle. As Xerxes said recently, Herr Harper and his oil-soaked cronies strike again!

The optics on decisions like this make getting Keystone and other projects approved more difficult - you'd think the government would have figured that out a long time ago.

Oh my god, Harper is stopping unqualified Government employees from commenting on something they have no real expertise in.



Given the outcry, I suppose all Gov't employees who are even remotely linked to a scientific field or endeavor should be allowed to issue statements on behalf of the Gov't, whether those statement are grounded in fact or not and, whether the people issuing them have any actual scientific expertise in the field.

No wonder people watch the Daily Show for their news fix.

Agreed. But the problem is that Harper is stopping qualified Government employees from commenting on something they have real expertise in

So you think that's the real issue here - that it's just a pure coincedence that climate change just so happens to be a subject that Harper wages conservative jihad on?

Freedom of speech for government employees is a myth much like any other large corporation. If these meteorologists want to express their views and opinions they have a myriad of methods that don't, by association insinuate that this is the Governments position on the subject especially one as controversial as this.

And for the record they aren't whistleblowers they're employees with personal opinions on a subject that they hold no expertise in. So, despite the fact you don't agree with the gov'ts stance it's understandable that they don't want these pseudo experts expressing unfounded opinions on government time using gov't resources. Hence the instruction for them to refer any questions on the subject to the climatologists which when you think about it, is perfectly logical.

So go on believing that it's a jihad against the Climate Change by the Evil Emperor Ming if it suits your agenda but, the truth is much more likely that the Government doesn't want it's employees embarrassing or contradicting them with personal opinions.

Agreed. But the problem is that Harper is stopping qualified Government employees from commenting on something they have real expertise in


That's another issue.

1) I'm not so sure "they hold no expertise" in the subject. That seems to be the political party's talking point. Does a Registered Nurse "hold no expertise" in health care since a nurse is not a doctor?

2) They're not expressing their "personal opinipn." The media engages them for information and they respond - it's not even clear what exactly their response has been and it's pure speculation on your part that they've been providing a "personal opinion" that is "unfounded" or "beyond their expertise" or that anything they're saying is even contradictory to Harper's agenda.

3) Of couse you note that the climatologists, like all other government scientists are already long-muzzled by Harperites. Meteorologists had a freer reign, since their job entails deailing the media daily.

If they want to exercise their free speech rights and the ability to air personal opinions on subjects that their employer still considers open to debate then they should seek alternative employment in the private sector. Otherwise, they should stop answering questions that they have very limited or no expertise in because just like you and I they're basing those opinions on personal observation, limited climate statistics, other peoples opinions and models which may not reflect fact.

If you were a clerk typist at the Embassy in London do you think that you should be given the right to use your position as an employee of that Embassy to give what, because of your position, some people assume to be an expert opinion on Government policy just because some reporter asked you?

Like I said, if the reporters want the truth instead of sensationalism, they should ask the climatologists like the Government wants.

I don't know why you bothered to quote my post, you didn't address a single point of mine, just repeated your earlier statement.

I don't know why you bothered to quote my post, you didn't address a single point of mine, just repeated your earlier statement.

This article is probably horseshit. If it were true it would be the front page of the CBC...it's not even on the CBC.

Two weeks old to boot Somebody got sucked in.

Since my anecdote missed getting through let's try it this way.

Point 1.

If you'd prefer a nurse to diagnose your brain tumour feel free. Or maybe the oil monkey from Quickie Lube to diagnose the check your engine light, but not me since neither of them are experts at making those diagnosis despite the fact they "work" in their respective fields and by extension the same thing likely applies when you compare meteorologists to climatologists. BTW Politicians and Meteorologists are the only two occupations in the country where you can be 100% wrong all the time and still keep your job.

Point 2.

Nobody said their responses were contradictory to "Harpers" alleged agenda. What is being said is that they're responding to questions that, whether they like it or not are giving "reporters" the ability to use those responses as the official gov't position simply because they're employed by that Gov't. So since Harper has been at odds with media for years now it only stands to reason that he wouldn't want "any' gov't employee speaking to them if he can avoid it.

Point 3.

I never said climatologists were or weren't muzzled, that's your position. I said it's a different issue but, given your animosity towards the current gov't and it's policies I shouldn't have expected you to be able to differentiate the two.

So I hope this addresses some, most or all of your concerns because to be honest I'm getting tired of beating my head against the alter of your partisanship just to make you understand that my position on the topic is. People who work in the Gov't aren't allowed to intentionally or unintentionally infer that they represent the Gov'ts position on a subject when making statements which, despite the fact they deal with the media daily doesn't change that fact.

Another anecdote. In the late 90's when the media started inquiring about Sailors using food banks because of the high cost of living in Victoria we were instructed not to talk to them and were told to direct all questions to the Naval Public Affairs Office. So, it may be a decade and a half but the premise remains the same. Just because you work for the Gov't doesn't mean you have the right to give opinion on a topic especially if it embarrasses your employer like this one did.

The muzzle for gov't employees has been going on for decades but the only reason we're talking about it now is because Harper has been the first to actually come out and publicly stop employees from making statements to the press.

I was an adjustments officer for Revenue Canada. What you're saying would be somewhat akin to the media asking me about, say, changes in the tax codes. I could probably tell you what they'd mean for the average person. But if you're wanting information on the complexity of the new codes and what they would mean overall, then you'd obviously be better served either by asking a tax lawyer, or those who wrote the new tax codes.

So, comparing current weather to overall climate is just silly because they aren't the same, but asking a meteorologist about climate change makes perfect sense.

Muzzling federal govt employees is NOT Harperism. There have been guidelines as to what the junior civil service can and can't speak about publicly as long as I can remember. My father was subject to muzzling throughout his years working for the UIC and its various incarnations. I too was subject to muzzling when I worked for RevCan, and it wasn't over the obvious, like personal taxpayer information.

Neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals are very fond of those who work in the junior swivel service and publicly contradict or criticize their position on something while they're in power.