Environment Committee on Dec. 13th, 2011

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

I will come back to the success of the Montreal Protocol.

This is what the scientists know, that the depletion of ozone was caused by ozone-depleting substances. The goal of the Montreal Protocol was to ban the production and use of ozone-depleting substances. It has been very successful. We know from inventories taken around the world that ozone-depleting substances are, to a large extent, no longer used.

There is already scientific evidence that the situation with the ozone layer has improved, but scientists are always garnering new findings. Now there is also interest about the interaction between ozone and climate change, so another reason for measuring ozone has come to light. But again, this is at a large global level, not at a “specific point in geography” level.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

The time has expired. Thank you.

Mr. Toet, you have five minutes.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In your opening comments you stated that Environment Canada scientists were encouraged to disseminate and discuss their scientific findings in a timely way for the public good. You also stated that they do this through the publication of their scientific findings in peer-reviewed journals and through conferences.

My questions are actually in line with the comments made about the ability of Environment Canada scientists to interact with the media. Does the department have a media interview policy or interview guidelines for their scientists?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

We do, and it's not a department-specific policy, but a Government of Canada communications policy.

No public servant, no matter what their classification, no matter what their level, is free to speak to the media at will or in response.... There is a communications policy in place. We have media relations officers, and journalists know this. This is really to consider who is in the correct or best position to respond. Many times it's the minister who is the appropriate person to respond. Sometimes it is a scientist. When the questions are detailed and technical on the science, that's when a scientist is in the best position to respond.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Are these scientists given any media training prior to the interviews? And who would provide that training, if they were?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

Most of the time, as with all other public servants, if there is an expectation that scientists will be responding to media questions, they are given some very basic media training. It helps them to become more comfortable in their dealings with the media.

Again, one of the key things for scientists is to have this understanding that their role is to address the questions about science, not to address questions about policy.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

So if a scientist had an interview request, who would give that approval or make the final decision as to whether that interview could go forward?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

The way the policy works now is that it goes up the whole chain in a one-off situation.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

So each situation is measured differently, but it would actually go up the chain for a determination to be made.

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

In the spring, a paper by one of our scientists made the cover of Nature. As soon as we found out, we knew there was going to be interest in it. In that situation we worked out ahead of time that this scientist, who is an author, who has media training, would be available to respond to media requests on the paper.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

How many interviews have been conducted by Environment Canada scientists in 2011? Do you have any idea?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

I do have the specific numbers, if we're talking about scientists and requests for interviews. I'm not going to take the time to check in the book. Around 270 requests for interviews were made and the response rate was that over 90% were approved.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Who generally would take that decision on the ones that were denied, the 10%?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

That was done for quite a variety of reasons. Some of our scientists have not yet had media training and do not feel comfortable talking to the media and say that they don't feel comfortable talking to the media. At other times, it will be a set of circumstances and the decision to say no can be at any level.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I just want to ask about a specific one and that is about Dr. Tarasick, who was not able to do an interview from the outset of his ozone research paper. Can you possibly give us some details on why he was not able to do that?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

What I can say, certainly, is that this is one of those circumstances where what Dr. Tarasick had published was about the ozone hole in the Arctic. It was very clear from a lot of media questions that the questions were going to be about ozone monitoring and what we're doing, which it is not the responsibility of Dr. Tarasick to respond to. When we had the media say they were going to stick to the science of the paper, Dr. Tarasick did do a media interview. When the question strayed into the policy realm, Dr. Tarasick appropriately didn't respond.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

When it goes up the chain, is there actually an assessment of what the questions will be and what direction the media is leading towards?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

Yes. And Dr. Lin wouldn't want to put his scientists in a difficult position. I wouldn't put my scientists in a difficult position. It is often very clear that media will.... We could roll tapes for you. As journalists, they press and ask our scientists, what do you think? It's very difficult because our scientists are public servants and have a duty of loyalty to the minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

And the time has expired.

Thank you.

Ms. Liu, you have five minutes.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Off the bat, it's important to know that scientists in Canada and around the world have expressed concern about these cuts. It's a decision that's raised quite a lot of concern and consternation among the scientific community.

In response to my first round of questions, you said that you didn't have data about the current budget for the two networks. I was wondering if you could tell me how much you hope to save with these budgets cuts to both of these ozone measuring instruments.

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

No. We haven't set a target figure for dollar sign savings.

I will say that the level of concern expressed is allayed as soon as we say we are continuing to monitor, we are continuing to measure, we are continuing to use both methods.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I think there's some lack of transparency as to where these cuts are being made. You were unable to answer questions about which sites would be closed, or whether or not both the Brewer and ozonesonde methods would continue to be used at the sites. Currently, I think there still are concerns that are quite well founded. You also said—I think it was in the Toronto Star on September 21—that the funds that were cut would be redirected towards the monitoring of oil sands.

So you don't know how much money will be redirected...or can you elaborate on that?

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

I certainly did not say that funds would be redirected to the oil sands.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

To the monitoring of them—

[Dr. Karen Dodds]

What I can say—