the Nature of Canadian science

In an editorial today, Nature expressed concerns about the position of science and science advice within the Canadian government

When the Canadian government announced earlier this year that it was closing the office of the national science adviser, few in the country's science community were surprised. Science has long faced an uphill battle for recognition in Canada, but the slope became steeper when the Conservative government was elected in 2006.

The decision in 2004 by the then prime minister Paul Martin to appoint a scientist for independent, non-partisan advice on science and technology was a good one — in principle. Arthur Carty, the chemist who secured the position, duly relinquished his post as president of the National Research Council Canada, which he had revitalized.

But his new office was destined to fail. The budget was abysmal and the mandate was vague at best. After winning power from the Liberals, the Conservatives moved Carty's office away from the prime minister's offices to Industry Canada. In 2007, the government formed the 18-member Science, Technology and Innovation Council (STIC). ... It can be expected to be markedly less independent: although it is stocked with first-class scientists and entrepreneurs, several government administrators also hold seats.

Concerns can only be enhanced by the government's manifest disregard for science.

Nature 451, 866 (21 February 2008) "Science in retreat" | doi:10.1038/451866a | Published online 20 February 2008 - Full Text - PDF

First published in 1869, Nature is a prominent international journal of peer-reviewed science.  According to Journal Citation Reports information available at in-cites.com, Nature was the second most-cited scientific journal worldwide in 2006.

UPDATE 2008-02-22: Reported today in the Globe and Mail

In a strongly worded editorial, entitled Science in Retreat and published in yesterday's issue, the British journal Nature wrote that while Canada's researchers consistently rank among the world's finest, the same cannot be said for the federal government's position on science and research.

...

In a rebuttal letter to Nature, Industry Minister Jim Prentice writes that the government is committed to "supporting world-leading research."

UPDATE: Also in the February 22, 2008 Ottawa Citizen

Under the headline "Science in Retreat," an editorial in yesterday's issue of the British journal Nature says Canada's Conservative government has a "dismal" track record on science and the environment.

The government issued a pointed rebuttal late yesterday afternoon, saying some of the criticisms are "completely misleading," while one is "incomprehensible."

...

It "has expressed what many of us feel," says geologist Andrew Miall, of the University of Toronto, and president of the Royal Society of Canada's Academy of Science.

The academy has not taken an official position, but Mr. Miall said via e-mail that he and his colleagues, as individual scientists, are "very concerned" about the dismantling of science advisory bodies and dismissal of senior independent advisers -- most notably Canada's national science adviser, chemist Arthur Carty, the former president of the National Research Council.

...

"How anyone can state that 18 bright minds [on STIC] cannot perform the task of one science adviser -- who decided to retire after years of dedicated public service -- is incomprehensible," Industry Minister Jim Prentice says in the rebuttal [to the Nature editorial] provided to Canwest News Service.

Disclaimer: I'm just the messenger.  Any statements quoted from the Nature article above, or indeed any statements I quote from any article, represent the opinions and research of the original authors alone, and don't necessarily reflect my opinion.  When it comes to anything to do with the Canadian government, this blog has no official opinions of any kind whatsoever.