Agriculture Canada calls it an effort to help the media get information faster.
But Manitoba’s farm community believes the department has adopted a policy that could muzzle its research scientists.
In May, analysts and research scientists with Agriculture Canada were told to refer media calls to the department’s communications experts.
Bill Toews, a producer near Kane, Man., spoke with some of the scientists after learning of the policy and is convinced it amounts to a gag order.
He called the measure “an insult to the integrity” of the federal research scientists. Morale among the researchers has suffered.
Read Also
‘I am hopeful,’ Saskatchewan premier says about Chinese trade
While there’s more to be done, Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe says he’s hopeful trade relations with China can be mended….
“I think we have to step up to the plate and go to bat for them,” said Toews, during a general council meeting of Keystone Agricultural Producers on June 21.
However, Agriculture Canada’s chief of media relations said the department’s researchers are not being muzzled and public access to the opinions and knowledge of those scientists has not been restricted.
“I know it’s been reported in the media that this is a gag order, but it’s not,” said Ron Milito in a June 28 interview.
Milito said the only change is in the way the department is handling media calls. Reporters now are asked to contact a central number when requesting information. The purpose is to help the media get in touch with the right person as quickly as possible, he said.
“So far, it has worked tremendously.”
Information incorrect
When the change took effect, there were reports that the policy was adopted because some scientists had spoken out of turn and scooped the federal agriculture minister on news announcements related to the potato wart virus controversy in the Maritimes. Milito said that was not the case.
The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada represents scientists and other professionals in the federal government. The institute’s president, Steve Hindle, said the communications policy adopted in May has not been raised as an issue by his members.
But Manitoba producers are concerned.
Gordon McPhee, a Dauphin area producer, worries that the flow of knowledge and the sharing of viewpoints are being restricted.
The notion of censoring how federal scientists make presentations and how they answer questions is “very scary,” he said.
Tom Baron, a Carberry producer, believes Agriculture Canada has a responsibility to serve the public good. He suspects that role will be diminished if views of scientists are screened before being shared with the public.
“Gagging pure science just doesn’t follow with that philosophy (of serving the public interest),” said Baron, who serves on the advisory committee for Agriculture Canada’s Brandon research centre.
KAP will convey its concerns and sense of indignation to federal agriculture minister Lyle Vanclief.
In a motion passed June 21, the general farm group described the department’s new policy as an effort to limit the contribution of research science to the public interest.
The preamble to the motion noted that in a time of controversy over modern scientific technology, open discussion is needed with Agriculture Canada management.
That discussion could help farmers and the public as they try to sort through the potential advantages and drawbacks of biotechnology and genetically modified organisms.
