The head of one of Canada’s top agricultural colleges rejects the notion put forth by David Suzuki that university professors and researchers are being bought off by private industry.
Geoff Hughes, head of the department of plant science at the University of Saskatchewan, said he didn’t hear Suzuki’s speech to the annual convention of the National Farmers Union in person, but he rejected the allegation made by Suzuki that plant breeders and other researchers at the U of S can be bought off by corporate research grants.
Read Also
Manitoba Parkland research station grapples with dry year
Drought conditions in northwestern Manitoba have forced researchers at the Parkland Crop Diversification Foundation to terminate some projects and reseed others.
“That’s a factually incorrect statement,” Hughes said in an interview.
He said the feedback he receives indicates that most farmers and other stakeholders in the agriculture industry still trust the information and analysis they receive from the U of S.
“I believe we are still seen as a source of impartial advice. Some other universities may have taken a different road.”
Suzuki, one of Canada’s best-known science commentators, told last week’s NFU meeting in Saskatoon that university professors and researchers are being bought off.
Suzuki said that researchers who receive grant money from big corporations have a vested interest in those companies and can’t be trusted to offer impartial information.
“Do you think they will speak freely?” he said, according to news reports of the Nov. 19 meeting.
“If you get a grant from Monsanto, do you think you will speak out and criticize Monsanto? You become like a tobacco industry spokesman, and I don’t think that belongs in the university.”
Suzuki, a geneticist by training, is an author, speaker and host of the CBC television program The Nature of Things.
His 60 minute speech to the convention was enthusiastically received by the crowd of several hundred packed into a Saskatoon hotel meeting room.
Hughes said although the university accepts research funding from private companies, it does so only if that research provides widespread benefits, such as agronomic improvements, better end-use qualities or market expansion. Money will not be accepted to carry out research for the sole benefit of the company providing the funds.
“It has to be for the general good, not for a specific company,” said Hughes.
Pierre Hucl, a wheat breeder at the university, said the reality is that plant breeders have no choice but to seek funding from the private sector, since public funds are generally provided on a matching basis.
He has never seen researchers slant their results or public comments as a result of private funding.
“If people have a perception, there is nothing I can say to change that, but I find it kind of sad that people would smear everybody with that brush,” he said. “You have to rely on the common sense and integrity of researchers.”
Suzuki also used his appearance before the NFU to criticize the use of genetic modification in agriculture and food research.
He said he was appalled at the way in which scientists have “rushed to proclaim” the economic benefits of genetic modification with little discussion of the potential costs.
He said scientists involved in GM research are ignoring basic scientific principles, reaching false conclusions and giving the false impression that biotechnology is being properly managed.
Not enough is known about the technology to be using it in crops and foods, said Suzuki, adding that Canadians are being used as guinea pigs in a huge experiment.
