Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Vince Fedoroff

CRITICISMS ON CLIMATE – Federal election candidates Melissa Atkinson of the NDP, Larry Bagnell of the Liberals, Frank de Jong of the Green Party and moderator Tara McCarthy are seen left to right at Tuesday evening’s all-candidates’ debate on environmental issues. A large crowd filled The Old Fire Hall. Conservative incumbent Ryan Leef did not attend the event, as he was campaigning in Watson Lake.

Tories rapped for ‘destroying data, muzzling scientists’

If the territory’s federal election candidates are experiencing any form of forum fatigue, they are perfecting their abilities to mask it.

By Aimee O'Connor on October 7, 2015

If the territory’s federal election candidates are experiencing any form of forum fatigue, they are perfecting their abilities to mask it.

The Yukon Conservation Society and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society’s Yukon chapter hosted the candidates Tuesday evening at a well-attended forum on the environment.

Many of the questions have been exhausted at several other debates and forums in the city over the past couple of weeks.

The candidates, however, have not skipped a beat in sharing their views on topics such as Bill S-6 and hydraulic fracturing.

As Conservative candidate Ryan Leef was in Watson Lake on Tuesday, he submitted answers to questions posed by the organizations in advance.

The event consisted of several pre-formulated questions from the environmental organizations before the floor was opened up to randomly selected audience members to raise individual issues.

An international climate change conference will be held in Paris next month. Candidates were asked what specific actions they will champion to ensure that Canada works on addressing climate change beyond the Paris conference.

NDP candidate Melissa Atkinson called climate change “one of the most significant issues” the nation faces today.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair, Atkinson said, is the “only clear leader” with the ability and experience to combat climate change.

Liberal candidate Larry Bagnell mentioned that his party leader, Justin Trudeau, intends on taking Canada’s premiers to Paris and having a sit-down within 90 days of the conference to develop a national strategy on climate change.

The proper approach to climate change, according to Green candidate Frank de Jong, is to reverse investments in the oil industry.

Proposing mitigation plans to climate change is one thing, he said.

Stopping carbon dioxide emissions at the source is the right approach – to do so would require shutting down the oil industry and not expanding it further, he added.

De Jong also noted that the New Democratic and Liberal parties are “finally” in support of a carbon tax, after the Greens worked toward it for 20 years.

The candidates were also asked for their stances on government cuts to federal science departments.

In his pre-written responses, Leef emphasized the importance of northern science. He first pointed to Canada’s large contribution to the International Polar Year global research program in 2007.

The formulated question, however, was focused on cuts made after 2008 (Leef took office in 2011).

Included in the question was the cut position of the prime minister’s national science advisor and squeezed department staffing to Parks Canada in 2012, Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans in 2013.

Leef later mentioned a new federal research organization, Polar Knowledge Canada, which he stated is responsible for advancing Canada’s knowledge of the Arctic.

“Science and technology form an important foundation for Canada’s Northern Strategy priorities and provide the knowledge necessary for sound policy and decision-making,” Leef wrote.

All three candidates at the forum expressed belief in the necessity of government decisions based on science and facts.

“We used to have evidence-based policy-making,” de Jong said, adding the Conservative government has created “policy-based evidence making.”

Atkinson also lambasted the federal government for “destroying data” and “muzzling scientists.”

Don Roberts, a spokesperson of the local group Yukoners Concerned about Oil and Gas Exploration/Development, addressed the candidates during the open question period – asking simply for their viewpoints on the practice of fracking to obtain natural gas.

Scientific evidence suggests that the practice is not environmentally cautious, endangering water sources.

“Any hydraulic fracturing project would have to go through Canada’s Strategic Environmental Assessment process to determine its potential impacts,” Leef wrote in response to the anticipated question.

Strategic Environmental Assessment, he wrote, is a tool used to make informed decisions for public policy that incorporates environmental considerations.

The candidates at the forum indicated they were simply opposed to the practice.

Though for the most part, the participating candidates had similar answers to the public and organization’s questions, they did jostle a bit when an audience member asked the candidates to unify in the electoral process.

De Jong said the Greens, New Democrats and Liberals all supporting a reformed electoral process is a “breath of fresh air,” but not before stating his concern that Trudeau might not follow through on his reform promises.

“He strikes me as slippery as an eel,” de Jong said, inciting laughter from the audience.

Bagnell took the mic next, reminding the crowd that he has not said anything negative about “any of the candidates or the parties.”

Among the repetitive questions which were met by the same responses regurgitated by the candidates, an audience member asked where, on a scale of one to 10, a nuclear crisis ranked on the candidates’ list of priorities.

In 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant suffered a meltdown that was the worst major nuclear accident since Chernobyl in 1986, causing radiation to seep from the plant.

Last April, trace amounts were detected on British Columbia shores for the first time – though researchers insist the amount of radiation is not a concern.

The question caused the candidates to do a little dance, with not one of them rating the nuclear disaster on a scale of one to 10.

De Jong called nuclear power a “continuing horror story,” and something the Green Party has fought against for a long time.

Atkinson went back to the issue of scientific cuts, saying the issue is about “not having the availability of science and information to back that up.”

Bagnell noted all clean-ups are a “high priority.”

He then veered off into a different direction – putting forth to the audience that he intends to put forward a private member’s bill calling a national inquiry into causes of cancer.

“I think we can do better,” Bagnell said.

The candidates will tackle issues affecting youth at a forum organized by BYTE Empowering Youth tonight at Baked Café.

CBC North will hosting the candidates the following evening at the Coast High Country Inn.

Comments (8)

Up 0 Down 0

About Those Scientists on Oct 13, 2015 at 9:08 pm

This is what gets my goat about scientists -- you can't engage with most of them about anything else normally. They'd be bored silly if the uncertain and partisan topic of civil society raised its head. But then they find out politics hits them too, and they're shocked! Shocked! I'm glad to know all this stuff they weren't sharing before, but they've been living in a pretty rarified world while the rest of us have been slogging it out. Now they get to lecture us on politics instead of, some of them, maybe apologizing for helping to elect Harper. Which I'm sure some of them did. That Professor Icycle (Gordon Giesbriecht) is running as a Conservative. "All I ever did was save lives" says Mr. Humble.

Anyway, I'm also glad to know they need money to live, too.

Up 12 Down 2

Groucho d'North on Oct 12, 2015 at 10:03 am

In many respects the debate over AGW has become: My scientist can beat up your scientist, so which ones do you trust to provide accurate information? When questioned many cannot even provide basic answers to data anomalies. Data is data and selecting which bits you use to support your view of things is not science- that's conspiracy. Too many researchers and "scientists" jump to conclusions and spout theories which further confuse an already confusing topic such as global climate change- its become the Tower of Babel. Then introduce the mega fund holders like Sierra Club who support research of various kinds for various purposes, like anti-development, and the problem becomes unmanageable. And they too cannot account for variances in the data: watch this and see: http://video.breitbart.com/Watch-Ted-Cruz-Tear-Into-Sierra-Club-President-Over-Climate-Change-29786506?ndn.trackingGroup=90085&ndn.siteSection=breitbart_nws_us_sty_vmppap&ndn.videoId=29786506&freewheel=90085&sitesection=breitbart_nws_us_sty_vmppap&vid=29786506.

State funded science should have terms and conditions placed on the release of statements of theory. 97% - yeah right.

Up 7 Down 12

FairAndBalanced on Oct 10, 2015 at 1:44 pm

HeaveHarper! - from somewhere you dredged up "I've worked with scientists and they are a bit of an entitled thinking bunch". You need to broaden your net a little and try and connect with other scientists (preferably not those in the employ of the Govt). Go along to the Yukon Science Institute presentations occasionally - you will be hard-pressed to truly sense any 'entitlement' on display.

Up 13 Down 3

ProScience Greenie on Oct 10, 2015 at 11:19 am

If the science and engineering says that a particular fracking method in a certain rock formation is safe then would it not be anti-science to oppose it? The same could be said about modern state of the art nuclear power facilities.

While the Tories for sure have shown a strong anti-science streak so have the NDP and sadly the Greens on some issues.

Up 31 Down 6

Heave Harper!! on Oct 8, 2015 at 7:37 pm

Even though I would never ever vote for a Harper puppet or party and don't believe what Harper did to the scientific community was right. I would agree that community needed to be knocked down a couple of notches. I've worked with scientists and they are a bit of a entitled thinking bunch. I believe that science should form part of the equation, it should not be the everything.

Up 51 Down 20

I-would-pay-to-see-that on Oct 8, 2015 at 1:25 pm

Leef showing his face at a meeting in which the main agenda item is Evidence of Environmental guardianship Whilst in Office, is like having Bernie Madoff host a seminar on financial ethics. Or Donald Trump extolling the virtues of altruism and charitable giving, whilst demonstrating the finer intricacies of medieval basket-weaving.

Up 28 Down 14

Definitely-Not-A-GrammerNazi on Oct 8, 2015 at 1:19 pm

Hey , ol' Josey. Miraculous. You actually put a fairly logical and grammatically-reasonable sentence together for the first time in living memory. There may be hope for you yet. Keep it up old man. ( now just wait for the drivelly response to this ! ).

Up 47 Down 17

Josey Wales on Oct 8, 2015 at 11:30 am

It don't surprise ol' Josey that Ryan Leef didn't attend a debate on environment. it's not important to the conservatives and that much was evident last night. Funding made in 2007 don't mean nuthin.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.