Another long-term senior analyst has left Statistics Canada, citing political interference with freedom to conduct his job in a professional manner.  He leaves behind him an agency contemplating program cuts and openly discussing the challenge to maintain its integrity.  Any bets that crime statistics will be one of the first candidates for the axe?  After all, as Justice Minister Nicholson said flat out last September, the Harper administration is “not governing on the basis of the latest statistics.”

Amidst the bad news, however, shines a beacon of hope.  StatsCan officially opened up access to its main database this month.  CANSIM (Canadian Socio-economic Information Management System) is a collection of data tables on various social and economic aspects of our nation that includes over 36 million time series.  For the past couple of decades, researchers were required to pay a fee for each segment of data requested.  Now the data can be downloaded free of charge. 

Alberta and Canada have just announced a multi-year plan for monitoring the oil sands.  Boosting the program from $20 to $50 million a year, the governments promise more and better data, as well as public access to the monitoring results.  The increased costs are to be funded by industry, according to the Environment Ministers who made the joint announcement.  So far so good.  But will it pass the sniff test of credibility? 

Without wanting to sound too pessimistic, I have my doubts.  Last year, the Government of Alberta commissioned a panel to make recommendations for a new, world class monitoring system which reported out at the end of June.  One of its key recommendations was to create an independent monitoring commission.  Under the heading ‘Legitimacy’, this is what its co-chairs had to say (at page 28):

Governments must deal with the inherent conflict of being the resource owner, regulator and revenue taker. For the new monitoring system to have the requisite legitimacy and scientific credibility, the system must operate at arm’s length from all affected parties, including governments, regulators and those being regulated.

Ignoring this advice, the governments have chosen to initiate a program that reports to two assistant deputy ministers, one federal and one provincial.  Although they say that data “will be made public on an ongoing basis”, the only independent review that is planned is not scheduled for another three years.  That’s a very long time, given the rapidity of our contemporary news cycles.  In the meantime, anyone who cares to interpret the monitoring results in whatever way best suits their own agenda (whether it be political, corporate or contrarian) will have free rein.  Without an authoritative, independent third-party to provide definitive statements on the state of the environment and human health in the oil sands region, Canadians and others around the world still won’t know who to believe.

I’ve been waiting for RCMP Chief Commissioner Paulson to assert his independence from political interference.  When he told Senator Kenny he could not meet without ministerial permission, I thought perhaps he’d misunderstood the policy.  Not so.  Yesterday, at a Commons committee meeting he declared he agreed with the rule imposed by Minister Toews, although he still didn’t appear to have a very clear idea of what the rule is.

Now, I’m concerned.  The Chief Commissioner should have absolute discretion to meet with whomever he chooses.  By the same token, we as citizens and parliamentarians should be able to trust in his discretion, as well as his acumen, to conduct his meetings appropriately.  If something arises in the course of his meetings that he feels the Minister should know, of course he should share that information, particularly if the Minister is likely to be asked questions about whatever issue is under discussion.  But he should not need permission to meet anyone, for any reason, and he should not be required to include other participants according to ministerial dictates.

Mr. Paulson’s difficulty seems to centre on the meaning of ‘political’.  He correctly stated that it is not his role to comment “publicly on legislation or matters of the government.”  However, he has complete responsibility for running the RCMP which is not, and should not be, a political issue.  As such, he should be fully free to choose with whom he meets, including parliamentarians.

Mr. Toews, on the other hand, obviously assumes that all parliamentarians would automatically talk about the government and its ministers (i.e., politics) rather than issues and policies within the purview of the RCMP Commissioner’s remit.  That attitude reflects more on his own world view than on reality.  Moreover, it simply reinforces what we’ve come to expect from Conservative cabinet ministers who routinely interpret everything in the light of their partisan interests. 

It’s always sad to watch doors being slammed shut on programs that help accelerate a brighter, more sustainable future.  Suspending the EcoEnergy Retrofit program is one case in point.  Buried at the bottom of a press release issued on a sleepy Sunday afternoon, the government’s announcement still reverberated loud and clear.  No more funding for homeowners trying to get ahead of the energy productivity curve by upgrading their homes with better insulation and higher efficiency furnaces.

To be sure, ending the residential grant program won’t mean that retrofits in that sector cease.  They just won’t go forward as quickly as they might otherwise have done.  However, they constitute only one part of the overall EcoEnergy program;  altogether it comprises something like 15 components, including grants, mentoring and training sessions for the industrial and commercial / institutional sectors as well as for homes. It would appear from Natural Resource Canada’s departmental plan that all the grant components are slated for termination. 

Leading thinkers in the field of energy policy have long advocated aggressive action to increase energy productivity in the way we deploy our resources.  Walt Patterson of the UK’s Chatham House, e.g., is of the firm view that “The first strand in reducing our dependence on fuel ought to be upgrading existing buildings and other user-technology – the top priority for real energy policy around the world.”  Limited in its scope though it was, Canada’s EcoEnergy Retrofit program was doing just that, as a recent evaluation of the program concluded.   Backing out of these activities means that the federal government has once again committed itself to mediocrity.  One can only shake one’s head in mournful regret for what might have been – namely, an enlightened, multifaceted and proactive commitment to a truly sustainable clean energy future.