New Zealand sacks its top climate researcher for speaking with the media

Norm Beazer (12:56:29),
I do agree with your protective stance on the matter of free speech. We don’t want governments or agencies using ‘protocol’ rules to stifle expression.
There is a difficulty in our present case, because NIWA is not revealing the details of Dr. Salinger’s offences. We therefore can’t really determine whether he obviously did step over the line (possibly repeatedly, with warnings), or whether perhaps NIWA is trumping up excuses to go after the guy. (Or, as has been suggested by a previous commenter, that a combination of clumsiness by both Salinger and his superiors escalated in an unprofessional manner.)
Still, agencies such as NIWA are not under an obligation to allow a longstanding employee to aggrandize his position into what can grow to become the equivalent of a government official, or Representative. A person in Dr. Salinger’s position – with 30 years tenure on the job and extensive social contacts – can use what is supposed to be a non-political, non-representational position within an agency like NIWA, to act as though he really is speaking for, on behalf of, or in an adversarial capacity against the government.
If the WonderGreen Motor Company hires me to make a better tire for their cars, I am perfectly free to go on the air and talk about my love of wilderness and my efforts to protect penguins in Antarctica … but I am not free to engage in high level explorations of the potential to improve society, save the environment, etc by modifying the tires we put on cars. I agreed – explicitly or by implication & context – to allow my Boss to call the shots on what will and will not be discussed with the media or with other parties, on the subject of tire-improvements, when I took the job. So did Jim Salinger.
In this case, it appears (we do not yet have the detailed facts) that Salinger has given himself permission to essentially become involved in the policy-phases of the role that NIWA plays within the government – a function that he quite likely does not properly hold, a prerogative that actually belongs with other people & offices.
The job of the hired scientist is to conduct the science. Interpreting that science, or deciding how to use it to educate & guide the public, is quite another matter, one in which the government has a large stake, and often this function is one we citizens fully expect to be discharged by duly selected representatives & leaders of the people, which Mr. Salinger is not.
Take another example: Methane Hydrates. We have a stupendous quantity of methane frozen into dirty, slushy ice beneath the ocean floor. It could fuel our civilization for a long time. The energy it contains could neutralize & remove the dangerous chronic issues of the Middle Eastern Oil Patch.
We have scientists who do a lot of research on methane hydrates, who really know more about them than anyone else – but is it their place as public-employee scientists to lobby for their exploitation – or against any exploitation? No – what to do or not do with or about methane hydrates is a policy matter, and does not belong in the hands of the ‘hired brain’ that society has commissioned to look into the phenomenon of submarine hydrates.
Does Dr. Salinger lose certain portions of the full scope of important rights that all of us hold dear, as a condition of the employment he has accepted & enjoyed these many years? Yes, he is subject to that compromise. Is it right that NIWA or higher authority vested in New Zealand can exercise control over the role he plays in the public sphere? Yes, it is: we expect the government to retain authority over policy.
It is the de facto reality that organizations like Greenpeace are trying to effect policy and exert authority within many governments, around the world. This is improper. It could well even be subversive. To wield the powers to which they aspire, Greenpeace ought to run for elective office, and submit themselves to the ballot. But they don’t, you’ll notice.
Greenpeace appears to be the primary champion of Dr. Salinger, following his dismissal, and that is probably because he is a major tool for effecting the role they would like to assign to themselves, in managing society as they see fit, without the inconvenience of winning the citizens’ vote.
Notice that the former US Senator and Vice President, Al Gore, is currently wielding great power in the US government … having entirely abandoned the elective process (at which he nearly succeeded) and has now allied himself with non-governmental organizations. Al Gore is an example of the kind of problem we don’t want to see a Jim Salinger or Jim Hansen grow into.
The potential for really unfortunate outcomes is real, and Al Gore is Exhibit A.

Thing is, if Salinger is such a good Scientist, how come he crusades for the pro-AGW camp? A “good” Scientist would be among the “skeptics” — wouldn’t he?

alex verlinden (10:14:46) : said,
however … I tried to confirm the link from a source at the P.A. of Sciences, but did not succeed … the “the Geologic Science Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences” is mentioned, and I checked a website ” http://www.ing.pan.pl/index_E.htm ” , but I did not find any mention of the report … I wouldn’t know if that is the correct place to look …
anybody interested and more succesfull ?
tia
Here is the link thanks to Luboš Motl.
http://www.kngeol.pan.pl/images/stories/pliki/2.Stanowisko%20KNG%20w%20sprawie%20zmian%20klimatu.pdf
and translation by Benny Peiser
http://www.kngeol.pan.pl/images/stories/pliki/2.Stanowisko%20KNG%20w%20sprawie%20zmian%20klimatu.pdf

For my money, it all boils down to a simple binary decision.
Whether he thinks A or B has no bearing. If you follow the rules, you have a job — when you break the rules, then you don’t work here any longer.

CodeTech:
“. . . this isn’t about “stifling” someone, it’s about them using their role in a Government organization to advance an agenda. Just as many of these personalities have done and are doing.”
No – I very much doubt this is correct. Have a look at the NIWA web page: the last time I looked they still had the hockey stick prominent, and they are firmly AGW. So is [was] Jim Salinger.
“Personally I don’t care what he or Hanson have to say, they can shout it from the rooftops for all I care…” That is all very fine: my point is that denying the right to free expression to one group harms us all. The veneer of civilisation is rather thin at times.
James from NZ:
“Jim S. must have been making public comments so far removed from the science taking place within NIWA” I very much doubt this is so, Jim S is [was] very much part of the AGW team. Unless . . . unless he was in the throes of turning his views around ?? Interesting. His recent report on long term weather changes in parts of NZ having an effect on the production of beer could well have been a little tongue in cheek. Maybe, just maybe his views have changed, despite his previous involvement in the IPCC. We will just have to wait and see. But speculation is such fun . . .

One of New Zealand’s top climate scientists, Jim Salinger, has been fired from his job at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa).
The high-profile scientist, whose work contributed to a Nobel prize, is reported to have been sacked for ignoring a new Niwa policy against speaking publicly without prior approval.
“I can’t understand it, it’s not as though I’m doing bad science, it’s not as though I’m under-performing, so I’m really astounded,” Dr Salinger said on TV One News tonight.
TV One said Niwa had accused Dr Salinger of serious misconduct after he took part in a programme the channel produced about glaciers.
The Green Party said Dr Salinger was dismissed earlier this week for helping TVNZ weatherman Jim Hickey with climate-related inquiries.
The scientist has frequently appeared in TV climate reports and has spoken in the media about climate change.
“Niwa’s actions will make all government scientists nervous about their jobs,” said Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons.
“New Zealand is on a slippery slope when trying to provide Kiwis with a greater understanding of our climate is a sackable offence.”
Ms Fitzsimons said scientists should be able to help the public and the media with scientific problems, particularly around issues like climate change.
“An investigation is needed into how it came to be that one of New Zealand’s foremost scientists was frog-marched out of his job for what appears to be trivial and petty reasons.”
Ms Fitzsimons said the Minister of Research, Science and Technology, Wayne Mapp, should call in Niwa and tell them to “get to the bottom of this messy matter”.
Greenpeace said it wanted answers from Niwa and the Government.
“Dr Salinger has done some amazing work to educate New Zealanders about climate change and he is highly respected internationally,” said Greenpeace senior climate campaigner Simon Boxer.
“He was very clear about the need for urgent climate action in New Zealand.”
TV One reported Dr Salinger was considering claiming unjustified dismissal.
– NZPA

For 9 years NZ had an aggressively pro AGW Labour government, they couldn’t sign up for Kyoto quick enough, during those years thousands of positions in government departments have been filled with fellow travellers of dubious quality as the public sector grew by 50%.
The incoming liberal /conservative National Government is busy replacing staff & stamping its authority on all departments, budget cuts are a certainty, job cuts will follow. NIWA bosses will be under the gun like everybody else Jim Salinger’s demise will be a clear warning to the AGW camp that the current government is much more sceptical about AGW and the need for Carbon taxes etc.
Salinger was an AGW promoter as are a number of senior NIWA staffers but his demise will be a sharp reminder to others toe the line or else.

By the way, you NZers out there… If you can be in Lower Hutt at lunchtime on Tuesday 5 May, Hungarian scientist Dr Miklos Zagini (who will be in Wellington to address the parliamentary ETS committee) will give a public presentation on “why greenhouse gases cannot cause climate change”. Shall I invite Jim Salinger?

Polish Academy of Sciences item #2 ignored the augmented impact of continental drift, potentially a significant contributing factor to the current ice age cycle.
On another note, are we experiencing yet another “cyclical” change? During the Bush era, the media “sold” news by denigrating the Administration’s refusal to support AGW. Now that a pro-AGW Administration is in office, are they beginning to sell news by questioning Cap and Trade and other AGW inspired policies?
One pebble does not a trend make, but one pebble an avalanche can make!

Steve Schapel (16:53:14) :
By the way, you NZers out there… If you can be in Lower Hutt at lunchtime on Tuesday 5 May, Hungarian scientist Dr Miklos Zagini (who will be in Wellington to address the parliamentary ETS committee) will give a public presentation on “why greenhouse gases cannot cause climate change”. Shall I invite Jim Salinger?
——————————
Go for it – the guy can always retool himself for a new career in “the coming ice age” doomsaying.

Norm Beazer, you didn’t quote the most important part of my comment:
NOT ON GOVERNMENT LETTERHEAD.
That means, these guys should be using their own resources to spread their unwarranted message of doom and gloom and catastrophe, not government resources and agencies. In the old days they’d be walking up and down the streets with a “The End Is Near” sign. Now they have direct access to the media and a voice of authority that is also called the bully pulpit.
That is my position and I stand by it.
It is not a violation of “free speech” to stop someone from using a position to advance a personal agenda. He and others are free to spread their message on their own.