Canada wouldn’t prosecute us over our views on climate change, would it?
By Tom Harris, writing in the Toronto Sun
“BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.”
This slogan appeared on posters of the Party leader in the dystopian society of George Orwell’s 1984.
It was a constant reminder of omnipresent government surveillance for “thoughtcrime” — independent thinking.
In Orwell’s book, Winston Smith, a Ministry of Truth “history re-writer,” quietly rebelled against this oppression, secretly starting a diary expressing forbidden thoughts.
But government telescreens were everywhere.
Watched constantly, Smith’s every move was monitored.
In 1984, the consequences of being caught were dire; the stress on individuals enormous.
As head of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), I have been feeling a bit like Smith these days.
That’s because the ICSC has been under investigation by Canada’s Competition Bureau, an independent law enforcement agency that “has a legislated mandate to ensure Canadian consumers and businesses prosper in a competitive and innovative marketplace.”
Here’s what happened.
In December, 2015 while in Paris attending counter conferences to the United Nations’ climate meetings, I learned the environmental organization Ecojustice had registered a complaint with the Competition Bureau on behalf of six prominent Canadians against ICSC, Friends of Science, and the Heartland Institute.
Ecojustice claimed we presented “climate science misrepresentations” which “promote the denier groups’ own business interest” and “promote the business interests of deep-pocketed individuals and corporations that appear to fund the denier groups.”
Our own core principles — which we state online on our homepage — were presented as evidence against us.
Two of our allies assembled a 37-page response to the attack in which they presented peer-reviewed research in support of our positions.
They suggested I counterattack with this impressive rebuttal.
Others cautioned me to keep my powder dry since the complaint made no sense.
We were simply exercising our rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to express our opinions. That is what science is all about, the opinions of experts based on their interpretations of observations.
Further, the complainants had no idea who helps ICSC financially.
With the exception of Order of Canada recipient, the late Dr. Gerry G. Hatch, who openly supported us, the identities of our donors have been confidential since 2008.
Some of our scientists have had death threats for contesting climate alarmism.
We do not want to risk exposing our donors to such abuse.
So, I did nothing, hoping the Competition Bureau would dismiss the complaint as unfounded.
Yet, five months later, it did launch an investigation, referencing a complaint that we make “representations to the public in promotion of a business interest that are false or misleading in a material respect regarding climate change.”
The bureau warned us,
“If the results of an investigation disclose evidence that, in the opinion of the Commissioner, provides the basis for a criminal prosecution, the matter may be referred to the Attorney General of Canada, who determines whether a prosecution should be undertaken.”
Although I asked the bureau where they suspected ICSC may have made false or misleading statements, it refused to say, citing subsection 10(3) of the Competition Act which requires inquiries to be conducted privately.
Aside from a letter in November, 2016 informing me that the investigation was “ongoing”, I heard essentially nothing until the beginning of July, 2017.
I received a letter from the bureau informing me,
“While the Commissioner has discontinued the inquiry, and no further steps are contemplated at this time, be advised that no binding determination has been made respecting the conduct of International Climate Science Coalition. The Commissioner continues to have discretion to investigate and take enforcement action in respect of matters previously inquired into, including where additional information is discovered following the discontinuance of an inquiry.”
The National Observer reported they received an e-mail from a bureau spokesperson concerning this investigation stating, “We invite Canadians who believe they may have additional information to contact the Competition Bureau.”
So, after nearly 14 months, the investigation is “discontinued” but revivable if it receives “additional information.”
Is this the Canada my father and grandfathers defended against tyranny?
Harris is the executive director of the Ottawa-based International Climate Science Coalition
Tom Harris,
Are you by chance the same Tom Harris who used to write science articles for the San Jose Mercury News?
But if you are of the AGW religion you can publish lies any time.
How many time has the Arctic been forecast to be ice free before this year. David barber said it would be ice free in 2008.
At a conference in Winnipeg in December 2016 a researcher at the U of Manitoba said Hudson bay would be ice free in the WINTER in 5 to 10 years. This was in the Winnipeg Free Press. When will he be investigated?
And in May 2017, Dr. Barber aboard the Canadian Coast Guard Icebreaker CCGS Amundsen had to cancel a scientific climate change research study trip off Hudson Bay due to unprecedented sea ice conditions.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/13/delingpole-ship-of-fools-iii-global-warming-study-cancelled-because-of-unprecedented-ice/
Dr. David Barber of University of Manitoba also proclaimed in 2008 that the Arctic that had never been ice free in over a million years would be gone by 2015.
“The December 5th StarPhoenix article mentioned above says that according to Barber, “The ice that has covered the Arctic basin for a million years will be gone in little more than six years because of global warming.” I wonder if Barber can seriously believe that the Arctic Basin has been continuously ice covered for “a million years.” There is considerable evidence that the entire Arctic region was warmer just several thousand years ago than it is now.” https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/arctic-sea-ice-gone-by-2015-a-challenge-to-david-barber/
And even covered here…
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/14/a-look-at-sea-ice-compared-to-this-date-in-2007/
The action against the ICSC would appear to be in contradiction of the Canadian charter of Rights , incorporated into a constitutional document , largely as the result of an initiative by a Pierre Trudeau:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (French: La Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), in Canada often simply the Charter, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all areas and levels of the government. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, along with the rest of the Act.”
Has the young Trudeau repealed that Act . I am not sure that he can do that without Crown agreement.
There is along list of Rights and Freedoms in the original Charter and the right to a free trial and the presumption of innocence is among them .
If a similar situation had arisen in, say, Pinochet’s Chile ( and it probably did ) just imagine the protests from the Liberal Left .
Quite reminiscent of Mark Steyn’s ordeal at the hands of Canadian Human Rights Commission.
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/i-hate-to-say-i-told-you-so-actually-i-dont-i-love-it/
Piddle on them. The first time this sort of issue comes properly and fully before a Court in Oz, Canada or UK, the CACA crowd’s phoney science will be destroyed in cross-examination by very capable QCs. The US Courts could probably do it too – Mann v Ball/Steyn has worked out well so far for Mann hasn’t it…?
I look forward to seeing some interesting court cases soon where can see a nice discussion as to whether it is scientifically correct to add radiative fluxes from 2 sources and derive a sink temperature from the SB equation AND a nice court room discussion as to which experiments in the entire history of mankind show that you can transfer energy from a cool object to a hotter one via radiation and thus make the hotter one warmer.
These are pretty fundamental to the arguments for and against the science of AGW and it is simple basic science things like this that we need to get aired in a courtroom. It’s going to be priceless!!
Of course the lists of fundamental errors, misconceptions, faulty logic, etc are very long so I think these cases could take years before there is a verdict. Counter claims should always be made as well as there is a very good chance masses of money can be extracted from the AGW pseudoscientists and their supporters once we win.
“Further, the complainants had no idea who helps ICSC financially”
Well, who does?
It would present yourselves in a more favourable light if you were open and honest about that.
One of the charges laid against skeptics – and a barrier to acceptance of their viewpoint – is that fossil fuel business interests fund them.
show that’s not the case (or defend that funding).
(I’d very much like to know who funds the GWPF… their mysterious funding is a major source of my distrust of the information they put out)
You must be very stupid not to be able to discover that in short order.
Who funds your childish postings by the way?
The reasons why the donor list is kept private were given in the article and are eminently justifiable.
Even if the list was 100% open, the trolls will still strain some gnats in order to find an obscure connection to an oil company somewhere in the list and from that declare this proves they are funded by oil companies.
Look what they did to Dr. Soon.
The group that funded him got a one time grant that amounted to about 1% of the organizations budget for that year.
The donation was years before Dr. Soon was hired.
The donation was a grant for a project that had nothing to do with climate and wasn’t even for the group Dr. Soon worked for.
Nonetheless the usual bad actors declared that Dr. Soon had to be ignored because he was funded by big oil.
No Griff, the reason you distrust their information because it doesn’t support your religious beliefs.
You apply the same standard no matter who’s putting out the information.
Griff, you prove convincingly that you are a warmist bigot,because you go the easy low IQ way of promoting funding smears. YOU that same raging hypocrite who ignores GOVERNMENT funding of warmist scientists,along with giant super computers and other pricey tools,who have been caught red handed on data manipulations and peer review collusion.
From the post:
“Although I asked the bureau where they suspected ICSC may have made false or misleading statements, it refused to say, citing subsection 10(3) of the Competition Act which requires inquiries to be conducted privately.”
bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
Tom Harris,never found out,since they dropped the 14 month long investigation. They never answered a simple reasonable request,that couldn’t have damaged the obvious witch hunt investigation. 14 months!!!
The complaint was filed,
“Ecojustice claimed we presented “climate science misrepresentations” which “promote the denier groups’ own business interest” and “promote the business interests of deep-pocketed individuals and corporations that appear to fund the denier groups.”
After FOURTEEN months,the complaint/investigation was dropped. They had plenty of time to find out,but there was NOTHING in the end.
THINK Griff,think!
Can’t you see that it was a “witch hunt’?
“witch hunt” combined with intimidation.
Some VIPs brought forth this complaint!
Griff has gone quiet,imagine that!
Have you apologises for maliciously slandering Dr. Crockford yet, Skanky?
Don’t you think you should?
As to funds this, that or the other organisation that you are paid to impugn, would it make any difference to inform you – including chapter and verse – of precisely who is was?
It has never stopped you lying about Dr. Soon, and you have been told on numerous occasions the truth of the matter, but you still continue to slander him.
But then, that’s what you paid to do isn’t it, lie?
As a matter of interest, I wonder what your employers would make of your wide spread notoriety…
Griff, the people I know (including me) are VERY touchy about the privacy of their charitable donations. It’s between me, God, and Canada Revenue Agency (the equivalent of the US’s IRS), and no one else. Any organization the disclosed my donations to it would quickly have one less donor.
Heavy accusation there Griff, but in the free civilised democracies the burden on proof is on you.
To get you going French President Emmanuel Macron has deemed max USD $1.7 million lump sum enough to buy a US climate scientist. No reason to think he pulled it out of his hat without checking. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/10/french-president-offers-us-climate-scientists-e1-5-million-each-to-move-to-france/
A former KBG agent shares your sentiments. https://www.hrw.org/russia-government-against-rights-groups-battle-chronicle. Are fractions of degrees in the average outside air temperature is really worth slipping down this slope in your opinion? If yes, please note it goes both ways and CACA will eventually hit the fan.
I knew climate panic had degenerated into derangement 10 years ago when the mayor of Minneapolis worried aloud on the Weather Channel that spring would come too soon. Minneapolis and most of Canada were a mile deep in ice until 18,000 years ago when the current round of warming began.
As it is, people have been moving from both places to Southern California for 150 years because it’s warmer there. How sick and ludicrous can climate hypochondria get?
Ah, mission creep. What would pseudo-government organizations do without it? Have to keep those expense accounts full and all that pensionable time adding up.
BTW, this is what happens when another “arm’s length” group decides that actually just doing its job isn’t quite enough work for them:
http://www.restorecsa.com/news/article/manipulating-home-inspections
The investigation must have cost money.
Can you FOI how much and from which budget it came from?
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
[ SOON (If not “very” soon) “ALL” FREE SPEECH IN NORTH AMERICA “WILL” BE ELIMINATED !
Had “Hellary” been “elected” instead of President Trump you and I would have counted the days until the U.S. Supreme Court would with first restricting free speech until it was completely eliminated !
“Canada” YOUR CURRENT PRIME MINISTER IS “ROTTEN” TO HIS CORE !
That guy (Thing?) should have His (It?) forehead shaved just in case there is a few “numbers” stamped there as a way to”Identify” just exactly what “It” (He?) is !!!
AND YOU CANADIAN PEOPLE “ELECTED” THAT THING !
And “We” the American People “almost” did the same by electing “Hellary” !!!
Point being the “LEFT” is just using Climate/Global/Change/Warming to “stamp” out FREE SPEECH period, and if that doesn’t work they will “find” something else, AND [ EVERY ] TIME YOU/ME/WE/US GO TO THE VOTING POLLS YOU/ME/WE/US EITHER VOTE TO STOP THAT “CRAP”, ORRRRRRRR, WE VOTE IT INTO [ “LAW” ] and then We live with the results (Which = Consequences)… ? ! ? !!!
WHY DO SUPPOSEDLY “SANE” HUMAN “PEOPLE” ALWAYS GO TO THE POLLS EVERY 2 TO 4 YEARS AND VOTE TO THEIR/OUR OWN DESTRUCTION ?????????????
THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF “INSANITY” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And then later the same people come to blogs like this and complain about it… ?
These truly are the last days where/when evil is good and good is evil !
Pathetic
ricks2014 – why don’t you tell us what you really feel?
Why can’t this same tactic be used against Ecojustice? Or for that matter, Greenpeace and many others. They have indeed proclaimed false advertisements in order to get donations. Polar bears anyone? All of that was false advertising.
If all it takes is a complaint by citizens…
You can file the charges, but the government bureaucrats who run the thing would never actually investigate fellow travelers.
The Liberals in Canada (Trudeau ) attack small business yet encourage Chinese to bring their laundered money and 15% tax payers in to take over Vancouver real-estate and drive the families that pay 40% tax out . Trudeau is a commie lover just like his silver spoon old man .
Go out to UBC and you couldn’t tell the difference whether you were in Beijing . White kids need not apply .
Very well put Amber and I concur and agree, except it will soon be more like 50% tax for us. Canada is for sale, just ask Prime Minister JT…they sell visa’s to the Chinese mainland nationals who now see Canada as the second favourite place in the world destination to launder their cash, after USA, driving up the price of real estate in Vancouver and Toronto where Canadians cannot now afford to buy.
https://globalnews.ca/news/3609338/canada-now-no-2-emigration-destination-for-chinas-rich-report/
Ah if only Canada was the Number 2 for welcoming the poor who would marvel in front of a dishwasher! That would certainly not threaten Canadians…
Never underestimate two things about Canadian leftists: their desire to use government power to force you to change and their complete inability to follow through on any project due to incompetence, stupidity and laziness.
From birth lefty and amusing, civilised writer Christopher Hitchens’ autobiography shows how ‘revolutions’ on behalf of the people merely replace one set of tyrants with another.