It’s been almost a year since the Liberals took office, ushered in with a flourish of science-friendly intent. Canadians were clear in their voting decisions: they’d had it with a decade of muzzled scientists, reduced research funding, and big decisions in energy, health, crime, and environment that lacked a clear basis in evidence.

While campaigning, Justin Trudeau’s Liberals unequivocally planted their flag in the sand, criticizing the seemingly anti-science ethic of the previous government and issuing sweeping promises to support scientists and research. Across economic, social, and environmental issues, their declarations were tied to a suddenly popular phrase in public lexicon: “evidence-based decision-making.”

We’ve heard a lot of Liberal bark. What about the bite?

Of all 219 promises in the Liberal platform, we identified 15 related to science and evidence. We looked at some of the most crucial promises to ask how the actions of Trudeau’s Liberals stacked up against their intentions.

Restore mandatory long-form census and make Statistics Canada independent

The mandatory long-form census was restored. This questionnaire was not only celebrated, but in the words of our former head statistician Wayne Smith, the “best census since 1666.” However, he resigned in protest in mid-September over loss of the independence of the office as a result of convoluted data-sharing agreements. It seems that all is still not well with one of our most important institutions for evidence-based decision-making.

Revoke rules and regulations that muzzle government scientists and allow them to speak freely about their work (with only limited and publicly stated exceptions).

Leaks of internal emails suggest that unofficially, scientists are free to speak. Yet, many remain unsure this is the case. The writing in the books, the communications policies that govern their departments, were deemed by a 2015 report to inhibit communication, and not protect rights to free speech or freedom from political interference. It isn’t clear the policies have changed on paper. Although there are ongoing efforts to enshrine science integrity into bargaining agreements for federal scientists, we need to see more formal movement on this file.

Create the post of Chief Science Officer

We are well on our way to 2017 and no Chief Science Officer has yet been announced. The Minister of Science has taken input from Canadians, and much speculation has been proliferated, but we continue to wait.

Restore funding for freshwater research and Restore funding for ocean science and monitoring

This funding exceeded promised amounts, as the 2016 budget allocated nearly $200 million over five years. Part of this support was earmarked for the IISD’s Experimental Lakes Area, a groundbreaking institution controversially shut down by the Conservative government. Last spring, DFO announced it was hiring 135 scientists: a drastic reversal to personnel cuts under the previous regime.

This funding is being shared beyond the public service. Recently, $94 million was announced toward a new Ocean Frontier Institute to advance methods in ocean science, and a further $78 million given to support the Global Water Futures program. This government seems to be taking their commitments to water and ocean science seriously, perhaps responding to dire forecasts about the effects of climate change on our oceans and freshwater supplies.

Open data and open science

Three separate promises described making taxpayer-funded scientific information open and available to the public. The feds have made progress: central government portal for open data, and making the access to information request process free. Scientific data make up more than half of the most-requested data from government, and the benefits of it being open are vast: fostering economic innovation, international collaboration, and cross-boundary problem solving.

However, open data and open science are two different things. A true commitment to open science must acknowledge scientific integrity and open communication at all stages of the scientific process. Right now, we lack policies to promote this crucial ethos.

One year in, we’re seeing mixed results from the Liberals. Canada’s scientific capacity is indeed growing. Yet, it is one thing to portion out the budget and make funding announcements. It is another to entrench a culture of scientific integrity, where communication and data are open, and research free from political interference.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

This will require a Chief Science Officer with arms-length independence, and science integrity policies enshrined throughout government. The Liberals have three years left in their mandate, and time will tell how deep their commitment goes. Funding announcements and open data are a good start, but entrenching evidence-based decision-making into the culture of politics is a much bigger test.

Dr. Alana Westwood is Evidence for Democracy (E4D)’s research co-ordinator, and Kathleen Walsh is E4D’s interim executive director.

Read more about: